Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1860-02-18
Is Judge Cate State Rights man !?

Is Judge Cate 6 State Rights man /?
In the last number Of the Reporter
We promised to show from the record
that Judge Cate, Notwithstanding his
professions to the contrary, given to
Republicans whose political spinals
are somewhat affected with weakness.
is an anti-State Rights man-that his
official position is antagonistic to the
platform upon which g great majority
OF the Republican party stand. We
promised TO make it so plain that no
room should be left for cayiI by W.
Z. Webb and his followers, and if they
should persist in sustaining Judge
Gate, they would be necessitated to
rec ant their avowed position on this
question and seek some other subter-
fuge, equally untenable. But we are
relieved of that task by having better
dlsqulsltlon than We could prepare.
and at the same time its source will be
very apt to put quietus on the cav
Hing editor Of the Wautoma Ayqal8
and others Of that ill5, unless they as
sumo to understand the subject better
than the great expoundcr Of Consti-
tutionaI law-Judge A. d. Smith.
At the last November term Of the
Portage %. Circuit Court, (about
three months ago) III cause wherein,
n. f. Bliss was plaintiff and Orlando
Curtiss was defendant, Judge Cate
made the following order:
This cause having been BROUGHT on
to hearing upon motion for the re-
moval thereof from this Court to the
United States District Court. for the
District of Wisconsin.
And 1t appearing to the satisfaction
OF the Court, that the above named
plaintiff is citizen of the State of
Wisconsin !; and that the defendant is
citizen ofthe State of Illinois. and
that the amount in controversy in
this action is over five hundred dol
lars.
Therefore, on motion Of Park and
Van Myers, attorneys for the defend
ant, it is ordered that this action be re-
moved to the District Court for fur
Their proceedings thereon.
Made this 9th day of November,
1859. BY the Court,
GEO. w. CATE.
On the 9Th Of January, 1860, the
counsel for the defendant presented to
Judge lIiIler's Court the above order
aud other papers in the case, and the
cause was entered in, and ordered to
be proceeded with according to the
practice ofthat Court.
The following letter explains it.
self
Madison, Jan. 80, 1850.
Hon. 3. Z. IIUTcuISsoS.-Dca1.
iS5r i an n receipt Of your favor.
asking nay opinion upon certain legal
questions:
!. "Cah a case pending in any of
our State Courts, be removed to the
I. 5. District Court Of Wisconsin AZ.
ter issue joined %
2. ''As a constitutional question, can
such removal be made at anr stare
Of proceedings, against the will Of the
parties p
In reply to these propositions, /
must be permitted to premise that it
IS presumed that these propositions are
involved IN case actually pending:
and IS a few weeks since, in a case IN
which am retained, I had occasion
to give a legal opinion, mot arcumcntl
upon similar points. [ cannot answer
your note more properly, than to give
YOU the crude draft Of the opinion then
given. | would copy and correct il f
| had time to do it, but unfortunately
| have not now. If this draft will ail
YOU at all, it is at your personal ser
vice
| understand case is now pend
ing upon these very points in the su-
preme Court, and we viii very soon
have al authoritative and final deter
mlnatlon Of these vital questions.
As the draft send you is the only
one have, yon would oblige me by
preserving 2 copy or the original.
Yours truly,
A. D. SMITH.
2. S.-The names Of the parties are
not now recolIectcd and were moi IN
serted IN the original draft, which T
Send you. 4. D. S.
Here is 4 copy ofwhat Judge Smith
alludes to as being ''the crude draft
Of the opinion:
Milwaukee, Dec, 1859.
PEPN CIR CI-IT ClI-Dr