The Judge further
expressed a decided opinion that the law was constitutional, and
that before he could say a law was otherwise which had been
acquiesced in so long, he should require the strongest reasons to
be shown. As to what constituted an arrest, the Judge remarked
that force was not required, or a touching, but it must be a
detention professed to be done by authority and an exercise of
authority; which, he observed, was clearly proved in the present
case. The damages should give at least the actual injury and
something as smart money, if there was any bad motive. This the
Judge said did not appear, but the officer seemed to be impressed
with a desire to discharge his duty.
The jury returned a verdict of 125 dollars damages and costs for
the plaintiffs.--_New-Haven Reg._
[This was a case tried under the statute of Connecticut against
the right of unnecessary travelling on the Sabbath. The result
appears to be very remarkable. In the first place, we consider
the Law itself to be clearly unconstitutional, and we have never
had the slightest doubt that if the question ever goes to
Washington, the Supreme Court will declare it unconstitutional,
and reverse the decision of the Connecticut Court.
Pages:
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98