The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-06-27
WASHINGTON, d. c., June "a, 1S

10 me Editors Of he National lnteHgencer:
GENTLEMEN: We beg the privilege to answer the
nuncaton headed TO the Public" which appeared in
your paper of the 22d instant.
petition has been presented to Congress- praying for
the passage OF special act OF venue to enable the heirs OF
Gen. kosciusko and their attorney &C. Tochman) to
move from this District the trial OF certain cases involving
the right OF the former to property which Gen koscius
brought here from Poland in l79S and the security of
the good name and honor of the latter assaed from po
ca motives by diplomatic representative OF foreign
country near this government"
That petition has been supported by affidavit of G..
rochman and an affidavit of live most respectable ct-
zens OF this District estifyng their belief that fair and
impartial trial of the cases alluded to cannot be had in
this District And it has been also supported by another
petition of than $50 citizens of the District, pray
ing for the passage of the general law of venue, who
signed upon learning from G. Tochman that the Com
objected to recommending the passage OF the special act of
in behalf of the heirs of General Kosoiusko and
Of Major Iochmaa their attorney This is certainly
law OF for the relief of the heirs OF General Kos
| ciusko and of e. Tochman, their attorney, than any
party in any country governed by written laws and con-
s,ituon, ever produced to the legislative body sim
lar occasion 1t Is then surprising that in face of such
conclusive evidence in this respect the writer of the
nuncaon to which this is answer, denounces the bill
Of venue pending before the Senate TO be "entirely
useless"
OF similar character is also his allegation that the
bill is sided and defective, &c provides that the
suggestion for the removal of any be supported by
affidavit OF the party of his attorney, and affidavit
ii more citizens of the District tesying that fair
md impartial trial of the cannot be had in the Dis
riot, And 1t further provides that the proceedings had
pon the suggestion be certified by the court OF the Dis
rct to the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the
United STATES, who may nsh!s discretion either order
ne record OF the case to be transmitted to the United
States circuit court Tor Maryland, or 10 the United
states circuit cour for Virginia. or wholly to refuse
uch motion, If he should think proper 10 do So. And
Ill these proceedings in the cases hereafter depend.
ny the courts of the District are TO be had upon
the opposite party at least ten days before the
rial OF the case These provisions certainly 40 not show
.ai nj Inn lin Tho
contrary they restrain the removal of cases from this Dis
ct than does the law OF venue in any other part of
the Union In the State OF Maryland, OF which this Dis
rct was formerly part the CIVIL equity and criminal
removed from court to another, under the
provisions OF the statutes of 1901 chap 55 1909, chap
1885, and 1885, chap BAG, upon the SUGGESTION supported
merely by the affidavit OF the party or OF his attorneys and
upon similar suggestion and evidence, any case can be
removed from United States circuit court to another
under the provisions of the act OF Congress OF $780, chap
SO, sec. s.
The insinuation that the act of would be slur
and insult the judiciary of the District needs other
than that such law exists in every part OF the
Union, and every civilized country where the rights OF
The parties respected and it never has been thought
considered by any court nor anybody else that It should
be "a sur insult, TO any courtthe purpor OF chan
ging the being solely to the ends OF justice
where local influence other contingent circumstances
endanger its administration place in jeopardy the trial
| Of case involving the rights OF the parties
Not less unsound is the allegation OF the utter uncon
sttuonaty of the bill, in giving to the circuit court OF
The United States jurisdiction causes IN which ctl
zens of the District OF Columbia parties" That the
Congress has full power to legslate in the premises has
been decided many years ago, by the Supreme Court OF
the United States, the of Hepburn and Dundas Us
EIIzey, e Cranch's Rep. 3i2 and Dallas Cond. Rep.
ll4 and 4i5) And this OBJECTION in this case has beer
fully answered by the Hon. Reverdy Johnson, in hs
remarks the powers Of Congress to pass the law o
venue for the District of Columbia; which lit is submit
ted the Committee on the Judiciary OF the Senate hat
under consideration 1t is then hoped that the commune
cation appealing to the people to divert Congress from
its legislative duty, will be answered by the passage
the law, absolutely necessary Tor the attainment
the ends of justice in general and the protection OF thu
rights of the heirs OF General Kosciusko and their atto
ney, G. Tochman, in particular
We have the honor, &C. -
LADlSLAS WANKOWICZ,
Grand nephew of Gen. Kosciusko.
G.. TOCHMAN,
Attorney of the heirs.