The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-04-26
SUPREME COURT THROWS
OUT THE SUFFRAGE CASES
Holds There Is No Relief Under
the Statutes for Virginia
Negroes.
DECISION AS TO CHINESE

WASHINGTON. April 25.-The Virginia
cases involving the validity of the suffrage
provision of the new Virginia state Consti-
tuition were to-day dismissed by the United
States Supreme Court on the ground that
no relief was possible. the acts from whlch
relief was sought having already been COM
mitted. There were two cases, one being
a proceeding by Jones and others TO Sc
cure writ of prohibition against the VIZ
ginia State Board of Canvassers TO pre-
vent it's passing upon the returns OF the
election held Nov. "a, 1902, and the other
a proceeding in equity by Selden ana
others Justice Brewer delivered the opln-
ion of the court. He did not enter into the
merits of the case, but confined himself TO
the impractical biiity of the granting of re-
lief. He said: THE prayer of the petit
TONERS specifically is to restrain the can
vass of the returns of the election of Nov.
4, 1902 Even the general clause at the
close of the prayer is for such other and
further orders in the premises that shall
and may make the prayer of your petition
ers effectual' But. as shown by affidavit
and as. indeed, we might perhaps, take
judicial notice by the presence in the
House of Representative of the individ-
uals elected at that election from the var
ious congressional districts of Virginia, the
thing sought to be prohibited has been done
and cannot be undoDe by any order OF
court The canvass has been made. GER
tlhcates OF election have been issued, the
House of Representatives, which is the
sole judge of the qualifications of it's men,
bers, has admitted the parties holding
the certificates to seats In that body, and
any adjudication which this court might
make would only be an Intellectual de-
cision of the question whether or not these
petitioners were wronged by what has been
fully accomplished. Under these circum-
stances there is nothing but moot case
remaining and the motion TO dismiss must
be sustained: The equity case was dis
missed on the same ground as the pro-
hibition case.
In the Supreme Court of the United
States to-day opinion was delivered in
the case of Sing Tuck and thirty-one other
Chinese. held for deportation under the
order of inspector. The men claimed
10 be citizens of the United States and
sued out writs of habeas corpus, claiming
that they were entitled TO a review of their
cases by the courts before exhausting the
remedies prescribed by the exclusion treaty
of 1894. The court did not take this view.
but held that Cinnamon must pursue the
course outlined in the law, exhausting the
remedies there provided before applying
to the courts. The opinion was by Justice
Holmes.
Justice Brewer rendered a dissenting
opinion in which he characterized the pro-
ceedings of the inspectors a star cham
Der process, and said that a Chinaman
claiming to be citizen of the United States
is entitled to as much protection as an
Anglo-Saxon who makes that claim. Justice
Brewer said he did not consider IL strange
that China had denounced the treaty and
said that with the growing importance of
China that country could be counted upon
10 show increasing resentment against
this country. Having sown the wind he
predicted that the United States would reap
the whirlwnd. Justice Peckham concurred
In the dissenting opinion: The Chinese in
volved sought to enter the country at Ma
lone. n. Y The effect of the decision is
to sustain the action of the inspectors.
In an opinion by Justice Day the Supreme
Court of the United States decided the
case of Rear Admiral Gibson vs. the United
States. involving the question whether a
captain in the navy who served in the
civil war, retired as rear admiral, is en-
titled under the navy personnel act to re-
ceive three-fourths OF the pay of rear adj
mirals IN the nine higher numbers in the
list of rear admirals. the opinion holding
them to be not entitled The effect Of
the decision is TO fix the pay of such re-
tired rear admiras at three-fourths of the
rate allowed to the nine officers of the
iohh wiz VIA" thO pay VI oiiSduieI Sei-
eral IN the army.
The Supreme Court to-day granted the
petition for a writ of certiorari in the case
of the Chicago Board of Trade VS. The
Christie Grain and Stock Company. This
will tring the case to the Supreme Court
for review. 1t involves the right of the
Board of Trade to exact compensation for
its market quotations. which the Circuit
Court of Appeals decided II could not do
on account of the fact of the transactions
from the quotations. result are a species
of gambling and therefore illegitimate and
undeserving of the protection of the law.
The board contends that its business is
that of an exchange hall only and the con-
tention Is made that the legal contest
grows out of a desire of so-called bucket
shops" to use the boards quotations.