« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
law office of his uncle, the Hon. Aaron Vanderpoel, an He was one of the last men to be approached with accomplished lawyer and scholar of Kinderhook. Un-| rude familiarity. In all his relations as husband, der his instruction be prepared for the bar, to which father, friend and citizen, it is no exaggeratiou to say he was called on completing his three years legal that he was in many seuses a model. No one who studies. At that early age he gave pleasing indica- | met him in the social circle will ever forget the attrao. ' tions of future professional eminence. His industry tion of his manner and conversation). was untiring, and his resolute energy stimulated his The loss of such a man is indeed a public misfortune. research, saving him from that “numb rigidity of in He has passed away at a period of his greatest usefultelleotual life" into which students sometimes fall.
ness in his profession, and when most tenderly loved With many rare qualifications the young lawyer
ations the young lawyer by his family and friends, and when held in the greatcommenced his practice in his native village under
est esteem by the public. May we not say that his prosperous circumstances. After the lapse of a few death is not the extinction of a life, but its apotheosis? years, superior professional advantages opened to His memory will be perpetuated in the annals of the him in New York, and in 1850 he removed to that
great city he loved so well, and with many of whose city, where he resided the remainder of his life.
institutions he was so honorably and usefully identiHis talents, learning and reputation sovu called
fied. It will be perpetuated in legal history, in the to him an extensive and influential clientage, and records of that profession which he so long and so while yet comparatively young, he took his place in honorably adorned. the front rank of the metropolitan bar, brilliaut with
L. B. PROCTOR. legal lumiuaries of the first magnitude. Thus fortunate in his profession, he was equally fortunate in all his
CORRESPONDENCE. other relations in life. Mr. Vanderpoel occupied a very high position as a
ANTIQUITY OF SEPARATING WITNESSES. lawyer. He was eminent not only for his professional Editor of the Albany Law Journal: accomplishments but for his endowments aud at
Perhaps one of the very earliest instances of containments as a scholar. His mind was enriched
founding preconcerted perjury by the separation of by a thorough education, a life study of the classics,
witnesses is to be found in the Apochryphal “History and by the perusal of the best writers in our own
of Susanna." There you will recollect, the story is tongue from Hooker and Bacon to our own times.
told of how a couple of elders, with the proverbial Like Nicholas Hill, Charles O'Conor, Daniel
weakuess of elders for the softer sex, conspired to Lord and other eminent jurists, his distinction rested
swear away the life of Susanna, on a charge of adulon his professional excellence alone. His ambition
try, to avenge themselves for her refusal to respond to centered on his place at the bar; he preferred its solid,
their desires. So far do they succeed, that their victim lasting honors to the doubtful, ephemeral fame de
is on the way to execution, when a young man named rived from political distinction, which renders a man
Daniel — in utter defiance of Archbold aud Bishop prominent and influential to-day, while to-morrow by.
asked for and obtained a new trial. Appearing now the vicissitudes of partisan strife, he is nobody, a
as counsel for the fair accused, he first has the prosething cast one side by struggling and pushing aspirants
cuting witnesses, the brace of elders, separated, and for his place.
next demands a bill of particulars, quoting largely Mr. Vauderpoel was fortunate as a speaker at the
from the brief of Evarts and associates in Tilton v. bar. “His arguments were not set with diamonds, nor
Beecher. The elders locate the offeuse in a certain decked with flowers," but they went forcibly and
garden (the favorite scene of woman's successful successfully along the track of logio aud reason to the
temptation), but the first witness when asked “under center of the attack or defense. He often levied upon
what tree sawest thou them companying together?" the classic, ancient lore, and modern research, for illus
Answered, “under a mastic treo ?” The second one, tration, but it was only for so many recruits to the
under a like interrogation names "a holm tree.” The forces he commauded in his legal conflicts. He
result, of course, is not only the release of the prisoner, always spoke with animation, fervor aud con
but the separation of confederating witnesses, at the vincing emphasis. His manner was uniformly easy
request of counsel, from the days of Daniel to the and natural, his diction chaste and unpretending, and
days of Ben. Butler. By the way, the cuteness of this he always commanded the respectful attention of
young lawyer leads me very naturally to infer that he courts and juries.
is that “ Daniel come to judgmeut” referred to by Mr. Vanderpoel was one of the founders of the State
Shylock, or rather that this was an early feat of the Bar Association, and always took a lively interest in
same Dauiel, while yet at the bar, and before a dearth its welfare.
