| Show AN IMPORTANT DECISION THE case of robertson et al vs the united states recently decided by the supreme court of the united states is of the greatest importance to the people of this country the facts out of which the case a rose arose are in brief as follows the appellants engaged themselves to perform a voyage as sailors on the ship arago from san francisco via astoria to valparaiso and to such other ports as the master might cou contract tract and then to return to the port of discharge in the united states when the ship had reached astoria oregon the sailors being dissatisfied with the ship refused to proceed further on the voyage they were at once arrested and given a hearing before a justice of the peace who ordered that they be delivered to the master against their earnest protest and will they were accordingly ironed d and taken on board the vessel but still refusing to work on the ship they were held to the united states district court for the crime of disobeying orders of the master on the high seas the supreme court held that the officials of oregon had the r right to seize the fugitive sailors and that the sailors were guilty of crime and subject to punishment for their refusal to obey the masters orders the case hinged upon upon the thirteenth amendment to the constitution which provides that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall exist in the united states justice brown who wrote the opinion of the court held that the protection of the said amendment applies to the inception of the contract and that one who has voluntarily entered into a servitude by contract cannot invoke the provision justice harlan dissented upon the ground that the decision was of the amendment spoken of in that it opened a wide door for the enforcement of involuntary servitude not only of seamen but of railroad men in fact all who engage in contract labor this calls to mind the famous dred scott decision and the case of vs tac thc commonwealth of pennsylvania the latter sus sustaining the fugitive slave law H X the word sailor were substituted for the word slave the case would be almost identical with the one under consideration era tion we confess that we cannot see the justice or reason of this decision can it be possible that t the he thirteenth amendment looked only to the inception of the contract if f a person cawon contracts to do a certain service upon tearra firma finna and after having entered upon its performance for mance refuses to complete cOm Piete it can c he be be com compelled belled to go on or be subjected to fine and imprisonment I 1 we think not nol L HiI he has hae a 7 1 W x I perfect right to dispose afim tune AM ke ieee ev av s ass r e c tracts it awa away y and then breaks th same the civil arm of the land will afford adequate redress to the injured party A private right has been violated and it is the province of the civil law to redress that injury the criminal law is fo for r the protection of pu public alic rights no individual vidt ial it seems to us should be a allowed to set in motion the criminal law for the purpose of enforcing a private right what has been said with reference to a contract f for or service upon the land applies it seems with equal force to contract service upon the sea the thirteenth amendment the savior a alvior and champion of personal rights and personal liberty declared to every citizen of the united states I 1 will make you free indeed surely the liberty of a citizen is more precious and sacr sacred ed in the eyes of the law than a private contract |
