The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-01-10
Tn. Mayor and oouaoil win.


OF the ma or and city council of Lin
coin, Neb., who are now In custody OF
the United States marshal There for
contempt of the order Of the Circuit
Court. The court, in long opinion Dy
Justice Gray, holds that the United
States Circuit, sitting, as a court of
equity, has no jurisdiction what yer
over criminal cases or cases involving
the appointment or removal of State
and municipal officers. Thu. proceed
ings of 3 the, federal court j ! Nebraska,
therefore, were from the beginning In
the nature of usorpation of the func-
tons of a courto of Law, we're beyond its
Jurisdiction. and were null and void.
The detention of the mayor and city
council OF Lincoln in custody is Illegal
and they are entitled to discharge.
The chief justice and Justice Harlan
dissented. 49,
A decision was also rendered in the
case of James F. Whitney aud Others
against William A. Robertson, collector
of the portof New York. The question
presented by this case is the farce and
scope IF certain provisions contained in
treaties concluded between the United
States and the 4 Republic lof San
domingo, and the kingdom OF Hawaii,
respectively. The plaintiffs in error.
Imported in 1882 from the Island # :,sl.,
Domingo. large quantity Of centrifugal
and molasses sugars. similar in kind to
Sandwich Islands. The collector
sugars to the amount or $z2 900. The
brought this suit to recover the money
so e1acted, on background lat BY
virtue of the ninth article of the treaty
between the United States and the
Dominican Republic, the United States
higher duly or any other duty
upon, q product of San Domingo
than should be imposed upon
similar products of other countries
with which the United States might
have commercial relations. Sugars of
the kind here in controversy were i'm.
ported free of duty from the Sandwich
Islands, under treaty provisions, there !
fore, it was contended they should be
admitted free of duty from the Island
of San Domingo This aCoart, in its
opinion by Justice Field, holds:
tirst-That the ninth article of the
treaty between the United States and
San Domingo was merely a pledge, of
the contracting parties that there
should be no discrimi mating legislation
against the importat on of articles
which are the growth, product
or manufacture of their respective
countries. in favor of articles Of like
character from any other country. 1t
was never designed 10 prevent special
concessions like ttose made to, the
kingdom of Hawaii, Rpon sufficient
Considerations for the iInporta ton of
specific articles. 1t would require the
clearest language to justify the conclh.
sion that the government of the United
States intended to preclude itself from
such engagements with other countries,
which might in future be of the highest
Importance to our interests.t,..., y 80 (
Sec ndzThat act of Congress, undtr
which duties in this case were collected,
authorized their exaction. 1t was of
general application and made no eX-
cepion in favor of the foods of the
country. 1t was passed after the treaty
with the Dom @nican Rep bile, and if.
there be any conflict betw ZEN The lstipu-
! tons of treaty aud the Requirements
of the law, the latter must control. If
the country With which the treaty is.
made is dissatisfied with the action of
the legislative department, it may pre-
sent As complaints 10 the. executive
head OF The government, and take
such, other measures y as. it may
deem essential for the protection
gifts interests. - Courts can afford no
redress when,th law iselear in its pro-
visions, its. validity cannot be assailed
before courts, foraihe want of conform.
ity to the stipulation assprevious
treaty not already executed. The judg
ment Of the United States Circuit Court
is. affirmed. RI .Ss u
A similar decision was rendered in the
case of Hugh Kelly VS. Edward L. He'd
den, = the collector, which presents
nearly the samequestion .ss-he
Decision was also rendered in the
patent case of Benjamin Dreyfus-xs.
Sophia Searle, executrix, appeals from
the United States circuit court for the
district of California. This was a suit
for alleged infringement of a patent
granted July, 1885, to ] Ohm s. Earle, for
an improved process of impartiDg age
TO wiues by means of steam healing
This court holds that the application
of artificial heat for the purpose
OF lmpaTtIpg age to- wines Was old,
and tina. there was no novelty
in the process The decree of the Circuit
Court is reversed, and the easelisr re-
manded with direction TO dismiss the
bill 4-g Wv ~ w ~ -
Decision was also rendered in the
postmasters case in. the United States
er rel J. K. Mclean VS.. William F.
Villas, Pos master General. This was
a suit . for a writ of mandamus
to, compel the sgPostmasterGenets
to- readjast the salaries of post
masters of the lower grades in
accordance with the acts of July L.
1864, June IL, 1856, and, March 3, 1885.
This court agrees with the Postmaster
General in his understanding and con-,
struction of them, and holds that Con-
gress did not contemplate a readjnst-
ment of salaries in any of these offices
oftener than once in two years, as the
legsl dnty or obligation of the Post
master General. y The Judgment of the
Supreme Court Of the District Of Column
bia, denyins the writ, is affirmed.
The attorney general o., Missouri
submitted motion to dismiss for want
of jur sdietien in the ease-oss Hugh
Mstrom Brooks, alias, w 81. Maxwell.