The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1874-05-05

World to the plaintiff in error; it being
stipulated that the latter company
should not allow the steamer to ply in
California waters for a period of ten
years. Afterwards. the Oregon Com.
pauy sold her to the defendants, with q
stipulation that she should not be al
lowed to ply in the California waters,
nor upon the Columbia River and it's
tributaries. Subsequently, the steamer
was plyed between San Francisco and
Vallejo. within the State OF California,
aud this action was brought to recover
the damages stipulated to be paid in
case of breach of contract. The court
below held the contract to be in restraint
OF trade, and therefore void, for consi-
deration of public policy. That judg-
ment is here reversed; the court hold.
ing that the restraint OF trade was, not
to such an extent as to invalidate con-
tract reasonable in its terms, aud found.
ed upon valid consideration. 1t did
not deprive the public of any of the
business enterprise of the country, but
rather facilitated, than otherwise, the
business of the venders, The price paid
for the steamer WAS affected by the sti-
pulaiion as consideration, and the
time of the restriction was no longer
than necessary to protect the vendors Of
the steamer. Mr.. Justice Bradley doll
vered the opinion. Dissenting, Justice
Clifford, Swain and Davis.
Ec p1rts Robinson, original in this
case. The Judge Of the United States
~ ,1b e..
of Arkansas disbarred the petitioner for
refusal to answer certain interroga-
tions required by the court in pro-
ceeding before it. IE answer to the al
ternative writs Of mantk,nlus issued by
language of the petitioner, Il shull an
swer nothing" taken in connection with
his tone and manner, waa such as to
merit summary and severe punishme ent,
and it was accordingly Inflicted. This
court hold that the power to disbar at
torneys can only be exercised where
there is such conduct on the part of the
parties complaiped of as shows them to
be unfit to be members Of the profes.
sion. They hold their Office during
gooa behavior, and can ouly bs deprived
Of it for misconduct. uscertained and de-
clared by the judgment Of the court
after opportunity to bs heard has been
offered. Before Il Judgment disbarring
An attorney is rendered. he must have
notice OF the grounds of complaint
against him, and ample opportunity of
explanation and defence. III accordun nce
with the rule of natural justice, applicu.
Die IN all cases. a peremtory nlantlins.
wm is directed to the court below to re-
store the petitioners 3 name to the roll of
attorneys Justice Field delivered the
opinion.
The tax case Of St0ckdale Is. tie At
lantic INSURANCE Company, from the
Circuit Court for louisiana, which also
carries with it thirteen other cases, was
decided IN the Supreme Court to-day
The opinion establishes the following
points: That whether the tax on divi-
dends arising from the earnings of cor
porations for the year 1859 be viewed
as tax on the share holder or on the
corporation, it was intended to tax the
earnings for that year by the section
which limited the duration 0f the in
come tax; that Section II of the Act of
1870, constituting certain sections of the
law OF 1859 to extend the tax to the
year 1870, is valid, because it is not
an attempt to exercise judicial power,
constituting statute for the court, but
is mode of constituting or revising u tax
which might have been supposed 10
have expired. as this merely imposed
tax retrospectiveiy, it was within the
legislative power of Congress, and the
case differs from an effort to invade
private rights. over which Congress has
no power whatever The cases of
Barnes rs. the banks and railroads, II
Wall. 294, and tho United States rs. the
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company,
II Wall, 322. wero considered. aud con-
tirmed in the opinion. Mr.. Justice
Miller delivered the opinion. Dissent
ing Justices-Davis, Field and Strong.
The twenty per cent. cases we're also
decided, the court holding that the Act
increasing compensation in the civil
service applied alike to ull n that s rvice
in the City OF Washington. but not out
side of it, who were employed by an
officer Of the Government authorized to
contract for their services, and to x the
compensation. One case-that Of n
plate printer in the bureau Of engraving
and printing-was held not to be within
the Act Of decrease. He did piece work,