of fees had driven him to the more lucrative profesThough Mr. Vanderpoel was entirely devoted to his
siou of lion-tamer; a suggestiou aided by the fact that profession, he did not stand entirely aloof from pol. itics, for he believed it the duty of every citizeu to
the story of Susanna was originally at the beginning
of the canonically recognized Book of Daviel. adopt and maintain with reasonable firmness, political
Hugh F. MURRAY. opinions, and as parties are necessary in a government
Wilson, N. C., Aug. 15, 1887. like ours, to identify himself with that party whose priuciples most naturally agree with his sense of right and justice. Accordingly, early in life, he identified
NOTES. himself with the democratic party giving it his un8werving allegiance through all his life. His advice and counsel were always regarded valuable by the
regarded valuable by the O great has been the demand for the report of the leaders of his party, and he often found it difficult to proceedings of The New York State Bar Associasuccessfully resist their repeated solicitations to accept tion, particularly, the last (the tenth) by lawyers in all official position.
parts of the nation, and on account of the large acces Mr. Vanderpoel was a gentleman in 'the true inter siou of new members, that the extensive edition of pretation of the term - a gentlemau by birth, educa this year's report is nearly exhausted, and the proption and association. He possessed the true dignity osition to publish another edition will very soon be which results from proposing habitually a high stand made to the executive committee. Many full sets of ard of feeling and action, and accordingly, the regard these reports have been furnished the faculties of ho called forth was always tempered with respect. law schools aud law classes in the universities.
The Albany Law Journal.
mean as to be deprived of invoking in his behalf the protection of the law, whether administered by a court of original jurisdiction or one having appel
late powers. There remains no safe course save to ALBANY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1887.
sustain the integrity and to vindicate the dignity
of the courts thus ordained. When newspapers in. CURRENT TOPICS.
terfere with the orderly processes of the law they
have stepped beyond their proper limitations, and As a matter of course the newspapers, wise or
in so far as in them lies, have imperilled the liberA otherwise, have begun to abuse Judge Potter
ties of the people. The temptation to do this is for granting a stay in Jacob Sharp's case. Their
constant, and too often persuasive, but it is one that attention, however, fortunately for the judge, is
all conscientious journalists will strenuously resist; somewhat drawn off to the General Term and the
for when the temples of justice are desecrated, and necessity of bullying and threatening them. Lest
they who minister therein have been made conwe should be misunderstood we reiterate that we
temptible, a people are not far removed from either believe Sharp to be guilty, and we hope his convic
anarchy or autocracy." Then referring to the newstion may be sustained. But it must be confessed
paper howl in the Tweed case, it concludes: “Such that Judge Potter's reasons are not easily answered,
reversal of prejudices and vindication of character even if they are answerable. The case, it seems to
may also come to Judge Potter, even if he grants us, is by no means free from serious doubt. No
| so hardened a wretch as Jacob Sharp the immuni. disinterested and unprejudiced lawyer will assert
ties which the law provides. At any rate, Judge that it is. If there had been any direct, clear evi
Potter will not be seriously damaged by the censordence against Sharp the errors charged might be
ship of the press, if he acts in accordance with the deemed immaterial, although we doubt even that.
law as he understands it, and obeys the dictates of But the evidence was all circumstantial; indeed, it
his conscience. He has his own conscience in hardly rose to that dignity; it was only inferential.
keeping. No one else, not even an omniscient ediIt pointed to bribery on a great scale, and the in
tor has been entrusted with that office." We are ference was easy that it must have been Sharp who
sorry not so much that Sharp has got a stay, as was the briber. This is why we believe him guilty.
