The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-02-29
He COU r T S.
Interesting Proceedings in the United States,
New York and Brooklyn Courts.
The Jumel Estate Cass-Brick Pomeroy's Court
ship and What Came Of It-Allegsd Viola
ton OF the Internal Revenue Law
Important Proceedings in Bank
ruptcy-Decisions
uNlIED STATES supaEM; COURT.

The Cause Between the CunRrd steamship
Scotia and the Borlkskire-The Necessity of
All Vessels Exhibiting ColOred Lights at
Sea-The Squnbble Between Judge Fisher
md Joseph III. UNDERGRADUATES "seizure"
Suit-A PinintiG Seeks to Recover for Prop
erty Never Entered to tho Credit OF the
Government.
WASHINGTON, Feb %, 1872.
No. 90. Secors ct al. VS.. Steamer Scotia-Appeal
from the Circuit Court for the Southern District Of
New Y0rk.-The appellants owners or the American
ship Berkshire, and on behalf OF the owners OF her
cargo fled the libel IN this to receive Tor the
loss Of the vessel and cargo, sunk in mid ocean by
collision with the British steamship Scotia. The
defence OF the Scotia was that the Berkshire mprop-
erly changed her course, when by Keeping II the
collision would nave been avoiden and tnat she
did not exhibit the cOiOred lights required by law.
The District Court fOund that the Berkshire had
changed her course before her light was dis
covered by the Scotia and that there pelng
was not to be deemed a fault on the part OF mat
vessel; but held that IN view OF certain British
maritime STATES concuring upon the point OF
sde-llght and log signals, the laws OF the sea must
be deemed TO be changed IN respect TO such require
ments, so that, at the time OF the collision, 1t was
obligatory upon the Berkshire TO exhibit colored
lights and that the failure to exhibit them was the
cause OF the collision. The GREAT Court, although
coming 10 the conclusion that ASIDE from the
neglect to carry side.lights the Berkshire was at
decree on the question OF lights holding that under
the acc OF 1864 The same regulation Is prescribed
ana that 1t is to be enforced In the OF COLI
the high seas, outside the jurisdiction Of any
nation, where the suit IS between citizens
and clilzens OF Ioreign State. 1he correctness Of
this decision is here contested. j. g. Carter Tor ap.
pellants, ID. o. Lord ana e. e. Benedict for appel
lees.
No. 11s. Joseph H. Bradley VS.. George P. Fisher
Error to the Supreme Court OF the District OF Column
pia. This is the case of Mr.. Bradley ST.. against
Judge Fisher TO recover damages for the injury
sustained by Mr.. Bradley by reason OF Judge
fishers action IN striking his from the roll OF
attorneys OF the Court and the particulars OF which
WIN he well remembered. MIR. Bradley, during the
trial of the Surratt case, in which ne was counsel
Tor Surratt, alter the adjournment Oh the Court, ap
preached Judge Fisher. ana complaining tnat the
ened personal cnastsement The next day.
Tor this offence, Judge Fisher ordered his name
pe lo Nv ne ro CO netbas
Judge Fisher could claim an indgnlty TO the Court
by Mr.. Bradey's acts. tne Court being adjourned
be sued for any act done III his judicial capacity,
such as the order made.
IL Was decided below that the act OF Mr.. Bradley
was such an act OF disrespecJ to the Court as usned
The order MADE, and that ne was not liable III
damages FOR the order so made. This ruling Is pre-
sented as error IN this Court Mr.. Bradley, In per-
son, Tor paintir IN error; Messrs. Cook and Riddle
Tor defendant.
No. 49, United States vs. Slvey-Appeal from the
Court OF Caims-This was an action to recover
the proceeds of seventy bales OF cotton taken
by the government forces at Atlanta, Ga. The
claimant established to the satisfaction OF the Court
OF Claims that he gave aid and comfort the
rebellion, and was allowed to recover the Court
hnalng that he was the owner OF the property. and
that 1t had been captured under the Captured and
Abandoned Property act, and the proceeds mad been
pail into the Treasury. Ii is here claimed by Inc
government that as the act requires q book to be
Kept by the Secretary an which the proceeds
OIL all such properly paid into the Treasury
shall be entered, and as there Is no entry
OF the receipts Of the proceeds OF the prop.
erty in this CASE the absence OF the entry
is evidence that no such proceeds were paid into
the Treasury. This book Of accounts, II Is urged,
should have been received as the best evidence on
the subject, and the finding should have been that
there had been no payment into the Treasury, III
which case there could have been recovery. 1t
Is also urged that as the act entities the Court OF
Claims TO give judgment only for the proceeds OF
property which have paid into the Treasury IN tine
absence or the evidence OF the entry contended tor.
as 10 what the proceeds are. the Court has data
upon winch 70 enter Judgment IL has no power 10
render pro tdrato Judgment as was done In this
case. Hughes, Denver Il Peck for claimant; Il. IL.
Bristow ana U. II. Hin Tor government.
No. 2i.-Uniued States VS.. T. q. W. Crussell. APP
peal from the Court OF Claims. This case presents
the same question stated in The foregoing case and
Is argued by the same attorneys.