Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

include every matter about which it is desirable that the different nations of the earth should have an understanding, such as copyright, codification of international law, extradition of criminals, and arbitration for the settlement of international disputes.

WITNESS' FEES.-As much-ignorance in the matter of witness' fees seems to generally exist, and as persons are frequently debarred thereby from their legal rights under the Code, a brief statement of the facts may prove acceptable. In all cases where the People of the State are plaintiff it may be stated as a general proposition that no fees or recompense for time lost or expenses incurred will be paid, as the law comtemplates the witness in the prosecution of his own business.

In civil cases a witness is entitled to the amount of fees prescribed by law for such services, and may demand such payment at the time the subpoena is served, and failing to receive such sum may refuse to testify until it is paid. The refusal to accept the fee does not excuse a witness properly subpoenaed form attendance or testifying, and only lays him liable to punishment and contempt. It is a common occurrence to see persons put upon the stand, who, after taking the oath to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth," object to giving any testimony on the ground that they. have not received the fees to which they are entitled. They are then informed by the judge in a voice expressive of the deepest sympathy that having sworn to tell the whole truth they have no recourse but to proceeed and tell it as promptly as possible. The judge's urbane manner no doubt is well calculated to make the unfortunate witness unconscious of his misery until his hand encounters the dreary void of his pantaloon's pocket, yet the latter event is sure to occur unless the litigant in whose interest the witness is summoned belongs to that class of philanthropists who voluntarily pay their debts, for he has got the witness "foul" and can make his whole stock of testimony at his own valuation on long time. If the witness desires to demand his fees before testifying he must do so before taking the oath.

PENSION CASE DECIDED.

On an appeal from the decision of the Commissioner of Pensions, where the claim of the party for bounty land had been rejected under section 3480 Revised Statutes, which prohibits the payment of any account, claim or demand against the United States which occurred or existed prior to April 13th, 1861, in favor of any person who promoted, encouraged, or in any manner sustained the late rebellion, or was not known to be opposed thereto and distinctly in favor of its suppression, Secretary Schurz has sustained the decision of the Commissioner rejecting the claim.

The Secretary says:

The fact that he was "utterly and optspokenly opposed to secession up to the war," does not meet the requirements of section 3480; that during the war he was "opposed thereto, and distinctly in favor of its suppression." Neither does the statement that he contributed to the comfort of his sons indicate that he was dissatisfied with the service in which they were engaged.

While he may have been "utterly and outspokenly opposed to secession up to the war," as were many others after secession was an accomplished fact and after the conflict of arms had commenced, he may have been earnestly and decidedly in favor of the success of the Confederate government. He must show affirmatively that he was opposed to the rebellion, its suppression, and that he did not encourage or in any manner sustain it.

There may be cases were persons paid taxes to the Confederate government under duress, who should not thereby be prejudiced in a just claim which had accrued or existed prior to 13th of April, 1861.

Cases may also arise in which the sons or husbands of claimants enlisted in the rebel army, to whom the claimants furnished food and clothing from love and affection and the dictates of humanity, when the claiments should not be held within the prohibition of that section; but in every such case

it must distinctly and affirmatively appear that the claimant was opposed to such enlistment, and while apparently acquising therein, was distinctly opposed to the war and in favor of its suppression. In other words, the test of a person's right to have his claim allowed should not be acts done by him under duress nor under circumstances beyond his control, but he should be allowed to show in connection with such acts the facts and circumstances under which they were performed, and that while such acts were done by him his motive and feelings were not thereby truly represented.

WHAT IS A SAVINGS BANK?

