The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-12-01

washington, Nov 30.-5y its unani-
nous decision today, announced by Chief
Justice Fuller, the supreme court of the
United States practically affirmed the
judgment Of the court Of appeals OF
the District OF Columbia in the case OF
Elverton z. Chapman, the stock broker
who declined to answer certain ques-
tions propounded by the senate COM
nittee investigating the famous Sugar
trust rumors in connection with the
consideration of the tariff bill in 1873.
The effect of the decision is that Mr..
Grammar must surrender himself to
serve q term of 80 days adJudged
against him upon conviction in the GlS-
trict court and pay fine OF SlOo A
collateral effect is that Messrs. have
never and Searles of the Sugar trust,
and ATessrs. Edwards and ShriVer, the
newspaper correspondents who also de-
clined to answer the questions pro-
pounded by the senate committee, VIII
have to submit themselves for trial N
the district courts upon indictments
similar to that in the Chapman case.
The history of the case is familiar, nav
ing been frequently narrated in these
dispatches. The appellate jurisdiction
of the supreme court of the United
States, the chief justice said, rested on
acts Of congress, and a proper con-
struction of the act of 1893, and being
the District of Columbia court of APP
peals it was to be arrived at IN the llSnt
of previous decisions upon similar
statutory provisions. In the case of the
United States vs.. Moore decided in
1S05) Chief Justice Marshall held that
the supreme court of the United States
had no jurisdiction under the act of
1901 over judgments of the district
courts in criminal cases.
Marshall said: THE words matter
in dispute seem appropriate to civil
cases when the subject in contest has
a value beyond the sum mentioned in
the act. But in criminal cases the
question is the guilt or innocence of the
accused. But although he may be fined
upwards of 500, yet that is, in the eyes
of the law. a punishment for the omense
committed and not the particular OBJ
ject Of the suit
This construction OF the law was car
RED forward under subsequent juris-
dictiOns and was affirmed in several de-
cisions as to laws of March 3. 1881. and
of February 6, 1889. The eighth sec
ton Of February Q, 1898, establishing
the court OF APPEALS for the District
Of Columbia provided for the review by
the supreme court OF the United States
of any final decree Of the district court
in which the matter Of dispute exceeded
5000 in the same manner and under
the same regulations as heretofore pro-
vided for in cases Of writs of error, or
appeals from DEGREES rendered in the
supreme court Of the District of Column
bia: and also in cases without regard to
the sum in dispute. wherein is involved
the validity OF any patent or copyright
or of q treaty or statute of or any eX-
ercised by the United States.
This act and that Of 1885. the chief
justice said. the court regarded as the
same III their meaning and legal effect
The suggestion that because a fine of
500 was involved the case could not he
reviewed by the supreme court of the
United States was disposed Of by the
language of Chief Justice Marshall in
the United States VS.. Moore. There
was nothing. the opinion continued, in
the eighth section quoted to justify its
expansion so as to make the provisions
OF The act of 1891. by which cases in
Volving the UncOnstitutionality of any
statute of the United States may be
brought to the supreme court from any
district or circuit of the United States
and apply to the courts OF the District
OF Columbia No mention was made in
that act Of the district courts The con-
clusion was that the writ of error must
be dismissed, and it was so ordered.
There yet remains to Chapman. how
ever the right to apply for his release.
after he shall have been placed in the
custody of the marshal. under the SEN
tence Of the district court. upon writ
of habeas CORPUS, and the whole case
viii then come up for review. He may
file his petition in the district court.
but inaSInuch as that court has already
practically decided against him. ne VIII
be more likely to go to the supreme
court of the United States with an
original action.
IOWA ~ THE HOLE.