The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1878-03-25
NOTES FROM TIfE NV COJRTs,

WIS urea Ht truy ton for an alleged libel or
{ Vu''n hlNihoil. Mr. George Autustus slin
VINO is uulrrSi 'ol to rlii the J. i.oo- of IA,
Wr"k in the HVSiro'td LOu,lDn Mrs. hn- ,yi.
IDENTITY been studying tho report If the Gus. in
the State Trials II We may rely upon a motto
which We fnd in that column. II -tntos thoi
the judge who presided urged the defendant IN
h"rp IN mind tho words Of the 2]l chapter oi
Exodus: Thou shalt not rail upon the
riirr u the people. for whosocver doth ~
SHAH die the DEATH Now, it so hap
pens that this text is not TO be found
in that chapter or anywhere else i'm
Tn" IN sent authorized version Of the Bible. and
the do 'trne of the court WIS no more scriptural
than II WAS legal We can hardly suppose that
II Judge would dare to invent text for the oc-
cnsiOn. and the natural inference is that the
language quoted must have been derived from
some version OF Exodus then current. quite diff
fcrent from ours. After all. though. il may
prove to have been II isuuotation on the part
Of the Judge. Such mistakes arc by no mems
uncommon on the bench in modern times
How often have Judges of criminal courts re-
marked that The way Of the transgressor is
hard under the impression that they were re-
peatng the precise words Of Scripture?
An officer Of nm insolvent corporation in Mis-
souri, bought up a considerable number OF
! ShdlHlS hSHlnSl III NJ n discount. lie tHcn tflcu
to prove them against the company in bank
ruptcy on his own individual account and for
their full face value. The United States District
Court at st. Louis has very properly refused TO
allow this The officer is n trustee and Judge
| Treat holds that he cannot be permitted to
speculate with the subject Of his trust. The
claims were recognized rs valid in his hands
only to the extent OF the amounts he actually
paid for them.
Tho latest Blue Book relating to British India
shows that the enormous amount Of litigation
| in that country was a good deal lcsscncd
for the time being by tho visit of tho
| Prince OF Wales. 1t soon resumed its nor
NAL proportions. The High Court at Cnl-
cutta in the year 1876 disposed Of Gsl5
causes and applications on tho appellate
| side alone. In the province of Madras. during
4, the same year. 207 1893 civil suits were begun in
| tribunals inferior to the high Court While
| however the volume Of legal business Is enor-
| nous. the average duration Of suits is such as
might well excite the envy OF litigan,s in
| other lands including our own. In Bombay
during the year mentioned. contested cases
| lasted 300 days on an average. and uncontcsted
cases l62 days. For india these periods are
! exceptionally long owing to circumstances
peculiar to the province mt this period. In the
same year the average duration in the Punjnub
was % days for contested cases and II days in
| suits which were uncontestcd The figures in
the central provinces were about the same. The
| minimum IL reached in British Burmah where
| contested suits require only about II days in
all. from beginning to end and undefcndcd
cases last scarcely g. Although n speedy ad-
ministration Of justice is TO bc encouraged. the
| Chief Commissioner of that province does not
deem IT desirable to dispose Of litigation any
more rapidly than this.
The extradtion case of the Queen agt Will
son is reported in the February number OF the
English Law Reports. The prisoner was de-
manded for cxtradition from England to swift
| erand. 1t appeared clearly enough that the
alleged offence was one OF the crimes contcm-
plated by the treaty between the two countries.
and also that II was committed in Switzerland
| But there IL a provision in the treaty that no
| Swiss shall be delivered up hereunder by
| Switzerland, and that no subject OF Great
| Britain shall be delivered mp by the British
Government. Wilson was British subject
and applied for his discharge from custody
| upon n writ of haheas corpus rcturnablc in
the Queens Bench Division of the High Court
OF Justice. The Court unanimously ordered
him 10 be released. Mr.. Justice Field declaring
that II was better one criminal should escape
from punishment than that n court Of law
| should wrongly construe documents submitted
| to its decision" This case has attracted good
deal Of attention on account Of its bearing on
the eXtradiiion Of Henri De Tourvillc. who WAS
| convicted in Austria last year of the murder If
his wife in the Tyrol. 1t is said that tho Anglo
! Austrian treaty also prohibits the rendition Of
British SUBJECTS. De Tourville was an English
citiz N. and it is thought that If the point sub
sequently made in Wilson's case had been
raised in his behalf. IL would have prevented
his eNtradtion from England to Austria. and.
consequently. his conviction and sentence.
Some months ago crazy man threw m egg
Mt Vice Chancellor Malins. More recently Il
pistol shot was fired at Sir George Jessell the
Master Of the Rolls. by person who proved to
be insane These occurrences have suggested
a rhyme to P'mch;
cststrengt o thing shot AT by strength Of the missile
! Asess IL To bullet W l. Mains tDIcsscll
Jesscll will probably see more fun in this than
Mains.
The jurisdiction Of the Supreme Court Of the
United States 10 review civil cases is limited to
those in which the value Of the matter in dis
putc exceeds S. 900. benjamin +. Butler sued
Alex indcr A. Thompson in tho United States
Circuit Court in Massachusetts. and obtained "A
| verdict for s. OG6.l7 Before entering judg-
| mcnt the plaintiff RENTED s66l7. So that the
| judgment rs entered WAS for precisely IS 900
The defendant then sued out II writ of error to
| have the ease reviewed 10y the Supreme Court nj
| Washington. There he WAS met 10y motion
to dismiss tho writ for want OF Jurs-
diHon. because the amount or value
involved did not exceed 5000. The
opinion of the Court. delivered by the
| Chief Jusicc. sustains this objection and the
writ of error has been dismissed. 1t is held
that the trial court has the power to permit "A
plaintiff TO reduce a verdict in his own favor rs
was done here and presumably no such rcduG-
ton will bo allowed If the object is to deprive
the defendant OF nm appeal in mcritnrious
case Whether this case was mcrtOrOus or not
It looks very much "a il the reduction were
made solely TO prevent AN examination of it by
the supreme Court. In Diminishing the appeal
that court holds that the fat that tho Judgment
Wis for five thousand dollars " in coin makes
no difference. Our jurisdiction" says Chief
Justice Waite. rs to be- determined by the
amount Of money 10 he paid. and not the kind'
Virgil on Fraud.
Filr me- fat f,r.s