The Supreme Court of the United States was obliged to answer this question a few days ago in its decision of a suit brought by the personal representative of a depositor in the National Savings Bank of the District of Columbia to recover an interest in the franchises and property of the corporation. The Court decided that this Savings Bank is not a commercial partnership nor a corporation, the members of which have any property interest in it, and that it was not strictly eleemosynary. The decision describes the true savings bank as "intended only for provident investment, in which the management and supervision are entirely out of the hands of persons whose money is at stake, and which are quasi benevolent and most useful, because they hold out no encouragement to speculative dealing or commercial trading." This is the character of the old Savings Banks of this and other cities, and it is only because speculative concerns, having nothing in common with the original system, having stolen their name, that savings banks have become associated in the public mind with fraud, bankruptcy. In all the larger cities there are such corporations as the Philadelphia Saving Fund, a fact noted by the Supreme Court, when it says: "Very many such exist in this country, and, until recently, the primary idea of a savings bank has been that it is an institution in the hands of disin

terested persons, the profits of which, after deducting the necessary expenses of the bank, inure wholly to the benefit of depositors, in dividends, or in reserved surplus for their greater security."-Philadelphia Ledger.

Authority of a Notary Public to Commit a Witness for Contempt.

The following is a recent opinion of Judge Bakewell of the Appellate Court of St. Louis, on the authority of a Notary Public to commit a witness for contempt in refusing to answer a question:

Ex parte R. M. Scruggs, habeas corpus.

The petitioner claims that he is illegally imprisoned in the jail of the city of St. Louis, under authority of a certain commitment issued by a notary public. The commitment shows that petitioner attended, and was examined on oath before the notary in a certain cause pending in the St. Louis Circuit Court; that he refused to answer a question put to him on that examination, and was committed for the contempt for the space of ten days, or until he purge himself of the contempt. A notary public is authorized to take depositions, and for that purpose has the power conferred on justices of the peace, and if the witness attends and refuses to give evidence which may lawfully be required to be given, the notary may commit him to prison until he give the evidence: Ex parte McKee, 18 Mo., Ex parte Mumford, 57 Mo.

The jurisdiction being established, the judgment of the magistrate, and his interpretation of the law, and of its application to the facts before him, cannot be reviewed on a writ of habeas corpus. It is not pretended that the question asked the witness was one which it was his personal privilege to refuse to answer. The objection that the evidence demanded was irrelevant, cannot be urged on an application of this nature: Ex parte McKee, supra.

There is, however, a suggestion of want of authority on the part of the officer. It is urged that section 17 of the scheme of separation between the city and county of St. Louis

which provides that "all notaries now commissioned by the governor for St. Louis county, shall exercise their duties within the city and county of St. Louis, as constituted by this scheme," is a provision which the board of freeholders had no power to enact.

It is going far to ask a judge in chambers to try title to an office on an application for habeas corpus. No authority is cited in support of such a position. Habeas corpus is the remedy for illegal imprisonment, but the imprisonment is not illegal where the process is a justification to the officer and process from a de facto officer, not defective in the frame of it and issued in the ordinary course, from a magistrate having jurisdiction, will protect the officer: I Hale, P. C, 488; Com'm'th vs. Leckey, 1 Watts, 66; Freen. Ex. § 101.

There seems to be nothing in the objection that the committment is signed by the officer by his initials only. The officer is described in the body of the writ, as “L. A. McGinnis." and the signature corresponds with the description. A consonant may be a name. I knew a man who named his children by the letters of the alphabet, and this notary may have no other given name than "L," for all that appears: Tweedy vs. Jarvis, 27 Conn., 52. But if his name appeared to be "Louis," I should still think the signature to the account good, there being no question as to identity.

The return in this case shows a commitment for contempt, plainly charged. The officer had a right to compel an answer to the question, as it was not a privileged one, aud he did not, therefore, exceed his jurisdiction. To refuse to answer was a plain contempt. The relevancy of the question was a matter for the Circuit Conrt on the trial, and not for the witness. Appellate Courts do not exercise appellate jurisdiction in habeas corpus, and they will not, in such proceedings (and, a fortiori, a judge in chambers will not,) review the acts of the committing magistrate where he has acted within the scope of his jurisdiction, and there are no such gross defects as render the proceeding absolutely void: Ex parte Ruthven, 17 Mo., 542. The prisoner must be remanded. It is so ordered.

« AnteriorContinuar »