The national Republican., 1869-06-29

court and 10 every such SQUIRT tfs power Of
os1s g, @ wa. u..Sn in
thisl eases whether the Odminh court OF
the District Of Columbia wa. United states
ISL, which Sinp Pproridsd o that no soats%pi shall
be puhlthedunlcss committed in presence OF
the court, 40.
court were court at all u was a court Of
what Of the District OF Columbian whyt
District Of Columbis was nothing but tEe
and its courts, deriving their authority from
the United States, are therefore United States
courts, and In this respect distinct from the
tained IT'S power BY vittue Of another clause
MT. Cook examined At length the authority
for contempt, Being court OF independei
law 70 gani;h for contempt lie quoted mai
tended that the law OF 1881 Ia rsIatioa to COT
tempta, relied on by the other side, was merely
explanatory Of an set Of i7so and 70 be eoI.
no District Of Oolumbia, and consequent
that act could not be eohstru ID to apply t.
,hI' Distric'; He Gtsessded, preceded pie'sn,lnE ma.
show that for the judgment or order Of a
count, no action could be brought In the courts
OF law. The remedy in such case was by I'm.
YMr. Harfi. desired timo TO look a, soao Of
the oasea Of MI. Cook, and suggested an ad-
Sns Until tSmot.Ss SS Os 3hs IrpS.s
friend stricken down tn the midst Of honors
and years without q trial BY asinEie bolt from
the Judicial hand, lie did not believe the
ied BY Mt, OoSk we're the law 81 Ills esse.I
suggested that he would 20 on tomorrow.
woui3be useless. lie had never seari Of sue
a ease 1 this, and he supposed nobody ha
ssyes beard q such : eass., v.s 40 action'
order. TINT oTisf iSi psrisd Il. % own verify.
Judge Hughes said he VA In court the otht
day when the case OF = lad who had been SCI
70 the jail for twelve months was eaiied ~
The Judge there decided that a. tho Court had
no authority TO send the I'd to jail Tor longer
time than SIX months, that hotlon was void,
and che lad was entitled to hts discharge.
THs JuDeg SAYS Mr. BRApLEY mas NO CASE.
The court explained the case alluded to by
judge hughes, and said; l think, gentlemen
and go TO the supreme Codtt MY opInlon on
the subject are so strong. The opinion o
Judge Black In Pastsmorc Willlamson's case
covered M ny ease comple,eIy' aad the report.
n,,rn., The t1ns ti,; t Of /, Judge S,Onot he in
Z tho universal current OF decisions. The
Aw has so much respect for the certainty Of
!udsmeets thst y wlll not allow them 70 !
tmpesched except for error OF law. II w
certain law tht no action will lie against
judge for y iudFmcnt made within the scoi
VI nus luIlsllCtiOn. rus ordef was m OfdI
10 the case of Surratt. An order made Ipui
ishihg Tor contempt In the course Of trif
to DO REGARDED As an order 10 tho eAs
though the panishment DO NOT Indicted unit
he case 10 closed! The prosecution had EiyeI
In evidence the record Of q Judicial order
which was q complete answer TO their action
OF libel. lie would givo the plsintiff every
opportunity for making up = case to 90 to. the
supreme Court.
hwas agreed that such ease be made to.
morrow, snd the case finished so far as the
Circuit Court is concerned,
The following orders were mhdei
" w, q 'orge ct vi. va. J. Ferguson ct al
ordered TO be placed upon the calendar.
Irmbell VS. Charter Oak Insurance Com
pany. Order for inspection OF papers.
CASES TODAY.
ISL ltg l7o lfs, l1s, lse ipi, 1875, lel, 2oO 2Ol.
All the attorney are requested to appear Il
day and arrange the cases which are stlil ope
on the calendar.
Adjourned.
Eouirr Courr : Judge IYyIis pro ien.-Thi-
court made the following order yesterday
Halliday vs.. Halliday ct al. Order eonnFbt
log trustees ana auditof's reports, An dire,,l
Owner vs. Owner ct al. Order dlspsu.bi
with further publlcsi In the EaiioAaI IiFT
iigencer ofIudieisi noticcs -
McClean ys, 0aynor etAl Order OF publioH
tion against absent defendants,
Lindsley vs.. DeKrafft ct al. Order appoiat
Ing guardian to defend infants inierestin 10 sui,
Adjourned.