New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-12-20

Fremonts Department growing out OF ms contracts ior
suppes 1t is now before this court on appeal by inc
Government from the judgment Of the Court OF Clals,
and represents number OF other cases III Wlcn te GOV
,,oIt has taken appeal Counsel for the claimants
appear and that the appeals DC uslnsseu on te
following grounds: FIRST: Ihat they were h9t TAKEN
within 90 days after the rendition OF the Judgments,
Second That there was no sufficient allowance OF aPbf
by the Court OF Claims IN term tme or 10y the ds
Justice in vacation, which Is essential within e W qa3
allowed by law for the taking OF such aIpeaIS
That there was legal application Tor the allowances
of appeal within such prescribed time; o.o, -.
Judgments were rendered IN al OF ne eases ~ ,ror
the motion in March, and IN june anu W'a !J amt
time the Solicitor Of the Court OF Claims hed ls apP.
cation in writing with the CLERK OF te court p NV nv Of
the even the knowledge OF me Sou al t
the Judges for appeal and this was all that ne Siu u
he reasembing OF the Court some days after the eNru
ton the ninety days, at which time IoIln"l a ~, The
was made. predcated ON the apphcauoH neo ~
Clerks Office, and 1t was granted Inc Cot
took recess but did not make any maj m
the December term of 1866 continuing uua I1 had
menCement Of the regular term OF IoO AT IL ou
heen adjourned It cOntended in support OF the in3I
that there would have been an end Oh ne iln' W,
Of december in the present year For all purposes except
the hearing of oral arguments inc Oou.t ~ ,ed
i'm tbe consideration Of and preparing OpnVhs iU
public announcement on reasse ~ "s cr Tho
Intervening time was longer The Judges met as sudi
during this recess IN thelI coisng toOd W ttenfion
The apnca not having been allowed WITHIN INC s''tu
, & a. IL commended that II must be dismissed, the
saiute OF March 1868, providing that either party aS
appeal under such regulations as the supreme ma?
direct i'm case such appeal shall be taken WITHIN ninety
dVs after the rendition of the Judgment by decree
lives The Court power to extend the time ior appear
or 10 dispense with any other re, nses ol iic tt
The Court has made rule which PROVIDES lnal tue Stat
ute shall cease TO run from the ulne, Iho alIl,n."d
tion Is made another, that the ordeI sha po ~
NJ The Cont il i'm session from the Chief Justice IN
vacation 1t urged that the hlng OF me og3ct3n WIN
the clerk in these cases docs not Wy 6ird
ment TO the benefit OF the statute II was neither nTu
in term time with the permission OF ihe I0uft, nor The
rules and regulations of the Supreme Court IN respec on
these appeals take the place OF me sIae' r m prc
statute has specially provided; but so l9r 10 P0
scrbed by the statute. the letter thereof controls
should the Court grant the motions ana DISMISS thc ~
,ooi tbe Goverulnent will Ice defeated IN nearly all OF
Its most important appeals from me CoS OF If the
John A. Wills for mOuoni MI NOrIon 0oHV'Oi VI '"'
Court OF Claims, opposed.
DOVER IN Personal EsTATE-CONSTRCCTION
OF LOCAL STATUTES BY TIE STATE COURTS
johnson and Wife Appellants. sgt Union Bank Of Florida
ADpeal from the District Court of the United
states for the Northern District Of Florida Under the
act to incorporate the Union Bank OF Florida Samue
Parkbu became subscriber TO the stock OF the bank
and 10 secure the payment Of the amount due Tor he
stock executed sundry mortgages IN when ms VIC d1
not join, although the Incorporating slatu'es ~ W o
provided for REIMBURSEMENT OF dover by the WE IN suc
cases The question is whether the wife fght OF GoWSI
is paramount 10 the right OF clam OF lHS p9h 10 Wv
mOrtgaged property. BY the statutes OF florida is eN
pressy enacted that the wife shall be entitled 10 GoWe
Onethrd part Of the slaves Win Wilch htI hsDiu nv.
possessed and that such claim shall hay preference Over
all others These last words u has beeh h,u ns me
Court Of Appeals for the Territory oi foIlua give nv
widow her third part Of the personally irrespective
Of the claims Of creditors at large INC District
Court OF the United SiateS' ,Yo, Tvs 49,
IN this case. dismissed the bl hcG ny tne
widow Of the mOrtlagCr 10 secure HtI IIEht0'
ana this appeal Is brought 10 review lha H.
pcant c0ntcndug that the Supreme Court OF the state
OF Florida has settled that dover means not Only me
common law provision OF NE estate h h Va ny t,
real estate hut also the other provisions secured ny tha
act to w-an interest In slaves aud other personal prop
erty; and that this dover Interest OF ie MiuO ~ Ply
ferred right, standing above all Othcr Claims Inc cItu
than they could all OF the real estate and thus altogether
defeat the widows dover interest Ihey can ony SUI,
icct TO the payment Of their demands the husband
estate subject TO the wiie's right OF dover. -,
On the other hand 10 cOnended below that by the
/ oh al he
upon the property mortgaged for stock money loaned
upon pledge shares Of stock and for all other demands
by the bank and arising out Of transactions between
me Dah s 19 If e 6of below sustained the position
taken by the bank, and this Court by division oi the
Judges, affirmed that judgment
CONCURRENT JURISDICTION or THE STATE AND
FEDERAL COURTS MANDAMUs-ls IT An
ORIGINAL OR AN AUXILIARY PROCEEDING.
The United states rel Marcus Rig, r1a.a 9 error sgt Tie
The relatOr filed his information IN the Clr-
cult Court for the district Of Iowa. setting forth That
johnson Couhly ln 49, Sg o oti, ~ go Coz nav
able lst of June, 1879 with interest coupons pay
able AZ the rate Of seven per cent Mnh
he was of a. That the 18th Of May 1884 he
recovered Judgment upon his coupons for s5s6 26 ami
found; that upon Ming the information about $4,000 oil
interest on the bonds was due and unpaid inandamns
was asked commanding the Board OF Supervisors 10 make
provision by tax for the payment OF the interest accrued
and FOR regular payment thereafter a. II should ia due
The Board returned 10 the alternative writ among other
~ = I'm tbc state Court i'm that county I'M
winch they were made defendants, decree had been
rendered against them and their successors IN ONCE Tor
ever el1mning them from levyng or proceeding to
levy collect any pay OF the coupons OF The
bonds or the bonds themselves and that the decree sun
remained in force.
The rcator demurrcd to the return. first because he
was no party 10 the proceeding In the state Court second
because the proceeding that Court begun and the
decree rendered after Judgment had been rendered on
part Of the coupons included In this proceeding third be
cause Court had no jurisdiction 10 prevent the
relaor from using the process Of this court by writ
mandsmus, TO collect this Judgment and fourth, because
the decree set up was no bar TO the Ieiei sought
The Court Oyerruled the demurrer, and the cause
thence comes here, the plainllh III error insisting
that the power OF the United states Court to
issue writ Of mandamus 10 compel the levy OF
tax to pay judgment Is vested III u by reason
OF the jurisdiction acquired by me g1dEmeht ana not
where 1t s to be created or acquired by me WIZ! ltse
dtlon Of the Judgment but continues ut inc Judgment
Is satisfied Many questions arise on process subsequent
10 the judgment in which jurisdiction is 10 be exercised
The injunction set up by the SUPERVISOR attained be
fore the suit, would have been no bar TO the pants
recovery The issuance Of Il after recovery OF the udg
is bar To the writ Of mandamus. The remedy by
m8ndamus Is the process 10 enforce the Judgment Tor the
plaintiff IL issues, not TO give Jurisdiction, but TO enforce
iusdction already acquired. No State can control the
exercise Of authority under the Federal Governments
State Court has an authority or jurisdiction 10 ei0n
judgment OF the Circuit Court Of the United states Oh
to stay proceedings under II.
Nor can court OF coordinate jurisdiction restrain the
proceedings Of another court OF the same Jurisdiction
The process Of state court Judge has no authority
beyond the limits OF the sovereignty which cOnels the
judicial power.
The defendants in error maintain the following propo
sitons In questions such presented the Federal and
State courts have concurrent Jurisdiction In courts OF
concurrent jurisdiction the decree and judgment OF that
proceeding by mandamus Is ordinary action indie
pendent and not an auxiliary proceeding One court
Will not require party TO proceeding therein do
act in violation Of the order OF another court and which
would subject him 10 punishment therein.
Francis Fellows, j. Grant, +. A. Dick and Montgomery
Blair for plaintiff In error; Farall BOOl Henry strong
the Hon Thos Ewing, and the Hon. o. II. Browning for
defendants in error
THE CIVIL COURTS
Petitions in bankruptcy were filed Yesterday
by James II stevens, Moses BuXbaum Isaac BuxbauIn
John Il. Arthur, and John Gaylord Wells.
Before Judge Gilbert in BROOKLYN. J. H.
DObbs IN recover fhe va,e ~ go,