The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-09-03
THE LABOR LEADERS AND THE
SUPREME COURT.

The platform adopted by the conference
of labor leaders at st. Louis contained the
following:
At its last term the Supreme Court of
the United States decided that the thlr-
teenth amendment, forbidding Involuntary
seryitude lis not violated by arreStlng a
seaman imprisoning him until his vessel is
ready to leave port and then 1orclply put
ting him on board to serve out the Term OF
his contract'-a decision under when the
old fugitive slave laws may yet be revived
and striking laborerS be seized and returned
to the service of their masters
This declaration was made in proof of the
assertion that personal liberty and the ex-
ercise of the commonest rights of free men"
had been destroyed in this country.
1t was to say the least, very presump-
tuous for an assemblage of men not one
of whom was a lawyer or capable of esti-
mating the scope and effect of a judicial
decision. to charge that the Supreme Court
of the United States had rendered decision
which nullified the Constitution and under
which personal slavery might be revived.
If the Supreme Court should render such
a decision knowingly every member of 1t
would deserve Impeachment, and if it did
so ignorantly the judges are a lot OF
"chumps." But has it done so? Is the
decision referred to susceptible of the con-
struction put upon it by Mr.. Debs and other
labor leaders? The decision was rendered
in January last and is reported in American
Law Reports, No. 16. 1t came up on appeal
from the United States District, Court of
California, which had dismissed a writ of
habeas corpus in the case of four sailors.
The record showed that the four men had
shipped on board an American vessel at
San Francisco for "a port in the State of
Washington, thence to Valparaiso and
thence to such other foreign ports as the
master of the ship might direct, and to re-
turn to a port of discharge in the United
States 1t will be observed they were under
a written contract to render certain service.
Becoming dissatisfied with their service,
they left the vessel at Astoria, Ore, and
were subsequently arrested. taken before
Justice of the peace and by his order placed
on board the ship again. This was done UNI
der the provisions of Sections 1896 to 1899
of the United States Revised Statutes.
These sections apply to deserving seamen
who have signed a contract to perform
voyage, and to no other class of persons.
They provide that a seaman having so con-
tracted and so deserted may. on complaint
of the master of the vessel be arrested on
the warrant of justice of the peace, and
if it appears that he has broken the con-
tract and deserted the vessel he may be
kept in confinement till the ship is ready
to sail and then placed on board That was
done in this case, but the men refused to
work At San Francisco they were ar
rested under another section of the statutes
applying to sailors only on a charge of
refusing TO work. Then they sued out
writ of habeas corpus, which, upon hearing
by the court, dismissed, and they were
remanded 10 the custody of the United
States marshal, whereupon they appealed
to the Supreme Court. 1t is to be noted
that the whole proceeding was on the ad-