140
NOTES.
The Supreme Court of Nebraska has handed down a decision in a very queer and unusual case, it being the case of the State ex re/. Thomas J. Scheibley against the school board of Ponca, Dixon County. This is the case wherein Scheib ley applied for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the school board to reinstate in the Ponca high-school his daughter Anna, who was expelled because she refused to study grammar, which was a part of the established course. The court holds that parents have the right to make a reasonable selection from the prescribed studies for the chil dren to pursue, and this selection must be re spected by the trustees, as the right of the parent in that respect is superior to that of the trustees and the teacher. The court also held that it is apparent that the excuse of the school board and teacher is insufficient, and that they were not jus tified in expelling Anna Scheibley from the school, wherefore a peremptory writ of mandamus is awarded her for reinstatement.
A policeman of New Bedford, Mass., filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the mayor and aldermen to reinstate him as a policeofficer of that city. He had been found guilty of soliciting money for political purposes, which was a violation of a rule of the Police Depart ment, but he contended that he had a right to express his political opinions. Judge Holmes, in giving the opinion of the full court (Massachusetts Supreme), said : " A person may have a constitu tional right to talk politics, but he has no constitu tional right to be a policeman." — To-day. Every good detective has to some extent his own way of working, which is varied, of course, ac cording to the circumstances. We may say, how ever, that as a rule the Parisian agent has a freer hand, and works in a somewhat bolder, more selfreliant manner than his English colleague. This follows from his isolation; he is less helped by "information received," and too badly paid to buy it; so he is forced to acquire it by his own exertions. A favorite method is to assume the disguise of a workingman or hawker; and here it may be said that the use of an elaborate make-up exists now
only in books. Every zealous hand has his own little wardrobe, and the simpler the better; the most effectual disguises are those which best as similate the wearer to common life. The Parisian has two in particular, — the blouse and the work man's apron. " Shadowing " is always done by two men, one some little way behind the other. Each carries a change of dress, to wit. a blouse wound sash-wise round the waist, and a casquette carried inside the shirt. The moment the first man fancies himself perceived, he gives place to the second, and dropping behind slips the blouse over his jacket, and exchanges his felt hat for the casquette. Thus metamorphosed, he resumes his place. — The Saturday Review. The decision of the court-martial just held at Begiers is one of the most eccentric that have yet gone upon record. A cavalry sergeant, it seems, had been guilty of gross ill-treatment towards one of the recruits. Having lost patience with the novice, he ordered the man's hands to be tied behind his back as he sat on his horse, and the result was that in taking a jump he fell and broke his arm. The sergeant was arraigned before a Council of War at Be'giers; and his counsel asked that he might be acquitted, not because the charge of ill-treating a recruit could be refuted, but be cause the " anarchist press had made the matter the subject of a violent attack on the army in gen eral." Extraordinary, almost incredible, as it may appear, the court took this view of the case, and promptly discharged the prisoner, as a gentle hint to civilians to mind their own business. — Even ing Post. In the case of The United States vs. C. N. Cas par, of Milwaukee, who was charged with using the mails for the transmission of obscene literature, Judge Jenkins administered a scathing rebuke to Mr. Comstock, who had resorted to most extraor dinary methods to obtain evidence against the defendant. "The Court," said the judge, " cannot approve the conduct of the government officer who has lured the defendant into the commission of a crime. I am aware that such methods are often pursued in dealing with alleged criminals, but I am not will ing to lend my assent to such doctrine. If gov ernment officers cannot detect criminals and enforce laws without resorting to dishonest practices, they
