In re Blair

• Decision Date: 14 January 1901
• Docket Number: 17.
• Citation: 106 F. 662
• Parties: In re BLAIR et al.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

106 F. 662

In re BLAIR et al.

No. 17.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

January 14, 1901

William M. Mellette, Edgar Smith, and L. F. Parker, Jr., for petitioners.

James B. Burckhalter, for trustee, respondent.

Before CALDWELL and SANBORN, Circuit Judges, and ADAMS, District judge.

CALDWELL Circuit Judge.

This is a petition filed bye Samuel Carlin, Thomas F. McDonald, and Joseph A. Blair, composing the firm of Carlin, McDonald &amp Blair, to revise in matter of law the proceedings of the United States court sitting as a court of bankruptcy for the northern district of the Indian Territory in the matter of the bankruptcy of Nelson Moore, wherein that court adjudged the petitioners guilty of contempt. The jurisdiction of this court to entertain this petition for review is challenged. It is necessary to a correct understanding to this question to ascertain the precise relation this court sustained to the Indian Territory was passed March 1, 1889 (25 Stat. 783), two years before the passage of the act creating the United States circuit courts of appeals. Under the act of 1889 there was but one judge for the Indian Territory, and the act provided that:

'The final judgment or decree of the court hereby established, in cases where the value of the matter in dispute, exclusive of costs, to be ascertained by the oath of either party or of other competent witnesses, exceeds one thousand dollars may be reviewed and reversed or affirmed in the supreme court of the United States upon writ of error or appeal, in the same manner and under the same regulations as the final judgments and decrees of a circuit court.'

The act creating United States circuit courts of appeals was passed March 3, 1891, and contained this provision:

'Section 13. Appeals and writs of error may be taken and prosecuted from the decisions of the United States court in the Indian Territory to the supreme court of the United States, or to the circuit court of appeals in the Eighth circuit, in the same manner and under the same regulations as from the circuit or district courts of the United States, under this act.'

The appellate jurisdiction conferred on this court, by the provision last quoted, over the United States court of original jurisdiction on the Indian Territory, continued until the passage of the act of March 1, 1895 (28 Stat. 693). That act divided the territory into three judicial districts and gave it a judicial system modeled after that commonly adopted by congress for the territories. The act provided for the appointment of two additional judges. This gave the territory three judges, who were constituted a court of appeals for the territory; and the act declares that such appellate court 'shall have such jurisdiction and powers in said Indian Territory and such general superintending control over the courts thereof as is conferred upon the supreme court of Arkansas over the courts thereof by the laws of said state, as provided by chapter forty of Mansfield's Digest of the Laws of Arkansas, and the provisions of said chapter, so far as they relate to the jurisdiction and powers of said supreme court of Arkansas as to appeals and writs of error, and as to the trial and decision of causes, so far as they are applicable, shall be and they are hereby, extended over and put in force in the Indian Territory. ' Among the powers conferred on the supreme court by chapter 40 of Mansfield's Digest, which, by the terms of the foregoing provision, are conferred on the court of appeals for the Indian Territory, are the following:

'The supreme court * * * shall have a general superintending control over all inferior courts of law and equity; and, in aid of its appellate and supervisory jurisdiction, it shall have power to issue writs of error, and supersedeas, certiorari, habeas corpus, prohibition, mandamus, and quo warranto, and other remedial writs; and to hear and determine the same.'

The supreme court is further given appellate jurisdiction over 'final orders, judgments, and determinations of all inferior courts of the state. ' It will be seen that by the provisions of the act of 1895 the appellate jurisdiction over the judgments and decrees of the United States courts of original jurisdiction in the Indian Territory was vested in the court of appeals of the territory, and thereupon the appellate jurisdiction of this court, under section 13 of the act organizing this court, over the judgments and decrees of the United States court in the Indian Territory exercising original jurisdiction, ceased. The act creating the court of appeals for the Indian Territory contained this further provision:

'Writs of error and appeals from the final decision of said appellate court shall be allowed, and may be taken to the circuit court of appeals for the Eighth judicial circuit in the same manner and under the same regulations as appeals are taken from the circuit courts of the United States.' The appellate jurisdiction conferred on this court by this provision of the act is the only jurisdiction this court could exercise over any court in this territory at the date of the passage of the bankrupt act. It had no appellate jurisdiction or supervisory or revising control over the courts of original jurisdiction in the territory, but appellate jurisdiction over the court of appeals of the territory only.

Before the bankrupt act was passed, the court of appeals for the territory had been vested with appellate jurisdiction over the United States courts of original jurisdiction in the territory in the broadest and most comprehensive terms. It had been granted and possessed all the jurisdiction and powers over inferior courts within the territory that are ever conferred on an appellate court. Section 15 of the act creating the United States circuit courts of appeals provides:

'That the circuit courts of appeals in cases in which the judgments of the circuit courts of appeal are made final by this act shall have the same appellate jurisdiction, by writ of error or appeal, to review the judgments, orders, and decrees of the supreme courts of the several territories as by

...