The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-03-01

Communicated.
There case before Congress in the issue OF which
national faith and horror greatly involved. After
the fall OF the Inflated Poland It's ustfious champion
Of liberty, Kosciusko carried of portion OF his parmo
NAL estate which he CHANGED TO save and invested il in
England France switzerland, and in these United States
The portions OF that estate which invested in Eng
land, France, and Switzerland, recovered BY Kosc
uskos legaees year after his deah-o viii, in ISIS
That portion OF il which Kosciusko brought and in
vested in the United States, being undspo.ed OF by any
will or testament, is claimed by his heirs-ailaw under
the statute OF distribution Two generations OF tne
claimants are already in the grave aad those who
their representatives are approaching IT, and cannot re-
what Kosciusko brought TO and left for them in
country, although the litigation has been carried on
in courts OF justice since 1919 Is this not case
which should put TO the blush oil shame every American
true to himself, and who about the faith and
OF Kosciusko want to remove from the United States
circuit court Tor the District OF Columbia 10 the United
States circuit court Tor the district of Maryland. any
other United States court To attain this object, they
have been memoralzng Congress- during four successive
sessions Tor the passage of the act Of either for
the District OF Columbia in general for their relief in
particular. The fourth session is about closing, and
Of these acts have passed yet Now, the heirs OF
koscusko demand a right which every citizen OF this
Union and every foreigner is entitled 10, and enjoys all
the United States. except in the District oil Colum
bs, because Congress neglected TO pass for il the law OF
venue. You can remove any ut law and in equity
from one Stale court TO another and under the
OF the act OF Congress of February u.s. 1899 (chapter 3D.
section So from United States another upon
simple affidavit OF the party, its Attorney that there
Is reason TO believe that fair and impartial trial
was not to be had in the having original jurisic
ton OF the case sought to he removed The heirs OF
koscinsko have not only LAID before Congress simar
athdavs. but filed in the Judiciary Committees OF the
House OF Representatives andhe Senate petitions signed
BY $50 most respectable citizens OF the District praying
tor the passage OF the act Of venue TO relieve them OF
course even The most inveterale opponents TO granting
this relief do NOT dare say that the does not demand
IT. But they say "The constitution is paramount To
any other consideration and does not authorize giving
jurisdiction 10 the United States courts of cases arising
within the District Of Columbia" Were this reasoning
correct we believe Congress should find other means 10
relieve the heirs of ko-cusko To the credit and
honor OF the nailon even appropriation 10 pay In.
claim would not be out of place. II the elai could no,
be recovered from the holders because OF the insuf
ceney or dei.c, IN our laws But this case il not
40 desperate moments reflection will convinc.
Every sonnd mind that The law OF venue for the
Iphrcf OF Columbia would be constitutional The
Constitution OF The United States, IN 81 aurcls sec
ton provides that the judicial power Of IN. courts OF
me unled States -hs extend all cases IN law and
equity arising IN YER The constitution and fhs ,srs Of x
Oa*ed Mofss. Nov. can il Ne denied tina, whatever law
r M iores IN the Dstric, Columbia Ms Ian Of hs
O"ted Ndtssf the laws Of Maryland are not in force
here becAuss they ,hs laws Of May land but because
Congfess, BY the act Vi February p7 1907 section fs