Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1902-06-05
THE COURT OF APPEALS
OPINION UNDER STATUTE RE-
LATINO TO DEBTORS.
The Lower Court Standardization
Affecting Proceedings for Ex-
tension of 18th Street.

The Court of Appeals, by an opinion writ
ten by Mr.. Justice Morris, has affirmed the
order of the Supreme Court of the District
of Columbia appealed from. in the case of
John F: Costello, appellant against Aulich
Palmer, marshal of the United States for
the District of Columbia.
The question was of habeas corpus
1t is alleged that the Bokel-Gwynn- en-
ney Company of Baltimore recovered judg-
ment before local justice of the peace
against John F. Costello for 800 53. Later
the Judgment being unsatisfied, proceeding
under the Revised Statutes which provided
Tor the arrest and detention of debtors
fraudulently conveying away their prom
erty, was instituted by the plaintiff com
pany; II Delng alleged that Costello con-
Veyed to his brother his right of an undi-
Flded one-ffth interest in part of lots 10
ana 20. square 49,. without consideration
with intent to hinder the recovery of the
uept referred to. Costello was arrested
lie sued out the writ of habeas corpus n G
an independent proceeding. The court be
low dismissed the petition for the writ of
habeas corpus and remanded Costello to the
custody of the marshal. From this order
the appeal was taken
Among the assignments of error advanced
by the appellant was one to the effect that
the act of Congress of June IL 1914 under
which. as it is assumed Imprisonment for
debt in case of fraudulent transfer of prop
erty was authorized, is no onger in force
in the District.
The Court of Appeals holds that the .c+
OF June II. 1884, as well as tnat of Feb
ruary 4. 1915 could not have been repeal led
by the new code of law for the District of
Columbia. for they had been repealed
tWenty-eight years ago by the revised staff
utes of the United States relating to the
District of Columbia by the fact of the in
corporation of the substance of them into
sections ia and I9J of the statutes
After its explanation of the proceeding
the Court of Appeals announces the i'm
portant conclusion that so far as they con-
Germ the Costello case. sections 1914 and 195
of the Revised Statutes of the United States
relating to the District Of Columbia were
kept in force by section 1888 of the code.
The question. the court states, is
Whether. to the proceeding now before
us, the right to the writ of capias ad salts
faciendum Is such a substantial right as to
be preserved by the reservation of the code /?
And our answer to this question is that we
cannot conceive of any more substantial
right in the law of procedure than this"
Opinions in Other Cases.
By an opinion written by Mr.. Chief JUS
tice Alvey the Court of Appeals has af-
hrmed the order appealed from in the case
of jeremiah F. Mccarthy and others
against James F. Mccarthy The appeal
was from an order of the Supreme Court
of the District of Columbia, transacting
Orphans Court business. The question In
volved was as to right to administer upon
the personal estate of Mary j. Mccarthy.
deceased.
1t is held that the court below committed
no error In refusing to grant letters of adj
ministration to the two children applying
therefor. and IN granting letters to the sur
yiving husband.
In the three cases brought respectively by
John Nj. Clapp, Donald Mcpherson and Pc
ter j. Heinz. as appellants, against the
commissioners of the District of Columbia
the Court of Appeals. in an opinion written
BY Mr.. Justice Morris. has affirmed the
order appealed from. The appeals grew out
o. proceedings instituted under the act pro-