New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-01-27
WASHINGTON.
Auditor McGrew.

Auditor McGrew.
WASHINGTON, January 26.-Mr. McGrew,
sixth auditor is i'll with brain fever.
Removed.
D. Metcffey, reading clerk, and J. w.
Clayton, assistant journal clerk, have been
displaced.
The Texas Pacific.
The hearing before the House Committee
on Pacific Railroads this morning showed
the vital interest felt by the South in the
Texas Pacific enterprise. Judge Kennard,
Diego, both took the ground that a compet-
ing line to the Pacific, which would be an
open highway, whose rates would be con-
trOlled by Congress, was an absolute ne
cessity; and rather than have the road
built so as to extend the present monopoly,
they would prefer to be without the line.
Judge kennard made an able address, aid
question was one above land beyond all
constitutional and all political questions.
Congress could not, having created an evil,
now confess it was pOwerlese to correct It.
Mr.. Felsenhield said the whole prosperity
of California was now in the control of one
interest; that the State could never take
it's proper position until it had the ad-
vantage of another trans-continental line.
Their whole argument showed the absolute
necessity of the South consolidating upon
this question, and presenting united front.
Colonel Scott appeared on behalf of the
Texas Pacific, and Mr.. Huntington on be-
half of the Central and Southern Pacific Of
California, and discussed at length the
questions connected with the extent Of the
line already built between San Francisco
and Fort Yuma, the land grant of the COM
pany, and other points bearing upon the
proposed bill.
Confirmed.
Miss Lucy N. White, postmistress at New
ton, Mississippi.
Diplomatic Appropriation.
Secretary Fish met the subcommittee in
charge Of the diplomatic appropriation, and
argued the injurious effects which would
accrue if the bill proposed passed.
The Gaines Case In tho Supreme Court.
Myra Clarke Gaines vs.. Joseph Fuen:es
ct al.-Argument was commenced by
Judge Paschal for the plaintiff in error,
James Mcconnell and T, j. Durant for the
defendants in error, and j. s. Black for the
plaintiff in error. The appearance of Judge
Black in court excited great interest.
The suit was brought by the defendants
in error to have a judgment formerly OBJ
tanned against them BY Mrs. Gaines estab-
fishing the will of her father, declared
nullity. The bill alleging frauds, false
evidence and suppression Of evidence in the
procurement OF the Judgment. The ST.
prem0 COurI OF Tue StaC0 AmrInS tEd
| Judgment Of the district d0urt made
| in favor of the petitioners therein,
and it is contended here necessarily
sustained the giuse of transfer of
the case to the federal court by the district
court. Although the case was clearly one
| for removal under the act of Congress, on
| the merits, it is said that the rulings below
were in effect decision against the plain
| tiff in error, under the will Of her father, in
the face Of the decision Of that question in
her favor by this court The defendants in
| error maintain that as the proceeding was
one relating to the probate of the will
| asking it's recall, and exclusively
matter of probate Jurisdiction, neither
| the Circuit Court, upon removal,
nor this court on writ OF error, have any
thing to do. 1t is also said that a mar
damus to compel the removal was denied
| by the federal Circuit Court, holding that
| the subject matter Of the suit was not
| within it's jurisdiction, and that Mrs. Gaines
should have taken her writ of error to stop
| the decision, and not having done so she is
now withou: remedy, for it is universally
| established that this court has no jurisdic-
tion to review Judgment relating to the
| probate, or the recall of the probate OF
| will.