Summary

Edward Douglass White Ex parte United States — Opinion of the Court

The expedition act being therefore still in force, and its provisions being applicable to the district courts which the Judicial Code created, we think the court below erred in concluding that the United States was not entitled to a district court organized in the mode pointed out in the expedition act, unless it be, as stated by the lower court in its opinion, the subject in hand was of such a character as not to be within the scope of the expedition act.
Source: Wikisource

Edward Douglass White Ex parte United States — Opinion of the Court

In the printed argument, however, upon which the matter has been here submitted, the action of the court is sought to be sustained upon a much broader ground; viz., that as, by the Judicial Code, the circuit courts were abolished, it has become no longer possible to organize a court in accordance with the expedition act, because that act by implication has been repealed by the Judicial Code. Thus, after commenting upon the provisions of the Judicial Code, it is said:
'The Judicial Code (§ 1, chap. 1) provides for a district judge for each district court.
Source: Wikisource

Edward Douglass White Ex parte United States — Opinion of the Court

Rep. 507. That case, which involved violations of the Sherman anti-trust act [26 Stat. at L. 209, chap. 647, U.S.C.omp. Stat. 1901, p. 3200] , was commenced in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Missouri, was there decided by four circuit judges in consequence of the filing by the Attorney General of the United States of the certificate provided for by the act of 1903, commonly known as the expedition act (chap. 544, 32 Stat. at L. 823, U.S.C.omp. Stat. Supp. 1911, p. 1383) .
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature