Case Name: Dewhurst versus Coulthard
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1799-02
Citations: 3 Dall. 409
Docket Number: 
Parties: Dewhurst versus Coulthard.
Judges: 
Reporter: United States Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 409–410

Head Matter:
ON the opening of the Court acommiffion, dated the 30th of December 1798, was read, appointing Bushrod' Washington, one of théaffoc; e judges of the Supreme .¡Court of the United States, and he was qualified according; to law
Dewhurst versus Coulthard.
THE following ftatement ot a cafe was preferited by É. Tilghman to the Court, at the inftance of the attornieá Tilghman to the Court, at the inftance of the attornieá • for both the parties, in the fuit in the Circuit Court of the New-Tor k Diftrift, with a'requeft, that it might be confider-ed and decided.
“ This was an adtion commenced by Ifaac Goulthard, againft “John Dewhurji in the Supreme Court of the State of New-York, and was removed by petition to the Circuit Court of the United States for the New-Tork Diftridt, agreeably to thSadfc of Congrefs in. fuch cafe made and provided, by the Defendant, he being a citizen of the ftate of Pennfylvania.
“The Plaintiff’s adtiori is profecuted againft the above defendant, as the indorfer ofá foreign bill of exchange drawn by G. B. ■ Ewart of the city and ftate of New-Tork, on Thomas Barnes oí Baldork near -London, dated the tenth day oí January one thoufand feven hundred and ninety-two!
“ On the part óf the Defendant, it is admitted that at the time ©f the making ánd indorfing faid bill, the faid John Dewhurji was a citi sen of, and- refident in, the city and ftate of New-Torkj, and that he duly received notice of the proteft of the faid bill, for non-acceptance and non-payment.
“ That on or about the twenty-fifth day of May one thoufand fe.ven hundred and ninety-two, the Defendant removed to the city of Philadelphia, in the ftate of P enrfylvania, where he has re.fided fi.tce that period. That fhortly after his removal to Philadelphia, viz. on or about the ft-venth day of June, one thoufand feven hundred and ninety-two, a commiffion of bankruptcy was awarded and iffued. forth againft him, in purfuance ■of two certain aits' or ftatutes of the faid ftate of Pennfylvania5 the oné entitled “ An ait for the regulation of bankruptcy;’* the other entitled, “An ait to amend án ait entitled, an ait for “the regulation of bankruptcyAnd in purfuance of which faid ftatutes the Defendant did aitually deliver, affign and transfer, to the commiffioners appointed under the laid commiffion, the whole of his dibits, as well in the ftate of Pennfylvania as elfe-where, which conftfted principally of credits' due to the faid Defendant, in the State of New-Tork. . It 'is further admitted, that the faid John Dewhurft in all things complied with the faid ftatutes of bankruptcy before referred to, and that on the eleventh of Auguji, one thoufand feven hundred and ninety-two, he obtained a certificate of bankruptcy duly executed.-
“ Upon the above ftate of the cafe, it is fubmitted to the Supreme Court of the United States, to determine,'whether the .certificate iffued under the laws of Pennfylvania, operates as a .difeharge of the faid debt, notwithftánding its being contracted' in-another ftate, wh:ri there was no bankrupt laws, and while the Defendant was refident in the faid ftate.of Niiv-Tork. If the court ihould be of opinion that it does, it is agreed that judgment bé entered for the Defendant 5 otherwife for the Plaintiff, for eleven hundred and twenty dollars damages, and fix cents ccft?.”
The anointment ofMr. Washington was in the room of Kir. Jufiicr Wilson deceafed. Mr. J.uftice Chas.e, was prevented by indii'p⅜ 1 itiSW &om 'attending the Court ddring the wjioie si'the perfeitt 'leripu

Opinion:
Phe court.,
on the enfuing morning, returned the--ftate of the cafe, declaring, that they could not take cognizance of any fuit. or controverfy, which was not brought before them, by the regular procefs of the law.
Motion refufed,