The national Republican., 1867-01-17
Ths Courts.

SUPREME CouRr oS rnx UsirED 5rArEs-
Oh motion % Hon b. q. GoCk, Hoo. NJ Ra..Ill
Thsysr. Of the State Of Psnusy yvaois, vas admitted
No. sl. Fliss Lstwioh ct al, plaiutifs 10 error,
Vs. Nesl L. Lscann. This cause wa argued by
Mr.. ailist Of counsel for the plaiptlhs In srror.
No. ~ Rlihu Evans. piaintif 10 error, Va James
Patterson. This cause vas srgusd By M. Wilson,
Of counsel for the plaintiff 10 srror and submitted
By the defendant In error on printed argumsnt.
No. es Samuel Ware st a., plaintins In error
". The United States This cause vas submitted
pript.d srsum.pt By M wharton, of soups.l for
The piaintiH. 10 error. and b Me- Attorney General
stanbsry, Of counsel for the d,fshdApts In error
No. %. John Wood, plaintiff In error, ys, Frank
ts ln s''.' 90 Tsi, =, s.s:: "a. ,.ss.a BY Mr.
No, los The United Statss, appellants. ". o.
A. Weed ct al. The argunsht ef thh cause vas
commenced By Mr.. Ashtea, Assistant Attorssy
General, Of counsel for the app.llapt., and con.
y s uot 81 Sosns :. Il I1s hs
TIE Po'tai Ssvvies-E Efsa efdLs Di,oonf,sssnos
q q Post OGos upon ths ebios Of Ponnastsr--
Poru Of the Poamaasr 0snsrei % Disconfiaas -
!sar,'f Wars s"S John Bsi,! gtGnt6: in sror.
the oircuit Court Of the Uuitsd ststss for the
Eastern District Of Psnnsylvanls, brought 10 70.
verse judgment Of tho court anifming the judg.
mont Of the District Court In an action ofdsf.ndsnf,
tuhhtut1u " tno Gnitsu bthtta On tnn omcth Donu
Of Samuel Ware as po.tnastsr at K.nsington, in
the county Of Philadelphia. The declaration
charged balance due Of o. Ss9.4s. 10. .1f
The defence was that Ware had not been lay.
fully removed from the once q postmaster, and
hence. S such otiosr, hs rstansd IN bis possession
the sum claimed 10 be due % and for his commits
sions on tho postagss collected st that once and
for rent Of once during the space Of eighteen
months, from April !, 1852, TO September 80 1898.
In 1854 Remington was oonsolidatsd with PhiIa.
delphia, under an sot Of the Psnnsylvanis Lsgisa.
turs, but the Ksnsngton once was continued until
March, 1859, whom II was discontinued By the
Postmaster General and thereafter all mail matter
which had prsviously been Deposited In that onice,
phia ofaes and its sub-ofiess. No postages were
oollsetsd or received thereafter by the postmaster
at Remington, and no accounts were rendered By
him to the Department. st Warrington. -.,...'-
Tho questions raised, therefore, touch the legal
character and effect Of the action Of the Postmaster
General In discontinuing the once. The defendants
lplaintis In error insist that the law under which
. Ware was appointed declares that the sppointes
less sooner removed by the Prssident;" and that,
not having been removed, he entitled to deduct
from the claimed, when this action was brought
all that would at that time have bean due to him
on aoeount Of the onios The alleged power Of the
cannot be construed to carry with II ths removal
) Of the postmaster not appointed BY himself else
he might do indirectly what he could not do
, directly. This power In that onaesr, therefore,
ought to be construed to apply only to those Offices
where he has the power to appoint the postmaI.
ter The power Of removal should be ooextensivs
. with the power Of appointment. ..
. The Postmaster General neither appointed Ware
nor sstablishsd the Ksnsington ONCE II illegally
> continues postmaster al Ksnsington. Dc jas, and
was entitled to the smoluments Of the once, al
though wrongfully withhsld from him. He was
: consequently entitled TO credit on the books ol
the Department. for those emolumsnts. -
b The Govsrnmsnt claim that a. Ware performed
no duties, and % postagss were collected at the
. Remington once By any ono. he has no Just iegs
claim for compensation after the discontinuAnoe
d The Postmaster General had authority to discon
Time the once, under the act Of March 8, 1875
n which gives To him the constitutional power "tt
establish post ofhcss and post roads," as follows
"Hs shall establish post ofioss and appoint post
masters st all suoh places as shall appear 10 hin
sxpedisnt on the post roads that are or may b.
:. ESTABLISHED by law" ir.
No part Of this set has been repealed except th,
provision In regard 70 the appointment Of postmas
" tors In regard To which the sct Of July 3D. 1895
authorizes the President TO appoint postmastsrs a
" each Office at which the commissions amount to one
thousand dollars In tho year ending june 3oth, 1885
N or which in any subsequent year terminating Jun
s0th, exceed that sum. The post ofoe having bee
n discontinued In fAot and inaw, such discontinu
anos operated 10 determine tho inoumbenoy Of th
dsfsndaat In the oihss To uhieh he was appoints
In By the President The existence Of Wares ono
depended upon the existence Of tho post once. an
4 Il could not exist for day thereafter
ld q. N. Wharton for PLAINTIFF In error, Hear
n stanbsry. Attorney General, and J. Hublsy Ash
ID ton. Assistant Attorney General for Government
o Rsssdsnoes Of ths JHdgss Of tie Supreme Court 0
As Uaiisd Stafss.
Mr.. Chief Justice Chase, street north, corn
10 Of Sixth street west. Ia.....
q. Mr. Justice Wayne, No. . Franklin Place,
n street
to Mr.. Justice Nelson, National Hotel. =.
Mr.. Justice Grier, No. north A street, Capt.,
Hill
N Mr.. Justice clifford National Hotel.
n Mr.. Justice Swayne, Willard's Hotel.
Mr.. Justice Miller, National Hotel.
=, Mr.. Justice Davis, National Hotel
Mr.. Justice Field, Willard's Hotel.
John W. Wallace, reporter National Hotel.
a. Nv. Middleton, clerk, No. sos New Jerss
~ avenue. ~. ..
David 8. Gooding, U. 8. Marshal, 4sl Z street.
- CRIMINAL CouRr-Judge Olin, presidin.
(E. @. Darlington, District Attorney, prosecuting
m. In the case Of James H. O. Wilson . nOlls pro
\. was entered.
rs In The cases Of Timothy Land, James McKsnny
"A WIN. Burke, John Clarke, Joseph Codrieh, Hsnr
w woiford David R. Small and John Riddle II
diotsd for assault and battery, their recognrancs
he were forfeited and bench warrants Issued.
ns In the eases Of James franklin and Tinsy Ca
re roll, indicted for larceny, no pros was entsre
BY the District Attorney. ... '... ......
= Mary Tufnor, oonuoteQ OF larceny, was sentence
10 be Imprisoned In the common jail for one day.
WIN. Aufort and James johnson, impeaded Wit
" Jeremiah Haggerty for forging soldiers discharl
a papers and anal discharge papeu. Case continues
lLCoURr IN EQUIrY.-J,ldge Wyliep presidin!
IN R. J. Walker vs. Charles Hill OF al. Order owe
- ruling exceptions to defendant'B anIwer. ...
~, R. J. Walker vs.. Covington Smith, executor
III R. Smith, OF al. Order ovsrrulng exceptions
defsndant's answer.
= Mary Jane Sslby vs.. John W. sslby. Deer
and order pro eonfss'O appointing benjamin