Show THE I 1 COURT arguments in the case of deputy I 1 marshal nae aegle le CJ LirOI 1 besim attorney central niffer and joseph choate argue the doti t protect ib its officials THE CASE arguments coin going on before the IL U 8 supreme court caarl washington march 4 the supreme court chamber was filled today with an audience which listened attentively to the arguments in the naele case arising out of the shooting of david ferry terry last summer when in the act of committing an assault upon judge field of the supreme court AH all the justices were present except justice field th the were opened by zach montgomery ful in n behalf of the appellant sheriff cun ill nagham from whose junis jurisdiction diction was di discharged scharl ed on a writ ri t 0 of f hubs corm corpus issued d by the united states court on the ground that he lie was an r of the united states a deputy marshal engaged in the performance for mance of bis his duty of protecting a justice of the united states supreme s court and could not bo be imprisoned by the stale state authorities montgomery said it was the contention of mhd th state authorities that the sole question before the court was the jurisdictional one on 5 and therefore all questions of 8 guilt or innocence were ere irrelevant he Us reviewed revie Aed the leading points in the evidence the th chief feature of the review was that it was not the purpose of es appointment to have him a united states official authority to prevent a breach of peace but to have him prevent forcibly any affront put justice field montgomery Al main maintained that unless there were specific sat ry authority for the instruction given to accompany justice juaice field b beld there was no authority for his release bythe by alio united stated states circuit court he lie maintained this upon authority of section revised statutes tat utes that a writ of habeas corpus should hould not extend to a prisoner onles I 1 in custody for an act done in pursuance of a law a of the united states if it were true that the act was justifiable homicide necessary for the protection tec ticia of juaice J as ice field then there need ne ed not be auy fear thai that the ata ta e would not acquit him but it was for the state to decide on his this point attorney general miller who followed on behalf of the united states eaid said he would base bis his argument on two propositions I 1 that it la is the right of the executive department to protect the jud ciary of the govern ment merit 2 that under the constitution the tile jud ciary clary being g in abeyance to the i I 1 executive it is the duty of the judiciary department nt to sit in judgment upon till acts of officials in in performing their duties in in accordance with the constitute on lie quoted from the words of S cretaro bayard that the right of government to enact and enforce ia laws e gives it the power tj ta protect its servants in their execution the attorney general argued his ilia case upon this line the proposition ad danced on the part of the tile state was a heresy as old as the govern government which had been refuted related times mein wi with h out number in the courts in congress and upon batt ef efio ields ds it was tins this same argument that the executive tia re had no power except such as was granted by the legislative department department which had been used before the civil war to deny the power of the government bovet ament to coene coerce the seceding stales justice bradley interrupted the attorney general in the course of his remarks rema its with the question with W it h what force shall the president e execute becu this power of protection of which you speak supposing the marshal had not sufficient force for the purpose attorney general with a posse in in the first instance and if that is not sufficient with the army and navy justice bradley then he has the right to aid all citizens of 0 the united states in in maintaining the laws and protecting the institutions of the government ern ment joseph choate of new york who followed attorney general milter as one of the counsel tor for the government opened his arg argument ament with the statement that ever since the beginning of the government the people of the united states had rested in the conviction that they constituted the nation that within its limits the government was sovereign and supreme and that it bad within itself all the power and facilities to fulfil fulfill its ow own n functions and accomplish its own purposes in doing this the government was not subject to the or interference by any power r the government had the power aa as it had the duty to keeayre the the per perform formani ame e of governmental operations and to protect its servants and agents in in doing the duties entrusted trus t ed to them for the first time in a hundred years the people were cre met with ith the startling contention that a justice of the highest court of the laud land wai wal not entitled to the protection of the government in in going from one place to another on ins his circuit choate bad had not concluded his argument when the court a adjourned |