that there is apparent reason for one. We are glad But legal proof is another thing. We never knew
that Judge Potter has had the moral courage to do a man convicted on such slight and inconclusive
what he believes to be right, in such trying circumevidence-evidence, mind -- and there are eminent
stances, even if the result should show that he is lawyers here who agree with us. The strongest in
mistaken. It should be borne in mind that he has ference against Sharp is one which the law forbids
not pronounced his opinion unreservedly for a new the jury to entertain, namely, his omission to proffer
trial, but only that there is doubt enough to justify himself as a witness and deny his guilt. But about
a delay in sending the defendant to prison. Judge
Potter has shown himself fearless and independent; these newspapers. Their conduct is very indecent. They should recall Tweed's case and haul in their
he is entitled to the common presumption of honhorns. The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, ed
esty. It is indecent to pry into his private affairs, ited by a trained lawyer, uttered some sensible and
and to argue against him from them in a matter of moderate views on this subject before this decision
public responsibility. was announced. It said: "As we have said, this newspaper wishes to protest in advance against the The most interesting law reading of the year is denunciation of a judge who, until the contrary is usually the annual address of the president of the shown, must be assumed to be simply doing his | American Bar Association. Mr. Semmes' address, duty according to the light he has received. It is
half of which we print this week, is no exception. not, let it be premised, also to be assumed that
We are glad to see that Illinois has prohibited the Judge Potter is right as to his law. He may be marriage of first cousins, and made the selling of mistaken in his conclusions. He is not infallible.
tobacco to minors under sixteen, and dealings in Nor, let it also be said, is Judge Barrett infallible. " futures," misdemeanors. We are also glad to see * * * He has the reputation of being both an that Indiana passed but thirty-eight acts, all told ! able and an upright judge, a reputation which will be of great value to him when his trial by newspaper begins, and the Rhadamanthus of the press We have several times referred to Mr. Ignatius summons him to receive sentence. For ourselves, Donnelly's promised cipher, which is to settle the we do not believe in the trial by newspaper as a proposition that Bacon wrote the Shakespearian superior agency, either in law or in morals, to the plays. This is a curious question of evidence, and trial by the duly constituted tribunals of the land. concerns a great lawyer, and has engrossed the atWe know that the press is omniscient, and is ever tention of several lawyers, who have published informed with the serene attribute of impartiality. | their opinions. In last Sunday's World is an acAt the same time courts have been constituted and count by Mr. Thomas Davidson, covering two pages, judges have been appointed to conserve the rights explanatory of Mr. Donnelly's views, and which of persons and of property, and there is no man so will prove an excellent advertisement of the forth
Vol. 36 — No. 10.
coming book, if it does not prove any thing else. These lines are certainly peculiar, and the last seems We have read it carefully, and find very little new to suggest Shake-speare.” He is “inclined to think in it outside the cipher theory, although Mr. Don- that the plays are the production of a knot of brilnelly insists that he breaks down Shakespeare's liant briefless lawyers belonging to the Essex party, claim without resort to the cipher. As for the stale of whom Bacon was the chief, and to whose numclaim of Shakespeare's ignorance, we prefer the ber the W. H. of the Sonnets, and perhaps, Sir testimony of Ben Jonson, that he had "little Latin Walter Raleigh belonged. Unwilling to acknowland less Greek,” which does not mean an ignorant edge the authorship publicly, they allowed Shakesman. Mr. Davidson says: “Mr. Donnelly brings | peare, to whom they had sold the acting copyright good evidence to show that Shakespeare was a for- (if the expression be allowed), to publish them unnicator, an adulterer, a usurer, an oppressor of the der his own name. In this way Shakespeare atpoor, a liar, a forger of pedigrees in order to obtain tained great fame as a dramatic writer, whereas he a coat-of-arms to which he had no right, a poacher, was at best a clever theatre-director, and a smart a drunkard, an undutiful son and a negligent caterer for the rather low tastes of the theatrefather.” This has very little pertinency to the going public, altering the plays considerably, and question. Byron and Poe had a good many of vulgarizing them before producing them on the these vices, but they were men of great genius. stage." This out-herods the cipherer, for it is inEven Bacon himself was a crafty, supple, time-conceivable that by far the larger part of the plays serving courtier, a false friend, a corrupt