New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-03-05
The Grcnt Gaines Casc-Ju dEe McN iniey Re
tiriug from The Bench, aud Decision of udEc
MrlnIrh Tor Del nlnnis.

The UnAcd States Circnn Court met yesterday. judges
~ Of the Court Judge Nney stated thst he .na his
brother Judge hal differed me Que.on iO toe fJos
5f the M he Patterson case h. thnsns that that
Judgment binding and Judge heCsleb nos drIUg
himself bound by that Judgment no tJsdge aekine bal
Judge To- ecide this lie induced 10 40 li.. b.,
-ause Do wass Judge Of the supreme Court aud wUud
% I'll 10 this when It came up before that tribunals
.igf ho anew case In which the supreme tOuu
osefurd ls own decision, and he would consider dsfss
cc TO his brother Judges IN undertake 10 review an -
their ad gmont There also another reason ny
should the decision 10 be rendered BY Judge Me-
Caeo who Was better acquainted with the local or safe
avs ~ Louisiana than he was ard ne case would 80 ~
the supreme Court win opinion written by Judge
f,milsT i ue peculiar luflsp udenco o hls STATE ITO
lOughf his tho most Satisfactory course a. wuui lead 20
he early decision Of ui,s case.
J4I.r Mckinley also stated thAi T. defendants alleged.
be- Patterson m.te.up case It Wa very cnsi
Hus msds lp cts~ as We material eFhenco VA dh' eas@ ~
daer Dom his There wasa great deal ofirreevsnt
,na r,ansshe testimony In he case whch 10 should OF
udr ravngl IN no essential point dluefenl nom ihs OF
.ta Paterson case.
Judge McKiaey then ordered the CLERK TO enter ugs
uuuts lat tho Ircnu Judge retired rom no bench dn'
ring lle dHrlslnn Of .hs case
Judge MeCaeb ,hen commenced reading very long
ild elaborate opinion sgainst hs Ganes nearly all he
point. raised hy her He dd not consider the Patterson
ssrou. ani a. binding this Court Il Wa
sn. with COLLISION no referred 10 tbs fAcis Ia proof u
hi. position As 10 the question ~ Legitimacy, as bad dc
sred shou.d be submitted 10 lafy question cni
lcnfly proper 0r iury % pss upon.
Judge McCaleb then reviewed the testimony dwelling
lp ihs discrepancies ia tho staemene particularly upon
auant Ito attached great importance 10 The tine ~ Mo
nsrnage lishould be established with more certainty,
The ecle.,slcAl record he considered, wss good n
prove paw The dec sraton Of Madame De Orange
Drnod sgng ground Or Tie presumption that Lnlme va.
married 10 CLARK Il Was good record evidence lie
considered that The acs In relation 20 CaFhs conduct "a
De Orange showed lhst be LILLE deserved the enconums
pronounced upon him by tho counsel honorable man
e also ssched great weight 10 he aimony 'ait Bus IN
Chancery were not evidence, because ChaDcsfy Courts
no, Courts u Record but, according 10 he judi.
prudence Of Louisiana me records u Couns were valid
lroDf he commented On he testimony ~ Madame Gala
~, unworthy Of credit is lheu proceeded 10 show ha
npfobabiiiy hat & ara was married man-dwe upon
- aurliOus to Mss tsiDn and 0tnfs, Madame DO
rangs marriage 20 DR. 0ardeite and other ere
10 sndiug a. exclude his dea that he marrrd n
sfk wa. married % va { ianfesuno marriage, AID an
me cYi law carried with 70 no civil rights. Read
groa' many spanish authorities The ls- docs not siaeh
80 much importance 10 Keeping NE sOiefohl.n"n or ~"
secret ~ no conduct u ihs parurs sf-rwafd
~ marriage could Do contracted until Tho pfsyioa. ono
"a. dissolved Read numerous spsnish aaihDnue- on
no point The Will - 1911 must BE- SGT aside before sis
h.f II shs fOr hsf dispos.bis pOrOn,
ears The defendant. wor. 10 good nb lie t6srsfors
that here had been marriage q Csk W
Zllns, that u ihefs not valid, because h Wa
-isndrslue maria gohecauss fhers had been previous
marriage snd lastly mat he defendants IN ihs case wsfs
anfs bl, and sbo musi b. dismissed
The ida u nj. gr-at suit commenced on "wednesday
h. 2 u Jan TIE 81 24h l5t and nth u that month
consumed be- reading Tie testimony Which 10 con
siaod ia printed volume u go psge, % hoodAy ,Le
ay~D Tor the drfendalis Mr. Preston spoke tas whole
4 " oudsy aod portion 0f Tee.dAy Ga ma, day Nc
-.0sld "a he next when Mr.. Campbell followed ssO nr
le complainant Ne eiosed On Tharsdsy, ne Sls' Jan-
On FRIDAY Mr. Duncan commenced his SElment 6f de-
.endans snd closed Tuesday he 5th FEB. when VI
Taylor commenced sso ~ ne defendants ana eof .ash
yn Wednesday tho en- Feb On Thursfsy, ne Iib FEB
M Orymes commenced his argument for complainant
AID closed u and no esss on saaIts' lbs Su yep when
no ease va. given D. he COan The reading u hs esr
nOny occupied four days and he ngUnent twelve days
IN y Delta, I'd.
The " o Bsllsi,s s.ys This eoarss ihs -thdfsvs u
Jadge NcElreyJ vss iyresuIne s .Tesuli OF ar
srsandnK 90 subjeot and e the moro ssnsfse'ofy
b. al hs p.sss 20 Il ensures earlier and direct decision
4 ne preme Can 81 Washington, beofe vhDm Il vii
- Immediate fAke8 Had tss Judges bob ftvsn dScis
0g. ard c-ff.lsa their herenr@s ihs WHEN
before "a pfsme COBr, would cot have been decided
~ 1a alter bot hoy would have femand@d { Tor nav
r a. Ia New Oreabs .0us he pO.nt 81
fr-fefee ard arr us second usl here wOgld ihen ~
fnai appeal " Washington ndsr ne present Plaza how
ever gOss under The sole opinion u Judge hrEs
3D. .1d yiI. dsEni ely decided WsshugtOn, without
sgan cunning bak New Ofssns snd thgs saving pf0Ds
BY ono Or tvO years 10 The fna decision.