The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1869-10-29
THE COURTS.

SUPREME CoURr OF TUE UNITED STATES
Thmsddy, October 2S, lS6o.-No. III. The
Steamer Carroll, &C., appellants, vs. John
NJ. Green. The argument Of this cause was
continued by Mr.. W. 8. Waters, OF counsel
for the appellee, and concluded by Mr.. La
trobe for the appellant.
No. ITS. Henry W. Drakely ct al, plain
tin In error, vs. Richard Gregg ct al. The
argument OF cause was commenced by Mr.
Latrobe, Of counsel for the plaintiffs In error,
and continued BY Mr.. Thomas for the de-
| PENDANTS In error.
Adjourned until tomorrow morning at II
o'clock.
SUPREME CouRT OF TnH DISTRACT OF Co.
LuMBIA.-All the justices sat IN bane yester-
day for the hearing Of appeals, and acted on
the following casesi a.
Lane Va. Gibbons. This 10 case growing
out OF q claim for fees Of counsel employed
to prosecute claim again st the Government,
once before reported. II was argued by Col
ouel Totem and General B. r. Butler. The
court took the papers aud held the case under
Amusement.
M'GARRAuAS CASE.
william McGarrahan vs.. o. ii. Browning,
Secretary Of the Interior.
This case came up last January upon an
application by William McGarrahan on the
Sd Of December, 1868, for mandamus to
compel o. II. Browning, the then Secretary
OF the Interior, TO Issue 70 MEG, upon pay
ment by him Of the sum OF s22, 900 to the
United States, q patent for q tract Of land
In California. A rule was Issued on Secre-
tary Browning to show cause, aud returna-
BILE before the court In general term. Mr..
Browning responded to the rule, denying
inter ala the Jurisdiction Of the court. Bya
stipulation between counsel at that time,
when the case was submitted to the court Il
was agreed that the Judgment OF the court
upon the application rule and return might
be rendered In vacation, as Of January term,
1869, and that on the 9Th Of July, 1869, (the
whole May term Of the court IN bdnc having
interviewed, y when the court was not In SEES
sion, an order or decree for the maudamus
was entered by two Of the justices Of the
court. That IL had been the intention of
counsel In their stipulation that the decree
should be entered In the vacation next sue
ceeding the January term, and not during.
any subsequent vacation, and that at the ex-
piration Of the vacation succeeding the jan
uary term, all authority under said agree.
ment for the rendition OF Judgment during
vacation, as OF the January term, 1869, ter
minated.
He further represents that between this
agreement and the rendition Of the judgment,
he succeeded Browning as Secretary of the
Interior, but that no proceedings have been
taken by the relator against him, aud that
peremptory mandamus against Browning or
his successor In oface upon the pleadings
mentioned could not be had until some fur
Their return Of the rule TO show cause had
been made.
He further sets forth that the irregularlty
fthe judgment becomes more clearly mani
fest upon a consideration Of the seventh sec
tion Of the act Of Congress Of July 23, 1866,
entitled, can act to quiet land titles In Cali
fornia," upon which the claim Of right by
McGarrahan for patent for the tract OF
land In question Is alone placed. That sec
ton OF the act expressly excerpts from the
right Of purchase therein given, call lands
containing mines OF gold, silver, or CHINA
bar" (alloyed mercury or Of the fact that
Is mine OF ciunabar which cannot there
fore be embraced in any patent Issued under
said act.
Furthermore, before the time the present
Secretary was appointed claim had been
made and flied to said mine of cinnabar, by
and on behalf OF the New Idria Mining
Company, and to q patent therefor under
and In pursuance Of the act Of July 23, 1866,
which said claim was and is subject to the
judicial cognizance and power OF the Com
missioner Of the General Land Office, and In
tue cAcICisc Vi HE supervisory anu upptllAte
power over the acts and doipgs OF that
officer Of the Secretary of the Interior, the
validity OF said claim OF the said mining
company and the extent and character of Its
interference with the claim OF, the relator
were and are within the exclusive jurisdic-
ton Of the Department Of the Interior, which
Jurisdiction can only be lawfully exercised
conformably to the statute OF the United
States In such cases made and provided, as
understood and explained by that Depart
ment. Whereupon Mr.. Cox prays, through
Mr. Ashton, his attorney, that the writ Of
mandamus heretofore issued on the 9Th day
OF July against o. II. Browning, or his sue
cessor In office, be qualified, and that the
order aud decree above mentioned of the sth
day OF July be vacated.
The motion was reversed for future action.
Harknsss VS.. James ct al, aud James ct
al. va. Schneider. The decree below In these
causes was affirmed, as the cases follow the
disposition made In the case Of James ct al.
VS.. Mclean, reported yesterday.
Alexander ct al. We. Bouldin ct al. This Is
q case growing out Of dispute between two
sections Of the First Coiored Baptist church
Of this city, heretofore reported In these
columns.
Mr.. Ashton filed motion TO Quash judg-
ment and vacate decree.