The New Orleans Democrat. (New Orleans, La.) 1875-1876, 1876-03-25
THr eFcENr DrcTyION IN THE GAINES
CASE.
The Several Points Involved Explained,
vhe Means NJ Opposition ~ MRS. Gaines
About Eshausted.

Editor DPmDCinf--It is reported from
Washington that on Monday last the
Supreme Court of the United States had
rendered decision IN favor Of Mrs.
Gaines. and there Is some anxiety
among o,,r citizens To learn Just what Is
lie ,neauit,g and effect Of the decision.
We proceed, therefore, to explain the
ease. and we do 50 from the records OF
The court and other authentic evidence.
The case lust decided Is entitled 80
senh Fuentes and others of New
Orleans. against Myra Clark Gaines"
The plaintiffs include about seven
ty-hve persons, who were. at the
institution Of the suit, owners OF
rehl estate in New Orleans under claim
Of title based upon the will Of Daniel
Clark, father Of Mrs. Gaines, dated 1871.
claims was dated two years later, viz
in 1879 Fuentes and his co-plaihtiffs
alleged that the will Of 1919 never had
any existence. and they further alleged
that If Il ever did have any existence,
Daniel Clark was never married to the
mother of Myta Clark Gaines, and
therefore she was an illegitimate child,
or I'm legal parapce, an adulterous bas-
tard. and therefore incapable OF receiy-
Ing legacy from Clark The suit was
one TO dnnul the probate Of the will OF
1919. and the plaintiffs, Fuentes aud
others, succeeded in both the District
and Supreme Courts Of Louisiana.
Mrs. Gaines then sued out n writ
of error from the Supreme Court
of the United States to the Supreme
Court of Louisiana. the object OF which
was to obtain u reversal of the decision
Of the latter court and thus leave un-
touched and unaffected the decree Of
tho Supreme Court Of the United States,
rendered In her favor at the December
term Of 1867. reported In 9Th Wallace re-
ports, page Ga BY this latter de-
rision the legitimacy .of Mrs. Myra
Clark Gaines was settled finally and for
ever. The Court there said, page IT'D
eve find. as ~ further fact in this
ease, that Daniel Clark contracted mar
rage with Xulimc Carriere tmother OF
Mrs. Ganes) In good faith As Clark
WAS i'm good faith when he married the
mother Of the complainant. 1t follows
she can take the estate under the olo-
graphic will Of 1913"
The question Of the legitimacy Of Mrs.
Gaines could not again be lawfully
raised after this decision. because 1t Is
law undoubted that the Legitimacy OF n
person once decided by competent
court i'm n suit contradietorily conducted
between lawful aud competent parties
Is final everywhcre and in every coun-
try rs to that particular question. and II
cannot bc again raised because Of pub
liz policy. This is the law OF nations
bubble law and the law Of Louisiana.
But Fuentes and his co-plaintiffs pro
eeeded to question Mrs. Gaines legiti-
macy i'm spite Of 1t.
But this was not the first time that the
legitimacy Of Mrs. Gaines the great
turning point Of the controversy be-
tween her and her adversaries) had been
established by the Supreme Court Of the
United States, 1t was established mt the
December term of 1860 I'm the case Of
Gaines VS.. Hennen. GA Howard. 6t5)
As to that point legitimacy the deci-
sion Of 1867 only affirmed that OF 1860.
The decisions of 1860 and 1867 Of the
Supreme Court of the United States
were supposed to have settled finally
all the principles applicable to this
celebrated litigation which has been
carried on for nearly forty years. and
we shall now explain why 1t Is that they
did not. and why Fuentes and his co
plaintiffs again attacked the will Of
isI3 and sought to have the judgment
Of tho Probate Court Of New Orleans lin
which ii WAS recognized and ordered to
be executed set aside and annulled.
The probate Of u will Is ordered upon
the application Of one who has an in
terest In having the will proved and
executed The judgment OF probate is
rendered upon OK parte testimony and
Is not binding upon persons who are not
parties to the proceeding. 1t follows
that any one having an interest to set
aside the probate can do SO within n
certain time allowed by law. Now the
Clark will Of 1873 was probated on OK
parte application OF Mrs. Gaines, and
L.. Il. s,,tc IN, Ian,
venuineness OF the will had u perfect
right to apply for the anpulment OF the
probate within five years. This right
was reserved to al parties in interest by
the decree OF the Supreme Court Of
Louisiana I'm the case OF the succession
of Daniel Clark. reported In the eleventh
volume OF the Louisiana Annual Re
ports. II was under this reservation
that Fuentes and his co-plaintifrs pro
ceeded.
We should state here that prior to
March q. 1867, the courts of the United
States had no jurisdiction in what arc
known as probate causes. But on that
day an act Of Congress became law Ivy
which parties in the State courts could
require their cases to be transferred to
the United States courts on account of
prejudice or local influence, which
might exist against them. Mrs. Gaines
moved for the transference of the case
Of Fuentes and others against her on
that ground, but the Judge Of the Sec
ond District Court Of New Orleans, the
probate court for this parish. refused to
transfer and he was sustained by the
Supreme Court of Louisiana, by de-
cision rendered in February, 1879, on an
appeal taken by Mrs. Gaines. She
then, as we have said, sued out II writ
OF error from the Supreme Court OF the
United States to the Supreme Court Of
Louisiana for the purpose OF enforcing
the act OF Congress of March 2. 1867, and
causing the transfer Of the case from the
State Court to the U. s. court. The
counsel Of Fucntes and defendants
then moved to dismiss, October Ii, 1875,
this writ OF error, but the Supreme
Court refused to grant the motion.
The case was then tried on its merits
that is to say-as to whether the act OF
Congress Of March 2, 1867, authorizing
the transference OF suits from State
Courts to United States Courts, included
probate causes" The Supreme Court
has decided that the act includes causes
Of every description. The result Is that
the decision OF Judge Collens, sitting in
the Second District Court, In the case of
Fuentes VS.. Mrs. Gaines, and in favor OF
Fuentcs; also the decision OF the
Supreme Court of Louisiana affirming
that of Judge Collens are annulled and
cot ac;1n md TINT the case sha1l hn