judge. were not the offspring of a single mind. As to the Forging pedigrees is a very venial thing at this claim for Bacon: we assert that there is no resemday. It is very singular that Mr. Halliwell, who blance, not the remotest, between his style and has spent a long life in investigating Shakespeare's genius and those of the plays. Is there a touch of life, has been able to find so few of these alleged humor in all his writings! Could he have created failings. Stratford is not mentioned, but St. Al-Falstaff? If he, an educated and polished man, bans, Bacon's home, is mentioned twenty-three bad written these plays, he would not have been times. There seems nothing singular in that as it guilty of their anachronisms, coarseness, barbarisms, is a historical place, the scene of two battles. Then obscurities; nor would he have borrowed his plots. the absence of any books or manuscripts of Shakes- | Probably if he wrote these plays he would have left peare is dwelt upon. How many are there of Ben other and acknowledged poems, but he left nothJonson's, for instance, or for that matter, of Bacon's? | ing worthy the name. The examples given are luMr. Davidson gives a synopsis of the chapter of the dicrously feeble. Certainly, if the cipherer is right, “cipher narrative,” in which among other startling he would not have flattered Elizabeth in the “Midoccurrences are Bacon's attempt to commit suicide summer Night's Dream.” And most certainly he because his authorship of the plays was discovered would not have gone out of life without leaving by Elizabeth, and the warning to Shakespeare to some claim to the plays more certain to be found fly! In chapter twenty-four “Shakespeare decides than this fantastic cipher discovered after two hunto fly.” Then why didn't he fly? Like the police-dred and fifty years. We shall be curious to see men in “The Pirates," he “ doesn't go.” Is there | how Mr. Donnelly reconciles his theory with Baa word of history or tradition that he ever fled? con's known coldness and treachery toward his Mr. Davidson says his faith in Shakespeare has been friend and benefactor, Essex. About the strongest shaken. All we need say to this is to call attention evidence of the absurdity of this Baconian delusion to his interpretation of the word “offices,” in the is the following: “A writer in Shakesperiana has seventy-seventh sonnet. The sonnetteer had sent recently pointed out a difficulty in believing that out a note-book or common-place book, and says: there can be a cipher in the folio of 1623, based “These offices, so oft as thou wilt look,
| upon the paging, because the same plays (1st and Shall profit thee and much enrich thy book." .
| 2d Henry IV) were published in quarto, with differMr. Davidson says: “What does the word 'offices'
ent paging, twenty years before. Mr. Donnelly's here mean? The commentators and translators, as
reply to that is that in 1597--8 Bacon inserted a far as I have access to them, have no answer to
cipher in the plays adjusted to certain paging of a the question. One translator, Fritz Krausz, thinks |
nks contemplated folio edition, the manuscript being the book sent was the album containing the son
arranged in sheets so numbered. Then right under nets; but why call it offices?' We have already
the nose of Cecil and the queen he published the referred to the Promus of Bacon, recently published
plays in quarto, arranged to a different paging, by Mrs. Pott. Now, the word promus means a cel
thus rendering detection impossible. Mr. Donnelly larer or butler, and proma cella means a cellar or thinks Bacon must have chuckled to see Elizabeth larder. But in Bacon's time (as to some extent
applauding plays which told the whole secret hiseven now) cellars and larders were called offices.
tory of her life!” But vive la humbug! One of Is it possible that Bacon's Promus is identical with
these days some one will arise to prove that Christ the offices referred to? If so, we have a strong ar
never lived and died in Judea. But suppose the gument that Bacon wrote the sonnets." Or the
cipher is really there? Well, then, Bacon or some following:
one else put it there for purposes of mischief or "• As full of perill and aduenturous spirit
mystification. What conceivable use or purpose As to o'rewalk a Current, roaring loud, On the vnsteadfast footing of a speare.'
could the cipher serve? The whole controversy
seems to us illustrate the credulity of the human sistance to it. The government might raise this imagination. We are now surprised to learn that question, but does not do so. The juror is known the Abbé Labrieu has discovered that there is no to be a man of exemplary character, and now desuch thing as the great Chinese wall!
voted to the Union and Constitution of the United States. Besides, the Revised Statutes, section 800,
provide that jurors in the United States courts shall NOTES OF CASES.
possess the same qualifications, and be entitled to
the same exemptions as jurors in the State courts, IN Simmons v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, June and no other, and it is not disputed that Capt.
