PART 1. the marshal to open and adjourn the court from day to day during the four days, and it seems advisable for him to do so. The act of 1840 authorizes the marshal to act only in pursuance of a written order of one of the judges, for the adjournment of the court to some day, to be specified in the order, prior to the next stated term.1 In case of contagious disease, court to be By the act of February 25, 1799, when a "contagious disease shall render it hazardous" to hold a cirheld else cuit or district court at the place prescribed by law, where by order of the the district judge is authorized to designate some judge. Or may be adjourned. other place within the district for holding such court, and for that purpose to issue his order to the marshal of the district, who is required to "make publication thereof, in one or more public papers printed at the place by law appointed for holding the same, from the time of receiving such order, until the time by law prescribed for commencing the said sessions."3 And by the act of January 18, 1839, it is enacted "That the judges, or some one of them, of the circuit court of the United States, shall have power to direct the said courts to be adjourned over to some future day, designated in a written order to the clerk of either of the said courts, whenever there is 1 See note p. 102, relative to the District of Kentucky. 2 Ch. 12, § 7: 1 Stat. at Large, p. 619. 'By this act (§ 5) it is also humanely declared that it shall be lawful for the "judge of any district court of the United States, within whose district any contagious or epidemic disease shall at any time prevail, so as in his opinion to endanger the life or lives of any person or persons confined in the prison of such district, in pursuance of any law of the United States, to direct the marshal to cause the person or persons confined as aforesaid, to be removed to the adjacent prison where such disease does not prevail, there to be confined, until he, she or they may safely be removed back to the place of their first confinement, which removals shall be at the expense of the United States." Ch. 3, § 9: 5 Stat. at Large, p. 313. a dangerous and general disease at the place where the CHAP. 7. court is usually holden; and the adjournment over by the clerk, in the absence of the judges, shall have the same force and effect as if the judges had been present." may be to a distant The courts of the United States have power to Courts adjourn to a distant day, and not merely from day adjourned to day. Thus, when the circuit court for the Dis- day. trict of Columbia, having continued to sit regularly from the commencement of its session in April, until the 16th of May, adjourned to the fourth Monday of June following, and then resumed and continued its sessions; the adjournment was held to be a legal continuation of the April term; and to adjourn in this manner was said to be a power common to all courts, not restrained in this respect by express law. 6 Wheaton, 106. PART 1. By the judicial act. Circuit court to cases. CHAPTER VIII. OF THE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OF THE CIRCUIT COURTS. The Constitution, as we have seen, defines the judicial power of the United States; designates one tribunal through which it is to be exerted, and vests a portion of it absolutely in that tribunal; but confides every thing else relating to the subject, to the wisdom of congress. What other courts should be established-in what proportions, and under what modifications, the judicial power should be distributed among them—were points to be determined by laws enacted in pursuance of the constitution. To these laws, therefore, and to the judicial expositions they have received, recourse must be had, to ascertain the jurisdiction of the circuit and district courts. The original jurisdiction with which congress saw fit, at the outset, to invest the circuit courts, is described chiefly in the 11th section of the organic act of September 24, 1789, as follows: "SEC. 11. And be it further enacted, That the circuits of have civil the United States shall have original cognizance, concurrent jurisdiction in what with the courts of the several States, of all suits of a civil nature at common law or in equity, where the matter in dispute exceeds, exclusive of costs, the sum or value of five hundred dollars, and the United States are plaintiffs or peti. tioners; or an alien is a party, or the suit is between a citizen of the state where the suit is brought, and a citizen of another state. And shall have exclusive cognizance of all crimes and offenses cognizable under the authority of the United States, except where this act otherwise provides, or the laws of the United States shall otherwise direct, and concurrent jurisdiction with the district courts of the crimes and offenses cogni Criminal jurisdiction. to be arrested for trial in another zable therein. But no person shall be arrested in one district CHAP. 8. for trial in another, in any civil suit before a circuit or district court. And no civil suit shall be brought before either No person of said courts against an inhabitant of the United States, by any original process in any other district than that whereof he is an inhabitant, or in which he shall be found at the time district in a civil suit, of serving the writ; nor shall any district or circuit court &c. have cognizance of any suit to recover the contents of any promissory note or other chose in action in favor of an as- Assignee's right of signee, unless a suit might have been prosecuted in such action recourt to recover said contents if no assignment had been stricted. made, except in cases of foreign bills of exchange. And the circuit court shall also have appellate jurisdiction from the district courts under the regulations and restrictions hereinafter provided." diction of court ex United limitation amount Subsequent laws have considerably enlarged the The juris jurisdiction specified in this section, by abolishing circuit the limitations in point of amount in several descrip- tended to suits by tions of cases, and by the jurisdiction attending to officers of additional ones. An act of March 3, 1815, does both, States, and though in terms rather indirect. It enacts "That the in point of district courts of the United States shall have cogni- abolished. zance, concurrent with the courts and magistrates of the several states, and the circuit courts of the United States, of all suits at common law, where the United States, or any officer thereof, under the authority of an act of Congress, shall sue, although the debt claimed, or other matter in dispute, shall not amount to one hundred dollars." This act came under the review of the Supreme Court in The Post Master General v. Early et al. (12 Wheat., 136), and was held sufficient to confer upon the circuit courts jurisdiction of cases Ch. 20 1 Stat. at Large, p. 78. The 12th section, authorizing the removal of suits from the State courts, and extending the jurisdiction of the circuit courts to certain controversies concerning the title to lands, will be noticed presently. 2 Ch. 101, § 4: 3 Stat. at Large, p. 244. The limitation in the district courts was $100. PART 1. in which an officer of the United States shall sue, and upon the same grounds must be considered as abolishing the restriction in point of amount in both Jurisdiction of cir extended arising revenue laws, and suits for damages incurred in their main tenance. cases. By the act of March 2, 1833, "further to provide for cuit courts the collection of duties on imports," it is provided, to all cases "That the jurisdiction of the circuit courts of the under the United States shall extend to all cases in law or equity, arising under the revenue laws of the United States, for which other provisions are not already made by law; and if any person shall receive any injury to his person or property for on account of any act by him done under any law of the United States, for the protection of the revenue or the collection of duties on imports, he shall be entitled to maintain suit for damage therefor, in the circuit court of the United States, in the district where the party doing the injury may reside or shall be found." The jurisdiction here conferred, it will not fail to be observed, is of great importance, and does not depend upon the citizenship of the parties or the amount in controversy. Garnishee process in suits by United States against corporations. in any By the act of April 20, 1818,2 it is enacted, that suit or action which shall be hereafter instituted by the United States against any corporate body for the recovery of money, upon any bill, note or other security, it shall be lawful to summon as garnishees, the debtors of such corporation; and it shall be the duty of any person, so summoned, to appear in open court, and depose in writing, to the amount which he or she was indebted to the said corporation, at the time of the service of the summons, and at the time of making such deposition; and it shall be lawful to enter up judgment in favor of the United 'Ch. 57, § 2: 4 Stat. at Large, p. 632. * Ch. 83, §§ 8, 9, 10: 3 Stat. at Large, p. 441. |