The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1869-12-06
aatioual @epnblitau.
THE COURTS.

W bdne yesterday -.H ..'r
J. L. Mason W. Rswley. This isAn ap-
peal in relation 10 patent for preserving
jar, In which Judge Fisher had decided Up 4
Judge Cartier said the court had come TO
the unanimous conclusion that the injunc-
tion granted In this case ought not 70 be sus-
tained.i Tho question arose under q con- |
struction of the patent laws, and tbs ques- |
tlon was whether the injunction granted In 4
this case vas within the power Of the court.
The statute only provides for the interpo-
The patent Is inchoate, and for q court 10 |
interfere would be TO transfer the conflicts Of |
the ONCE to a court OF general jprlsdiction. |
But even " this were not 90, 10 ID qusstiona- |
bio whether the latter portion OF tho statute |
was not fatal to tho Injunction Of mo court
In this case. The injunction must DO set
aside. frY.. -.y- ..Hf,y = a.
N Tho nraAIey .FishsrC sssa ~
Bradley vs.. Fisher. Justice wylie dellv.
cred tbs opipion Of she court sussalnlng the
Judgment OF the court below. A the opiB
lou Is upon matter ip which great Interest
has been manifested, and decides Incidentally
ssyerai qasstions Of local law, We giys space
for the opinion IN srfenso: ~ ~ Z -
OPINION or THE COURT.
Joseph II. bradley %. George p. F.htr, .Ss-
p prsns gOosrf efItk Dssris Of Cbbrnbia,
General Term, Oefooer, 1899. =
This case was tried At the circuit court
before one Of the Justices Of this ooart, where
several offers Of evidence made BY the plain
tilt were overruled, and bills Of exception
taken 70 these rulings. On these exceptions
now trialwas moved for In that court on
tho ground that there was error on the part
Of the court In excluding the evidence Of
ferod, and this motion was certified 10 this
court, to be heard here In tho hrst Instance.
II was an action on the case brought by
the plaintiff to recover damages Of the de-
PENDANT, In consequence of an order made
by the latter, whilst claiming 70 hold term
Of tho Criminal Court Of this dlstrict as ono
Of the justices OF this Court assigned TO that
duty, and which tho plaintiff AYERS was made
without authority and without Jurisdiction
/, on tho part OF the judge to make IL, and ma
llclously, corruptly, &c. But the denial OF
Jurisdiction Is contained only In the second
count: The order was made on the 10th OF
The Court orders the following 70 be en-.
tered OF record, to wit On the secoad day Of
s' q y p; S
Lincoln. Immediately after the court had
.s.en 5sss. e ne iollS.!9s %sS1ins
SsSds, io.spS II. Bf.dlsy ssS, .seo.te% hin
i.dss y h;,lss os.e I'LL hi% ,,o sf;;sS: sim
any intsntien Of passing any insult Whatever,
Tor HIN 90 other fssiios but tia, O. rs.psst.
nation or disclaimer, thfeatened the Judge
with personal ohastisement.
No court can administer jnstice, or live, ifit.
Judges are to be threatened with personal
eha,Mssment on all Ssoaalons, whsnsy s NE
one which even hii ys.rs vili not pslliate. II
e osas s. ssss ss name
stricken from the roll OF attorueys practising
IN this oouIt.n (Sisnedb Gro. 2. FIsHaR,
Justice o. the saPrens Court Of The District o.
The desisration consists Of two oounts-th,
nr.t charging that the SAID osdsr va, read u
tho court and was made without any reasonable
or probable cause, and that the conduct Of The
malicious, Oppressive. and tyrsnnicsi, and thu,
right 70 prsstios :, an sttornsy u the court;
order was not an order OF this court, or that Thu
judge wsa without jurlsdiction to mske y.
question was made without authority or Juris
diotion on tho part OF the judge, thatths orde
was in fact not an order Of the court at all
and against the will and objection Of the plain
tN"awronsfuily, eorraptly, nslieiously, an,
SrS5SsS. ,. sas sSd 70
was summary end wholly without notice OF an
tlash sfS. " i.si. S u
jadse's order, speelh tally and seriatir,, but 1
The manner on which we shall have osessio
70 III. s1 assisGssios ,Se dsf:aasss plead.
nIst, the general Issue; and second, spocia
plea setting OUT ~, me iset tant a, ne ZINE u
inAl Court ofth District, tonrt III 'ha Llj q
Gsneral juri.diction, 40, and that said orde
s1srcise q It's rishtiui Sathofity, jarisdii
To this second plea of the defendant, tn
~ lat Id A. aaG.. 10 and IA h.
1t is too plain for discussion, that the fri
fsstiss, hat the Court SS below wa. right !
exclude any. evidence offered BY the pisinsi
Il admits the authority and Jurisdiction {
thsjudge sitting In aud holding court at II
effect q the order e .tIi.. The glsiosia,. nan
Il AYERS that the order was made without Jul
or.prY6sble oau,s, tyrsnaieaiiy, oppressivsl,
Mths "ushoGity ar and Jurisdiction Of a oou,
Postorous proposition to offer evidence to.
again, II shs juds%ens u court could be e0 IL
peaohsd, and Its validity tried bafore jur
mosiSss 81 sss sSh Il on sntsus the uasaen
We, therefore, dismiss the nrst count Of th
plaintiffs declaration, and the offers o. ev
dsnee to sustain 1t, as not requiring any furth'
But the second count, As We have seen, DO.
deny the jurisdiction Of !. the judge to make u
good ssousds or probable cause thereof
that W .SoaIa ascertain What The piaiHtl
f.ss: :i IN the case. Fi,sl, Se sdniti shst,Se !
Sss. but Il he 'G 81 the pisins
he says was 80 entered re- ana m =, a. E VII
s 81 i:s sf "a p Sisas; spa a.
10 proceeding further to charge the falls
the order In QUESTION, the plaiutif says; "AI
he AYERS thatthere was no complaint made /
him to the said justice, and he did not aeoo
t.Atng sr.eeii, and a. ne prs.ia!ng Judg. ,.a,
NE said orders Is % soS did he yths nsntisS 81
and place mentioned ~ said ordsIl address u
taken e " s.s fso.s. sn * ssia ' gsg. e.
passed some time In private room and hdd Z
ssss, so Sas g of saaloSs ju1ors wtns
clerks and officers OF the court and the Jul
empanneied and the prisoner 90 trial had 10
wiifuiiy, msiielousIy, aorruptly and unla;
fully fabricated the said order to give cole
and grotenee 10 his juri'dio'i0n In The pref
Here is not syllable to deny any one OF II
facts stated In the order 10 question a. TO
aooidepts aud oircumstances; tbs. exact m
ment Of time, and that WAS Immediately aft
taking The rsee,. that NJ ,dineui'y occurs
as stated BY the Judge did occur, but, a ,dsni
only that i occurred tn after the Judge h
We are compelled to interpret such a deni
Of the .ue.tsstial truth Of the facts ststed
Ing dsnYsl but real soaisssion Or the facts i
Plaintin's declaration proeesds TO aver a. q
lows e to ths motive; q the ! galss, "a