Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-09-19
CREDIT MOBILIER.
The Government Salt at Hartford

The Government Suit ut Hartford.
HARTFORD, CT, Sept. 18.-In the
| United States CircuirG Court this morning
| the Credit Mobilier suits came up. Judges
Hunt and Shepman held that the motion
for dismissal should be heard first and that
all arguments on that question and demur-
rers must be closed by tomorrow night.
Roland G. Hazard, defendant, read bis
own argument before the court, holding
that the suits were brought nnder an I'M.
just and illegal action. A large number of
prominent lawyers from other cities were
present, including for the defense Bartlett
and Cur is of Boston, VIM. M. EVarts of
New York, and others. The Government
is represented by the Attorney General, As
sistant Attorney General and others.
The Court resumed its session at $50
P. NJ. The Government was repres ed
by Attorney General Williams and Messrs.
Perry, Jenck and Ashton. Judge Curtis
and Hon. Sidney Bartlett, of Boston, and
Hon. VIM. III. Evarts represented 80 of the
defendants, who have fled motion to dis
miss. Ten other defendants will also be
controlled by the decisions of this general
argument. Hon. VIM. N. Evsrts opened
his argument by saying that this suit was
brought under authority of the 10Th section
of the Appropriation act, passed by an ex-
piring Congress, agitated with its own repu-
tation. 1t has no precedent, no attendant,
and will have no successors. He spoke about
an hour and half. He divided the defend
ants into 3 dssses: those defendants
iIr their own right, those as administrators
and corporations outside of Connecticut.
He said the question was one of the power
of Congress under the Constitution, By
special act of retrospective legislation, to
authorize suit in behalf of the Govern
ment against certain designated individuals
or corporations, excepting such persons in
respect of suit from the operations of gener-
al and established law Of the land, both of
procedure and Jurisdiction, and subjecting
them, and hem only, to new rules, differ
ent from those heretofore and still in force
for the government of all other suits, and
all the rest of the people of the United
States. He said that one department of the
Government had no power 10 make laws
for the particular person not applicable to
any persons in a similar case. This Circuit
Court had no jurisdiction over
the persons and corporations
now moving for dismissal, save in
this very case, supposed to be warranted by
act of 1873, and that this act of Congress
is an exercise of judicial, not Legislative,
power, and so unconstitutional and void
that Congress could not confer upon an
Attorney General powers to determine in
what Court to bring suit, since that power
belongs to Congress; that administrations
equally protected from deprivation of right
without due process of law, and that an ad-
ministration appointed in one day is not
liable to be tried in that capacity out of
jurisdiction of State by whose authorities
he was appointed. This is applicable to
executors receiving powers from letters
testamentsry.
Mr.. Egarts was followed by Mr.. Ashton,
who wss soon after beginning taken sud-
denly sick. The court offered TO suspend,
but he still argu d for some time until he
was finally compelled to stop. Mr.. Perry
followed as senior counsel for the govern
ment. The court adjourned soon after he
commenced speaking.