New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1879-04-29
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

A DECISION IN THE CASE OF RAILROAD BONDS
SEIZED DURING THE REBELLIOS-sERyICE IN
THE CONFEDERATE ARMY NOT A DIsQUALIFI-
CATION FOR A JUROR
WASHINGTON, April 2S.-The following were
the proceedings III the Supreme Court OF the United
States to-day:
5S s al e s8D az h 1F nsd 3 ss eP
the District of case arises out OF Tie supple
ct agt the vcksbug. Shreveport aDd Texas Railroad
Company and oeT TaST 9G ns ws G
e es Of ceaa bonds Of the aforo.ad TarC winch
l TH eaTe of ~ BY ne T OF M the Town
and We're purchased BY the appellants qnes
ton presented to Tins Court u.s. whether me iacts maj e
pSSent was indorsed bonds required the bonds
W a o7 TP put da Si g 81 "a p0Ps bona
2ly bir these maTEs Of sgspcion being supple
mned by the further that the bonds offered Tor
very small consideration This Court holds that the appel
s a66s hSa a pSeS %er aee6 Win Of er
be allowed snstan the position hde hodeTs
The opinion delivered By Nj Justice Bradley MrJusuce
No iJ9~s Jennison, executor plaintiff In error ag J. T.
ton presented 6y whether ninth section Oh
Of july l869c9ners upon one who has water night the
me bG5 Es h8 Of hS uRited States at he By
n9ts5 T dhr nc GhGF rS s ecded TIA. S s
Judgment is here affirmed Field delivered the
No. 225-waner Van Norden, appellant agt Levi r Nor
states for the District OF Lousisna-n with
ssf Ea qs o. s SSE5 w & the S Of
reversed Sh costs and cause renamed with dfec
prejudice right Of the complainant to BRING aston
Was 4% Se II SS y Mr. Ja es M iy DC
No 235-GeOi &c Burt plaintiff error, agt Maria NJ. Bon
loud The Circuit Court Of ibe United states for
The Northern District Of Florda.-Tis was an acton Of
81 So Jon COUNTY Fac Which dtendaH in error aas
Among the assigned ruling OF
e lower Court 10 the effect that certain Henry Holmes
questions touching ms qualifications as Juror under Section
whether he dt aid not participate ~ rne Rebel
lion challenged on the ground that he wasdsluaihed
undcr section of the Revised Statutes and the
Court oyerrued challenge Upon this point this Court
holds that juror obliged than witness 10 dis
render hm Infamous orier qualifications
Juror questions asked him. answered the airma
tive. would have convicted Inn oil the crime OF treason
Whether pardoned by general a,,nnesty or rot the
not be required 70 disclose IN TINS manner II lie were guilty
challenger had the right to prove II by any other compe
proven the Court not bound
TO him As the Ownership the lots this Court
prior possession she is entitled to item both
Mr.. Justice Miller delivered The opinion
Mr. Justice Field delivered separate cOncurring opinion
regard 10 the test oath demanded OF IN juror Holmes
II agree with the Court that the Juror Holmes IN this case
cannot be required T. yer The questions pm, u HIM Pqt
by requiring oath conduct udes great
majority OF Tue citizens Of ball TIE country from
oppressive and OdOus and repuguaDt 10 the spirit
o0ur Institutions but Is clearly Unconstitutional and void
when dominated by the National forces the cCud be
tanned after the aud the nsurgtnt states
restored 10 their normal ana constitutional relations To
the Union much ont Of place ana imperative
would be law quareT1ng soldier IN every southern ans
house" Mr. Justice Strong dissenled from the opinion VI the
No 22s--Tbe People ex rel the Pacific Mail steamship
and Assessments Of the GiIy and County Of New-YciS
affirmed with authority Of kennard AIT Louisiana
81 b.