The morning call., 1894-05-25
NO NEW HEARING.
Final Decision of the
Blythe Case.
PASSES FROM STATE COURTS
The Supreme Court AcknowI-
edges No Points of Error.
WHAT THE NEXT MOVE WILL BE.
Lawyers Will Carry Writ of Error
to the United States Su.
preme Court.
PASSES FROM STATE COURTS
WHAT THE NEXT MOVE WILL BE.

AS expected. the Supreme Court has de-
MED all motions for rehearlng OF the
Blythe case.
When the long expected decision con-
firming the ruling of Judge Coffey Ie-
speeding the inheritance of Florence
Blythe HInckley, and thereby dismSslng
all appeals therefrom, was filed few
week ago, 1t was noticed that the Supreme
Court did not commit itself TO mention
that Florence was actually entitled to the
property as Thomas II. Blythe's daughter,
but it at the same time decided that no
other legitimate succession had been
proved, and that Judge Coffey was cOmpe
tent to Judge of the evidence as presented.
Thereupon a number of petitions for
rehearing of the case were presented,
points of error and insuficiency of EVIL
denee being the most advanced claims.
These the Supreme Court has decided nave
no weight whatever.
The particular decision rendered yester-
day, to which all the other petitions are
referred as conclusive, was given IN the
case of William and d. Savage, whose
appeal from Judge Coffey's decision was
made the subject of the Supreme Courts
final judgment. In denying petition Tor
a rehearing the court says:
Tine petition for rehearing Is denied.
Petitioners say that with respect 10 GER
tain asserted errors of law and 10 what
is called by them Federal question
claimed to be involved with Pima versus
Peck this court has not said IN Its
opinion that any of these points are not
well founded
'Ali the appeals in the Blythe estate
were considered in one opinion, in the
concluding part of which we said: There
are 10 other points presented IN the briefs
and arguments which call for special at
tention.' The transcripts presented
great multitude of asserted errors of
law which, however, were little pressed
IN The arguments.
I'VE considered none of them tenable.
and 1t would have been an endless task to
notice them in detail. As TO the Federal
question: we cannot now see any. None
of the points alluded to IN the petition Tor
rehearing are well founded"
The decision is gwen by the court. and
with that the great Blythe contest is at an
end so far as the State courts are con-
cerned. Messrs. S. w. and Z. b. Holiday,
counsel for H. L. Blythe, the representa-
tive of the Kentucky, or Gypsy Blythes,
have already applied TO the Supreme
Court. however, for writ Of error, upon
" hich they propose to take the case to
the Supreme Court of the United States.
The petition claims right and immunity
nnder the constitution and laws of the
United States, enumerating several points
under which these privileges have been g-
nored. 1t is claimed that no illegitimate
child can inherit unless acknowledged by
the decedent father. The all-impOrtant
Blythe letters are referred to in the en-
deaVor to show that DO such admission
was made.
In petitioning for a writ Of error the
appellants say: The decision of this
court hath extended the law of California,
making it reach to England, so as to
change the status of a subject of Queen
Victoria from that of nullia fila 10 that of
heritable blood, in violation and contrary
to the provisions Of sections SO and 81 of
the Political Code of California. which
limit the sovereignty and Jurisdiction of
this State and its rights over persons to
places and persons within the limits of
CalifOrnia-whIch was error"
The Messrs. Holiday say that they will
leave no stone uEturned to obtain re-
hearing of case which they think has
been UnJustly decided. Judge Coffey. how
ever, having given much time and atten-
ton to the case, says that his firm conVic-
lions can undergo E0 change.