Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1818-11-13
over to the Spanish consul as in the first
case. Herald.
LAW INTELLIGENCE.

A novel aud very important question oil
law as respects the jurisdiction OF the fede-
raj courts in admiralty and maritime cases,
has been decided by the judges OF the cir
cult court of the United States, during their
present session in Philadelphia. The ques-
ton arose out of a warrant oil attachment
issued from the circuit court OF the United
States for the Rhode Island district, tested
on the 9Th July 1878, directed TO the mar
shals of the districts Of Rhode Island, New
York and the eastern and western districts
of Pennsylvania. This warrant reci.ing
that the ship Frances and cargo were con-
demned as prize to the captors in the Rhode
Island distric, in the year 1873, a Certain
bale or box of merchandise, part of that car
90, had, by mistake, been delivered TO a
certain James Stewart, and taken Oh, OF
that district, that after monition, C:isobe-
dence, contempt and warrant Of attach
ment. Stewart had absconded from the D.
niied States, and that ,on the representation
of Stewards proctor and the captors, that
Peter Graham, of Philadelphia, was in pos
session of the said box or bale OF mercEan-
die, or the proceeds thereof, mention
had been issued 10 and served upon him TO
bring in the same, and, that he having dis
obeyed the rhoniicn, and being in contempt
therefor. The warrant in question lssued,
which commanded the marshals to whom II
was directed in the name Of the president
of the United States, to attach and arrest
the said Peter Graham if 10. be found in
their districts, respectively, and hold him
in close custody 10 answer said court Tor
his contempt or 1.-The cannot be found with
in the districts, respectively, then 10 seize
| and sequester the goods and effects Of Peter
Graham TO the amount CT COCO dollars.
The marshal having taken Mr.. Graham
into custody by virtue Of this warrant of at
tachment, he sued out writ ofhabeas cor
pus for the purpose OF contesting the lawful
ness Of the confinement. Mr.. Binney was
heard on the part of Mr.. Graham on Mon
day last, denying the power OF any district
or circu court OF the United States 10 send
or execute its process out OF the district o.
yer which such court presides and deny
ing the legality of this process in particular,
because Graham never was party to the
proceeding in Rhode Island and also ques-
tioning the validity Of the warrant ON va
rious points OF form. The court in conside-
ration of the novelty and great importance
oftbe question, requested the district attor-
ney, Mr. Ingersoll, 10 argue it in support OF
the warrant, which he undertook 10 do ac-
cordingly, bu, asked !or few days time 10
examine it. The court therefore postponed
the argument until Friday, when it was re-
sumed by Mr.. Ingersoll, in support Of the
warrant, and Mr.. Chauncey in reply and
conclusion against it. lnsupport OF the war
rant, il was commended that the constitution
and laws had given 10 the several courts OF
the United States all admiralty and mari
time jurisdiction, without other limitation
than the cases themselves, or subject mat
Ter required, and that as respected place
there was no limit 10 MISREPRESENTATION that
this being a case OF prize, in which the ju.
risdiction of the Rhode Island admiralty
court had once attached by possession of
the thing, its process would reach all the in
cidcnts and consequences Of such case
and that by The practice and principles of
all prize courts, which are international,
no, municipal tribunals, they are no, conf
ned to or by territorial Limitations.
On Saturday morning. Judge Washington
delivered the opinion Of the court, stating,
that though during the argument the judg-
es were moi without some doubt or the sub.
ject, yet they had determined TO discharge
Mr.. Graham from custody on the ground
| that the several circuit and district courts
of the United States are limited in theirJu-
| rjsdction.to the territorial districts. 10 which
they are espec;ively allotted in their orga-
nization, apd cannot extend their process
beyond their local limits, except in certain
cases specially provided for by law, Of
which this is not one.
We shall endeayor 10 lay before our read
ers the opinion delivered BY judge Wash.
ington, Tomorrow franklin Gazette.
From London Paper, September 9.
| UNION HALL.
Yesterday young man, who stated his