The provision securing freedom of speech is not violated by legislation excluding alien anarchists from the country ; or their de portation after entry in violation of law; U. S. v. Williams, 194 U. S. 279, 24 Sup. Ct. 719, 48 L. Ed. 979.
The provision securing freedom of the press is not invaded by the exclusion of lot tery literature from the mails; Ex parte Rapier, 143 U. S. 110, 12 Sup. Ct. 874, 36 L. Ed. 93; Homer v. U. S., 143 U. S. 207, 12 Sup. Ct. 407, 36 L. EU. 126; and its transpor tation otherwise may be prohibited ; Lottery Case, 188 U. S. 321, 23 Sup. Ct. 321, 47 L. Ed. 492, disregarding a suggestion in In re Jackson, 96 U. S. 727, 24 L. Ed. 877.
The right of peaceable assemblage and of petition was not created, but simply recog nized by the constitution and protected against federal interference; for its con tinued protection, the reliance must be had upon the states; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 23 L. Ed. 588.
Second Amendment. A well regulated mi litia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
The right secured by this article is not created, but only secured against interfer ence by congress; U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 23 L. Ed. 588; and it may be regu lated by state statutes not conflicting with valid congressional action; Presser v.
116 U. S. 252, 6 Sup. Ct. 580, 29 L. Ed. 615; Wright v. Corn., 77 Pa. 470 ; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. 243 ; Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394; State v. Reid, 1 Ala. 612, 35 Am. Dec. 44; State v. Mitchell, 3 Blackf. (Ind.) 229; Bliss v. Corn., 2 Litt. (Ky.) 90, 13 Am. Dec. 251.
Third Amendment. No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be pre scribed by law.
No legal question seems to have arisen under this article.
Fourth Amendment. The right of the peo ple to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon prob able cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The guaranty of this article applies to letters and sealed packages in the mails as fully as to property retained in a man's home ; In re Jackson, 96 U. S. 727, 24 L. Ed. 877. It is violated by an act requiring the defendant in revenue cases to produce his private books etc., in court, and providing that, on refusal, the case shall be taken as confessed against him ; Boyd v. U. S., 116
U. S. 616, 6 Sup. Ct. 524, 29 L. Ed. 746; but not by an inquiry of a broker as to pur chases or sales on behalf of any senator of corporate stock liable to be affected by the action of the senate; In re Chapman, 166 U. S. 661, 17 Sup. Ct. 677, 41 L. Ed. 1154; nor by compulsory production of docu mentary evidence under a statute which gives immunity from prosecution or for feiture because of the testimony given; In terstate Commerce Commission v. Baird, 194 U. S. 25, 24 Sup. Ct. 563, 48 L. Ed. 860. Tes timony procured in violation of this prohi bition is not thereby rendered inadmissible; Adams v. New York, 192 U. S. 585, 24 Sup. Ct. 372, 48 L. Ed. 575.
The provision as to warrants does not apply to any issued under a state process; Smith v. Maryland, 18 How. (U. S.) 71, 15 L. Ed. 269; nor to an action by the federal government for a debt due to it without search warrant ; Den v. Improv. Co., 18 How. (U. S.) 272, 15 L. Ed. 372.
Fifth Amendment. No persons shall be held to answer for a capital, or other in famous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger ; nor shall any per son be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public' use, without just com pensation.
This amendment operates solely on the federal government and not on the state ; Barrington v. Missouri, 205 U. S. 483, 27 Sup. Ct. 582, 51 L. Ed. 890 ; Hunter v. Pitts burgh, 207 U. S. 161, 28 Sup. Ct. 40, 52 L. Ed. 151. It is satisfied by one inquiry and adjudication, and an indictment found by the proper grand jury should be accepted anywhere within the United States as at least prima facie evidence of probable cause and sufficient basis for the removal of the person charged from the district where he is arrested; Beavers v. Henkel, 194 U. S. 73, 24 Sup. Ct. 605, 48 L. Ed. 882. The require ment in the amendment of presentment or indictment for the grand jury does- not take upon itself the local law as to how the grand jury shall be made up and raise the latter to a constitutional requirement; Tal ton v. Mayes, 163 U. S. 376, 16 Sup. Ct. 986, 41 L. Ed. 196.