THE UNITED STATES
v.
COOLIDGE, ET. AL.
Johnson, J.
delivered the opinion, ol the court.
Upon the question now before the court a difference of opinion has existed, and still exists, among the members of the court. We should, therefore, have been willing to have heard the question discussed upon solemn argument. But the attorney-general has declined to argue,,the cause; and no counsel appears for the defendant. Under these circumstances the court would not choose to review their former decision in the case of the United States v. Hudson and Goodwin, or draw it into doubt. They will, therefore, certify an opinion to the circuit court in conformity with that decision. J .
Certificate for the.defendant.a
a
Vide, 1 Gallison, 488, for the learned and elaborate opinion of Mr. J. Story, in the circuit court, in this case, tending to show that all offences within the admiralty jurisdiction are cognizable by the circuit court, and in the absence. of positive law, are punishable by 'fine and imprisonment. •
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
Krulewitch v. United States, 336 U.S. 440 (U.S. 1949)…with our observation, will hardly convince one that a trial of this kind is the highest exemplification of the working of the judicial process. United, States v. Hudson, 7 Cranch 32; United States v. Worrall, 2 Dall. 384; United States v. Coolidge, 1 Wheat. 415; United States v. Eaton, 144 U. S. 677, 687; United States v. Bathgate, 246 U. S. 220, 225. See, however, Warren, New Light on the History of the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789,37 Harv. L. Rev. 49, 73. Cf. Tot v. United States, 319 U. S. 463. [*458]…
-
D'Oench v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 315 U.S. 447 (U.S. 1942)…Pennsylvania Law Review 109, 270, 367. The research of Charles Warren, leaned on heavily in Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins to discredit Swift v. Tyson, led that scholar to conclude that United States v. Hudson, 7 Cranch 32, and United States v. Coolidge, 1 Wheat. 415, establishing the above proposition, were probably wrongly decided. Warren, History of the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789, 37 Harvard Law Review 49, 73. The error, if it be one, comports, however, with the present tendency to constrict the jurisdicti…
-
James v. United States, 366 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1961)…in the meaning of § 22 (a).” 327 U. S., at 408. See, for example, Great Northern R. Co. v. Sunburst Oil Co., 287 U. S. 358. See, for example, United States v. L. Cohen Grocery Co., 255 U. S. 81. 7 Cranch, at 34. And see United States v. Coolidge, 1 Wheat. 415. United States v. Sullivan, 274 U. S. 259, 263. 327 U. S., at 408. Wilcox v. Commissioner, 148 F. 2d 933. 127 F. 2d 572. 126 F. 2d 723. 127 F. 2d, at 573. Ibid. The same reasoning can be found in our opinion in Alison v. United States, 344 U.…
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence