Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1867-11-16
Conflict of Authority Between
State and Federal Courts.

Conflict of Authority Between
State and Federal Courts.
A conflict has arisen between the United
States Court for the Northern District OF
Ohio and the Court of Common Pleas in
Holmes county, which has already led to
arrests. This conflict grows out of the
Bankrupt law as passed by the last Con-
gress.
1t seems that one ELI SNYDER had prop
erty to the amount of some $40, 600 attached
by order of the Court of Common Pleas of
Holmes county, for the benefit of sundry
creditors. On the 18th day of September,
1867, the Common Pleas Court, Judge REED
presiding, ordered the property to be sold
under the statute providing for the sale of
perishable property. The property was
advertised to be sold about the 1st day of
October. 1867. Before the day of sale, about
the Goth day of September, other creditors
of ELI SNYDER, who.had not been diligent in
securing their claims under the State laws,
filed their petitions in bankruptcy, in the
U. s. District Court. On the 4th of Sep
tember, as we learn the facts from the
Clereland Plain Dealer,an injunction was is
sued out of the U. S. District Court, against
the Sheriff of Holmes county, prohibiting
him from disposing of the property under
his order of sale of the Common Pleas
Court. The sale was postponed. In the
meantime a warrant was issued for the
Marshal to seize the property of ELI SNY-
DER for safe keeping, until an Assignee was
selected to take charge OF it under the
Bankrupt Act. and pretended arrange
ment made between the Marshal and Sher-
the Marshal now claiming that he did take
the property from the Sheriff, and the
Sheriff claiming that he only consented to
hold the property until the law of the case
was settled, and that he did not deliver
it to the Marshal. At the term of the
Common Pleas judgment was taken
on the various attachments, and an or
der obtained for distributing the proceeds
of the property attached. An injunc-
tion was also allowed by the Common Pleas
against the Sheriff, prohibiting him from
disposing of the attached property other
wise than as before commanded. A motion
was also made by the assignees of ELI SKY
DER in the Common Pleas to dissolve the at
tachments, which motion was overruled by
the court, and exceptions taken. TIE Sheriff
then proceeded to sell the attached proper
ty, and commenced selling it on the 11th
day of November. The United States Mar
shal interfered, and bidders were deferred
from bidding. The creditors in attachment
sued the Marshal for damages $4,000 for
preventing the sale. The Marshal also ar
rested the Sheriff for disobeying the in
junction OF the District Court. The Pro-
bate Court issued its writ of habeas corpus
to the Marshal to bring the Sheriff and
Marshal before it. The Marshal failed to
appear, and an attachment was issued and
he was arrested by the Coroner. Upon
examination of the Marshal's authority the
Probate Court discharged the Sheriff. An
affidavit was then filed for the arrest of the
Marshal for resisting the Sheriff, and a
warrant issued and served on him at Orr
vile, but the Marshal resisted, and refused
to be arrested. On the night of the 18th of
November. the Marshal with special
train, and about sixty men, arrested the
Sheriff on warrant for resisting the Mar
shal.
The prisoner waived an examination and
gave bail In the sum of $4,000 for his ap-
pc arance before the United States District
Court. The Marshal thereupon arrested
him on a writ of attachment, which case
came on for hearing at 2 o'clock P. NJ, on
Thursday, before Judge SHERMAN; Messrs.
CRIrcHFIELD and WORRIES, of Holmes
county, for FRENCH, and U. s. District At
torney DIcKMAN, and Messrs. j. d. CLEvE-
LAND and B. WHITE. for the other side.
On motion OF Messrs. CRITcHFIELD and
WORRIES, the Court gave Sheriff FRENCH
until Monday, the 18th, to answer to the
charge of contempt; fixing his bail at
$4,000. He gave bail and was discharged.
Z The Sheriff, with his attorney, had made
all arrangements to start for Cleveland the
morning of the arrest.
Sheriff FRENCH has warrant in his pos
session, from the Court of Common
Pleas, of Holmes county, for the arrest Of
Marshal HASTINGS for resisting him in the
discharge OF his duties as Sheriff of that
county.
This is beautiful muddle, and may lead
to consequences to be deprecated. With
out any knowledge of law but that which
common sense teaches, it seems strange
that after property is ordered to be sold on
an execution, that other parties. negligent
in pressing their claims, should step in and
stop proceedings and force the whole mat
ter into a Bankrupt Court, and arrest the
Sheriff for doing that which appears to
have been his sworn duty in disregard
ing such proceedings.