The New York herald., 1870-02-22


or delalcations to an enormous amount cannot De
wanting particularly when we reflect that they are
| In charge OF underpaid and irresponsible officials
Congress should At once direct the Secretary OF the
! Treasury to have The whole amount counted regis
tered and burned; repeal the crude and nkcon-
sidered sinking Fund law, and stop forever the pay
fnent OF Interest on our matured and paid up Oh.
legations. Here Is chance 10 save $60oooOO
this year. We call the attention OF the Committee
OF Ways and Means u 1t. II that body OF wise men
improve this opportunity we viii give them another
The proposed $50 00O, ,0C0 reduction should be made
at least s75,oo0,ooo.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
Indiana DEMONSTRATION in the Cheever-
Worcester Divorce Cnsc-Indiana Declared
Legal Throughout tho United States
WASHINGTON, Feb. 21 1870.
Benjamin II. Cseerer u.s. Jesse b. wilson and
Anate J. Worcester-Appeal rom the Supreme
Court Of the District Of Columbia. was an
action brought to enforce the provisions OF decree
OF divorce granted in Indiana between the plainrn
In error and the defendant, Worcester. The decree
also provided for the appropriation OF certain pro-
pery in the District OF Columbia, belonging
to the wife, towards the support ana
maintenance OF the children Of the mar
rage, which were IN the custody OF Ine
father. This portion Of the decree me mother SUP.
seqnenty refused to execute although after II was
made she had entered INTO an agreement Win
Cneever 70 do the very acts directed therein lnsisI
VOID Tor want of jurisdiction. ana the court below
80 neld 1t.
court, reversing the decree below and remand
ing the cause, with directions to enter decree IN
conformity with The opinion which finds the decree
OF divorce or the Indiana be valid, the court
having Dad jurisdiction OF the parties by the appear
eeson o ts s Te or a
conclusive upon the parties to the SUIT ana
a. ID rated by the laws OF Inaiana, and has never
been questioned there under the constitution OF the
United STATES, IL must prevail IN every other p0r
ton OF the country. The Court also asserts that so
far from beng pound by the d0micll or her hus-
band, = married woman may acquire residence
independent OF the husband whenever sucn resi-
By litigation. The Court rest their decision as to
the disposition OF the property upon the agreement
OF The wife subsequently, to the divorce and DO not
find necessary TO inquire into the authority OF the
Indiana court to make the decree IN respect OF the
properly in the district. 1nls contract between
Mrs Worcester ana Mr.. Cheever Is held TO be sun
Gent for the purpose OF the decision on that point
without going beyond 1t. Mrs. Cheever subsequent
to the divorce married Worcester, and hence sne IL
made dependant by that name.
Congress Cannot Establish Police Regulations
Within the States.
The United States 0s. Henry @. Detrn-CertUtc0te
Of dirtston rom the Circuit Court OF Nichf1ayl-Ihe
defendant was indicted under section q OF the act
OF March, 1867, for selling petroleum oil for ilumi-
mating purposes. inAammabe at q less temperature
than ITO degrees Fahrenheit. On demurrer the fol-
loving questions, on which the judges were
divded--were accordingly certified here wheSher
the facts charged constitute any offence under q
valid law, and whether the twenty first section Of
the acc is valid and constitutional law, Mr.. Cnief
Justice Chase delivered the opinion or the Court
holding Congress has no constitutional power to
establish polce regulations within the States. and
that the law IN question being an enactment Tor the
projection OF consumers against DANGER in the use OF
oil TOO intiammabe Tor safety is such a regulation
aud ls therefore unconstitutional and void The
questions were answered In the negative, except
that III respect TO the second THE law Is held to be
valid TO Oil territory OF the United states outside
the limits OF any state.
Seizure Under the C0nnscation Acts.
Henry Pelham os. Dapad G. Rose ct aL--Certif-
cate OF Dtutsion rom the Circuit Court for the Dis
trtct OF Ind.Gna.-Ths was libel under the Con1s-
cation act OF 1892 against promissory note belong
ing to Pelham for $4,000. The marshal returned that
he had arrested the property and IN pursuance Of
order Of the court the note was sold TO Its maker
for $4,000. Pelham thereupon sued Rose, the mar
sinai making the seizure, and his suretes to recover
the amount or the note, ayowng 1alse return
20 the writ Of monition by the marshal, and
it having been ali the while in his (Pe-
nam'sJ possession III Kentucky. The defendant
questions whether the actual seizure OF the note In
the was necessary, whether the return OF the
Marshal should be construed TO mean that such
seizure was made, and whether the proceedings
below estopped Pelham from maintaining an action
on the note certified them to this court Mr.. Justice
Field delivered the opinion OF the court answering
the first two questions IN the affirmative, holding
tnat 1t was the property and credit, or the note in
question, whose seizure was contemplated and not
the mere debt Of the maker OF the note Pelham.
The third question was consdered hypothetical ana
Was, therefore, not answered.
specific Performance of Contract.
John b. Mote u.s. Benjamin Mole ana ~WUe.-Ap-
peal nom the Supreme Court 0r the District Of
Columbta.--In this case John L. Mole agreed, In
furtherance Of the marriage between his son. the
defendant and the lady who became his wife, 10 give
to the intended bride lot OF land, provided house
Tor Their home was built npon It, with money belong
ing TO her, The marriage TOOK place and the house
was built subsequently. the husband and wife
beng absent ana the house being unoccupied the
donor took possession and has since held It, profess
lug to have afterwards determined not 10 make the
gilt Of the property. The court below sustained
the contract ana decreed specific per-
Torrance. THIS court now affirmed. that decree,
MI. Justice Davis delivering the opinion, holding
that the building OF the house with the knowledge
ana consent OF the donor was SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF
part performance to take the case out OF the Statute
OF frauds and that this was not case for damages
TO the aggfe edjpares tut for specific performance
Decision Against the Government in the La
Brea Case.
The Uited States Us. 4nto1ato Rocha Ell ot--Appeat
from te District Court Jr me Southern District Of
CatloTiid:-This Involves the title to league
OF land in Los Angeles Cal there called La Brea
Bitumno. The decree below was against the gov
ernment and the settlers, ana The case was brought
here on the ground ihat Lne calmantS title A0t
based on an absolute grant, but merely upon per-
mission 10 pasture caltle, cultivate &C. The decree
below was now aifllineG, Mr. Justice Nelson delv-
erng the opinion OF the court. Dissent by Mr..
Justice Clifford
The Mcfsarrntan Case.
Evidence on the McGarrahan case has been closed
before the House Committee on the Judiciary. The
argument VIII commence Wednesday. Mr. shaw Of
New York. viii open 1or McGarrahan to be followed
| by Messrs. Evar;s and wilson, for the New India
| Company. Mr. Pascal VIII conclude Tor McGarra-
han.
Miscellaneous Decisions.
The Steamboat Joseph Johnson us M. cord Ell dl
and one other caSeApDedl from The Circuit Court
Jar the Southern District Of Neoo Yoyk-These were
cases OF collision, in which the Circuit Court held
%ayeS dacraa accorn,n"iy Tho docraa @ ,.n ana
| affirmed. The opinion OF the Court was delivered
! by Mr.. Justice Clifford.
smith Us. Morse et ei.-EYOr to The Circuit court
for tie southern district or Nes f0rk.-This wds
case growing out Of certain agreements between
the parties concerning Morse's telegraph. The &C.