I 22, 1887, it was held that "D- d son of a Carnes is qualified to serve as a juror by the laws b h ” is an expression which does not come of Georgia. This statute operates as a repeal of his
within the legal meaning of terms "insulting words disabilities, so far as service as a juror in the United used toward a female relative." as those terms are States courts is concerned. I hold that while used in the statute defining manslaughter. The since Capt. Carnes has not thought proper to apply court said: “The term used is rather a sudden ex
for the removal of his disabilities, he may not be pression of anger and contempt, and when used, permitted to hold offices of trust and profit under no one understands it to be directed at the mother the general government, he cannot for that reason of the person to whom used. It is a lamentable be exempted from rendering the usual services, and fact that this mode of expression is of too common performing the ordinary duties of citizenship. This use in the country." This passes our comprehen- | is a direct and beneficent result of the complete sion. To call a woman to her face a bitch would
| restoration of our government in all of its integrity, certainly be insulting, and to tell a man that he is a and the redintegration of our people in their rights son of one is intended to enrage him by defaming of citizenship after the termination of the unhappy his mother, and is clearly within the statute. - struggle between the sections of our common coun
try -- a marvelous instance of the presence of an
advanced civilization, literally without parallel in In Hennessey v. State, in the same court, May 18, history, satisfying the most incredulous of the per1887, it was said: “In writing the name · Knittel' petuity of our liberties, and silencing the criticism in the indictment, in setting forth the instrument of republican institutions." as it appeared after alteration, the pleader has dotted one prong of the letter 'n'instead of placing the dot directly over the letter “i.' The letters
At Bristol, on August 9, before the lord chief forming the word "Knittel' are however plainly justice, without a jury, the cause Brown v. Accident and distinctly written, and the mere misplacement
Insurance Co. was heard. Mr. Bullen appeared for of the dot intended for the letter 'i' certainly can
the plaintiff; Mr. Charles, Q. C., for the defendnot be held to constitute a variance."
ants. In 1852 the plaintiff insured himself with the defendants in a policy against railway accidents,
whereby 2,0001. was to be paid in case of his death In Re Carnes, Circuit Court, S. D. Georgia, W.D., by accident, and in case of an accident not causing June 28, 1887, it was held that the facts that one death the plaintiff was to receive “such sum by summoned as a juror in the United States courts way of compensation as should appear just and reawas an officer of the navy anterior to the late war; sonable, and in proportion to the injury received." that he resigned, and thereafter served in the Con- In March, 1884, the plaintiff was knocked down by federate army; and that his disabilities have not an engine at Risca Station on the Great Western been removed, will not support a personal claim Railway and seriously injured. The plaintiff now for exemption from jury duty. Speer, J., said: sued the defendants on this policy to recover com“ Capt. Carnes is a resident and citizen by birth of pensation in respect of the injuries he received on the United States of America, having their protec- that occasion. The defendants however contended tion, and enjoying all of the enlarged and liberal that the accident was not an accident happening advantages of such citizenship. Should his rights while the plaintiff was travelling on a railway, or be infringed by any other nationality the govern- within the ternis of the policy. Also that the ment would extend to them the same jealous and plaintiff had already obtained compensation in rewatchful supervision that another citizen would spect of the accident in an action which he had suchave under similar circumstances. It is altogether cessfully brought against the Great Western Railanomalous, and not to be permitted, that enjoying way, and consequently was not in law entitled to these privileges he should be exempt from jury recover any further compensation from them in reduty because of any action of his during the late spect of the accident. The facts were undisputed. war. If he could for this reason decline to serve The plaintiff on the day of the accident, having on the juries, he might, with the same propriety, taken his ticket, was crossing the line to reach the decline to serve in the armies of the country; and proper platform, when he was knocked down by a thus would be presented the extraordinary specta- train of empty carriages. In his action against the cle of a citizen excused from defending his govern-Great Western Railway he recovered 7501. The ment because previously he had been in armed re-only points to be argued therefore were the two mentioned above. Mr. Bullen argued that the in the archives of the State, by the member of the genplaintiff was at the time of the accident travelling
eral council representing that State.
I was therefore compelled to treat each State sepaon a railway within the meaning of the policy, cit
rately, and if in so doing I trespass on your patience, ing Theobald v. Ry. Passengers' Ins. Co., 23 L. J.
you must blame the command of the constitution, the Rep. Exch. 249; 10 Exch. 45, and an American
practice of my predecessors in office, the custom sanccase in support of this view. As to the second tioned by yourselves, the immense mass of legislation point he cited Bradburn v. Great Western Ry., 44
to be brought to your notice, and the inability of a L. J. Rep. Exch. 9; L. R., 10 Exch. 1, and Dalby
large majority of the members of the general council
to communicate to the president, as enjoined by the v. India and London Life Assur. Co., 24 L. J. Rep.
constitution, the changes in the statutes of their reC. P. 2; 15 C. B. 365. Mr. Charles argued that the spective States. policy did not apply to such an accident as this; This inability is principally to be attributed to the and further, that it was a contract of indemnity. | delay in the publication of the statutes.
