New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-11-30

washington, Nov. 29.-The United states supreme
Court to-day granted the motion OF the Sohc''ot-
General for a certiorari in the case OF the 1o''"
American Commercial Company and also t Ease on
.fon made at the time to advance tlo nndow
The dor nb" The case involves the contract OF tho
romnany with tie Government LOT coHPo"
Tor fur seals killed by It,
Chtof Justice Fuller handed down an opinion 10
day dealing with the revolution IN Nenezuea y,
1870, when the forces OF Crespo were ara
cainst those Of Palaco. The case was tha' u
Caorqe = IJnderh!ll against General Jose Mahuo'
hernandez a follower OF Crespo. ChuerhiiI' 80
ao ~ tho United States. the owner OF water
works at the town OF Bolivar, when soon ai'e, ~
beginning Of the revolution was occupieu W ,
rardcz and his followers Vie for time reiuse'
Urnderhills application for passport Ai'e' 80 80,
,o tho United States Underhill began an ac'io'
=, .ho Eederal courts to recover damages LOT INC
detention for his alleged confinement TO MS o",
house and for assaults said TO nave oes" .0. nm 80,
by Hernandezs soldiers the d Gssna Circuit was
oHss 70 IrnderhiTs contention, ana TINS decsio
was affirmed to-day on the grouep TO review the
OF Of another country Every sovereign Sia.I i'm 10
bound saG Of Every other Stat and the
courts Of country VIII no. 81 is territory Re-
dress Of by reason OF suGh acts vailed Of
obtained through the means ns oPet themselves
| ,,,,. Harlan handed down opinion IN 'ho
| case Of J. j. Douglas plaintiff IN error, "e ,s,,a.
| commonwealth of Kentucky. holding 'he =.
NJ the Frankfort lottery to be ih'"hu' 49,
na,,cht n this court by Douglas on aiesa
| ,,o,s ~ error IN the decision Of the kentuchS
| OF Appeals which was ADVERSE 10 nun, 49,. nro-
| ing his opinion Justice Harlan quo'eu eco, o,ok
| vision OF the Kentucky Constitution oi i Gov,
,r, oil lottery charters Heretofore granted anu
| Kidding the existence Of lotteries III 'Io -.
| oors,derad at some length the contention VI 80
| las that the revocation Of his charter 80, con.
revocation of contract. IN Nlo'at.o. " - STATS
s,,,ution of the United States prohip'''"e 80" no
from passing law impairhs oon r,a-aI Constitu-
| ssid this Interpretation OF 'he 80 ,io,, IN
, no correct it will follow that the pr ,hiSdnn
,he Constitution statutes OF hr''uS ia common
ana ana 1evekng ali lottery privileges or ehnI e
tiers thereto gIaned are hH'i results from the dec
ieraiion that the Constitution oil 'hs D,hng in tho
the supreme law laws OF Of ' any safe notwithsand
! Ing lie continued b. Guotihs no Common forms
Of the TGnrr W Wer" Comparatively inno1uous WnC
placed in f9n.rasi, st., w5 a I'd IS State forbid!
of Lotteries, s,nTenrc law OF the land from pt6
rs people at T all F' Can anu The LEGISLATURE OF
Sal Contract away its power 70 rom time
resu,ad'o' proGect tie public morals against '"0
S eys o. .is ha, "a lottery
g, 10, IN any -ense contract WITHIN s,,,tiitv ana
Of the Constitution oGl under It's police powers
d,d for the protection OF the pubic rondct
N. l,N
at any any oicry and rght acqHirTG
10 fe OF the grant, on the iHl,H - ~ W. rcyoca-
yi,b the grantee. can be - ,be totery
W. - mo grant and the prohibition OF - ici
| If it's exercise involves continuance "
| terry.
~. ,s. y, Edward Hodgson against the State
| ~ Vermont was decided The OPINION ","e -.
| nouuced by Justice Shiras. Tho case "NoN' ~"
| ors,i,utionalty OF tho statutes OF vermont pro
| v,aine for the punishment Of offences against ,n'
| So IN tho sale OF intoxicating liquors In TINS
80 tindeson was found guilty OF such offence on
| CAS- tfier.sSa,icn lie appealed to the supreme
Court OF the United States from the ru,s,,o, ~ "a.
s,ste courts on the ground that MS con ,i a.
,'tHou; due process OF law. Justice, SntaH' ~
S.StstHg against this contention. SAID tAA' IN"
| %IVth Amendment was not dcf.st"a W ,tves in
with the rights OF .tat"s 70 L.o,~ Wv ' "
crty and property OF their ci''|ehs'
Tho Cour. affirmed tho decision OF the Georgia
c,,a-crre Court IN tho case Of Mrs. Noble. con-
,.,o5 =, the murder OF her husband. Shc alleged
| ,t,, Ia. urocess O, law had been denied 10 her.
rto rcslt OF the decision IS that the sentence I'M
| nosed by the Court can now be executed justice
| White handed down tho opinion. lie reviewer
| briefly the points in the case showing that Mrs
\oble's counsel had moved for trial 20 prove hc3
insanity after she had been found guilty. OF IN" ~ ~
| der Of her husband. This motion W. n1' , =,
| the trial court and the decision GH.rmed by ",
state Supreme Court. Mrs. Noble men hppea! ga
| 20 the supreme Court on The 6r2lnd tH't ,ho
XVIII Amendment guaranteeing All citizens , I i
| proccss OF law had been violated. rho contention
was oycrruled by Justice whites OPINION lie 800
| that the questions involved were wnG!y, within
| The Jurisdiction OF the state courts. II the post
Ion ~ me painilf In error round" said tho
| Iur,lcc no criminal could ever be punished n
| ma Immunity would depend upon his fecundity In
raising pleas OF insanity