The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1891-12-11
LAW DEPARTMENT,
Annual Report Of Attorney
General Miller.
Review Of the Work Of the United States
Courts
Recommendations to Congress Chinese EX.
CluSiOn Act Should Be Amended
Itata Decision Unsatisfactory.
Special to THE MORNING CALL

WASHINGTON, Dec. 10.-The annual re
port of Attorney-General Miller was SUBJ
mitted to Congress to-day. 1t reviews the
business of the United States Supreme
Court and devotes chapter to the Circuit
Court Of Appeals, which, says Mr. Miller,
has been organized in each circuit and is
ready for business. although an additional
Circuit Judge in each circuit has not yet
been appointed. Mention is made of a
heavy increase in the business of the Court
OF Claims, and the recommendation is made
that the working force of the court be
largely increased. The Attorney General
says it is also necessary that some provision
be made for the representation of the inter-
ests OF the Government before the Board Of
Appraisers in customs cases appealed from
collectors to the Board of Appraisers. he
also invites attention to the special report
on the subject of Indian depreciation claims
and shows the Importance of change in
the conduct of that business. The claims
aggregate $4,000.
UNITED STATES PRISONS.
On the subject of United States prisons
the Attorney General says: "In pursuance
of recommendations in the annual report oS
this department bill was passed by the lest
Congress authorizing the constructions of
three United States prisons, to be located,
one north and another south of the tilirty-
ninth degree Of north latitude and east of the
Rockies, and the third west of the Rockies;
but, by an evident tnadvertence Congress
failed to make any appropriation for the
purchase of such sites and the -erection of
Srrnh hnafl Il
preparations evidently contemplated by that
act be made so this work psiy 60 forward"
EXCLUSION OF CHINESE.
After speaking of the well-known diff
culties i'll the enforcement of the Chinese
Exclusion Act the Attorney General says:
IF it is desired that these laws shall be
made effective, shey should be so changed
that they cannot be misunderstood. To ar
rest and trs such persons, and as result
simply se1d them back across the British
line, IS SHOWN to be an idle expenditure of
time, !aUor and money, by the fact that, as
might well be expected, the same persons
ha-5e to be arrested and tried over and over
again. Moreover, it is quite uncertain
whether the order requiring Chinese pris-
oners to be sent back into the British do
minloDs could be made effective. This sub
Ject demands prompt consideration"
From information, official and unofficial,
in regard to the administration Of the laws
in Alaska, the Acknowledgement is i'm
pressed that such administration is not sat-
isfactory, and that it can only be made sat
isfactory by new legislation. He calls at
tentl0n TO the evils of the 'fee SYSTEM" and
advises the substitution of stipulated sal
aries in all cases.
THE ITATA CASE.
The Attorney-General reviews the legal
proceedings in the case of the Chilean
steamer ltata and sums up as follows:
Upon the trial of this Indictment it was
held by the District Court that these pro-
ceedIngs were not in violation of the neu-
trality laws of the United States. first, be-
cause the enterprise was legitimate COM
mercial transaction, and, second, because
the Congressional party of Chile not hav-
ing at the time received recognition from
the Government of the United States, either
as government de jure or as a belligerent,
acts done by the representatives of ana in
the interest of that party III the way of hos
tilties against the Chilean Government
were not IN violation of any statute of the
United States; in short, that it is only in the
interest OF government recognized as de
lure or belligereht. that the neutrality
statute of the United States can be violated
Without discussing the proposition that
such transaction is legitimate commerce, |
venture the suggestion that in the case of
serious injury to commercial or other inter-
ests of nation with which we are at peace,
by ships fitted out in our harbors. the plea
OF such non-recognition is very insufficient
answer. Ii the construction given to these
statutes by trial court shall be sustained
on appeal, the statute should, | think, be
amended"
SUBSIDIZED TELEGRAPH lines.
Mr.. Miller reports five suits commenced
under the act of August 7, 1885, recurring
all telegraph lines subsidized by the Gov
ernment by and through their OWE respec-
tive corporate officers and employees to main-
tain and operate for railroad, governmental,
commercial and all other purposes, such
70 MI ND niri,, 4, A
General by proper proceedings to prevent
any unlawful interference with the rights
and equities of the United States In relation
to such telegraph lines On this subject the
Attorney-General says: "In the suits of
the United States against the Central Pa
clfc Railroad Company and the Western
Union Telegraph Company and the South
ern Pacific Railroad Company and the West
ern Union Telegraph Company, both pend
ing in the Northern District of California,
upon demurrers and motions TO dismiss for
want of jurisdiction, it is being claimed on
behalf of the Western Union Telegraph
Company and other corporations, necessary
parties defendant, having charters from
other States than California, that they can
not be sued in the United States Circuit
Court in any District Court other than
that from which they derive their respective
charters; in other words, they are not in
habitants of any district except the district
in the State by which they were created.
QUESTION OF JURISDICTION.
Touching the question of jurisdiction
raised by these corporations, non-residents
OF California, the result of such contention
is that corporation like the Western Union
Telegraph Company, New York corpora
tion, which is doing business in every State
and district in the Union, which has a right
in the Federal courts of the various dis
tricts, and if sued in the State courts they
move such suits for litigation in the Federal
courts, cannot be sued in the Federal courts
in any State outside of New York. 1t is not
believed such is the law, at least where the
Government is plaintiff. Certainly it is not
the intention of Congress in enacting the
judiciary law of 1888 10 thus make the
corporations a privileged class. l recon-
mend that Section 1 of the act of
August IS, 1888 (25, Statute 543I, be
amended by inserting a proviso after the
word inhaDtant' in the following sentence,
namely: And no civil suit shall be brought
before either of said courts against any per-
son by any original process or proceeding in
any other district than that whereof he is
an inhabitant; provided, any foreign cor
poration may be sued in any district where
it may be found, the process to be served as
in like cases in the State where said suit or
action is brought Such an amendment
would restore the law to what it was for
century prior to the act of March 3, 1887,
and would impose on these corporations
liability to be sued corresponding to the
right they enjoy to sue as plaintiffs and to
remove suits in which they are defendants"
LEGAL-TENDER SOUVENIRS