There were several laws of a general nature enacted The learned judge said in his opinion the particular
by Congress during the past year, which merit our atpolicy was a contract of indemnity; and further
tentior. that it was only intended to cover an accident re The act of March 3, 1887, to regulate the removal of ceived while the assured was actually travelling in causes from State courts, to further regulate the jurisa train, which the plaintiff was not doing when he
diction of Circuit Courts, and for other purposes, takes met with this accident. He accordingly gave judg
from those courts the cognizance of any civil suit, un
less the matter in dispute exceeds $2,000, exclusive of ment for the defendants, with costs, but ordered
interest and costs. execution to be stayed until the eighth day of the Nor can any suit be brought against any person by Michaelmas Sittings, and then till hearing if appeal any original process of procedure in any other district entered within that tinie. - London Law Journal. than that whereof he is au inhabitant, unless the jur
isdiction of the court is founded only on the fact that
the action is between citizens of different States, then AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION.
the suit must be brought in the district where the plaintiff or the defendant resides.
Nor can an assignee or subsequent holder of a chose ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT, Hon. THOMAS J.
in action bring suit in the Circuit Court, unless such SEMMES, OF LOUISIANA, DELIVERED AT
suit could have been brought if no transfer had been SARATOGA, AUGUST 17, 1887.
made; the only exceptions to this rule are assignees of I.
foreign bills of exchange and transferees of choses in
action issued by any corporation payable to bearer. I PROCEED without exordium to the performance of The regulations as to the removal of causes are: 1 the duty imposed on the President of this asso 1. No suit can be removed from a State court, unless ciation by its constitution, which provides that he the matter in dispute exceeds $2,000, exclusive of inshall open each annual meeting with an address "com terest and costs. municating the most noteworthy changes in the stat 2. It can be removed only by the non-resident deute law on points of general interest made in the sev
fendant, except where the suit is between citizens of eral States and by Congress.".
the same State and the jurisdiction of the Circuit The Legislatures of all the States except Iowa, Mary- | Court depends on grants of land by different States. land, Kentucky, Mississippi and Louisiana have been
3. When in any suit there is a controversy wholly in session during the year, but I have not been able to between citizens of different States, which can be fully obtain the laws of Florida. The Legislature of New determined as between them, then either one or more Hampshire is still in session. The session laws of Lou- | of the defendants interested in such controversy may isiana of 1886 were not printed in time to enable my remove the suit. predecessor in office to report upon them. I have 4. The application for removal must be made before therefore to review the legislation of Congress and the or at the time the defendant is required by the laws of following twenty-eight States: Alabama, Arkansas, the State to plead, except where the ground of reCalifornia, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, moval is local prejudice, or when jurisdiction of the Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Ne Circuit Court depends on grants of land by different braska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Car States as above stated. olina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, 5. Removal on the ground of local influence or preSouth Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, judice is allowed to the defendant only in suits whero West Virginia and Wisconsin. As my predecessors in the plaintiff is a citizen of the State in which the suit office had established the practice of commenting on is brought, and the defendant) is a citizen of another statutes as noteworthy in particular States, although State. The affidavit in such case must state that the not so in respect to other States, and as it had been defendant cannot obtaiu justice in the State court in the custom to call attention to statutes which had no | which the suit is brought, nor in any other court of direct relation to the service of jurisprudence, or the that State to which, under its laws, the defendant, on administration of justice, I felt very much embarrassed account of prejudice or local influence, might have ju dealing with so many States. I could have com the right to remove the cause; the affidavit of the pepressed the review within reasonable limits, either by titioner is not conclusive, and the Circuit Court, if not grouping States or by the classification of the subjects satisfied with its truth, may remand the cause to the of legislation; but so many Legislatures protracted State Court. If there be several defendants and the their sessions until late in the season, I could not pro. buit can be tried separately in the Circuit Court withcure the statutes in time to pursue that course. As it out prejudice to the parties, that court may remaud the is, is
instances I have had recourse to advanced suit to the State Court, as to the defendants not af. sheets of the statutes as they came from the press, fected by local influence or prejudice, and retain jurwithout any index, and in the case of Delaware, I have | isdiction of the cause as to the other defendants. relied on an abstract taken from the parchment rolls This act also takes away the right to an appeal, or