Minutes of the Supreme Court, 1–3 August 1791
Minutes of the Supreme Court
[Philadelphia, 1–3 August, 1791]
At the Supreme Court of the United States, begun and held at Philadelphia (being the Seat of the National Government) on the first Monday in August and on the first day of the said Month, Anno Domini 1791.
Present.
The Honble. John Jay Esqr. Chief Justice
The Honble. William Cushing, James Wilson, John Blair, and James Iredell Esqrs., Associate Justices.1
Proclamation is made and the Court is opened.
Ordered, that Samuel Bayard be the Clerk of this Court in the place of John Tucker Esquire of Boston resigned; he is accordingly directed to give bond as by Law directed, and is sworn to the faithful discharge of all the duties of his Office, and to support the Constitution of the United States.
On motion of the Attorney General John D. Coxe Esqr.2 is admitted to practice as a Counsellor of this Court and is sworn according to Law, and order.
| Nicholas & Jacob Vanstaphorst Pltffs |  |
In Case |
| vs | ||
| The State of Maryland Def[en]d[an]t. |
The Attorney General being of Council for the Plaintiffs moved the Court for a Commission to take the Depositions of certain Witnesses residing in Holland, with the consent of the Attorney and Counsel on the part of the Defendant State.
The Court refused the Commission untill the Commissioners should be named.3
The Court adjourned ’till to Morrow at ten oClock.
Tuesday August 2nd. 1791.
Present.
The Honble. John Jay Esquire Chief Justice.
The Honble. William Cushing, James Wilson, John Blair, and James Iredell Esqrs., Associate Justices.
Proclamation is made and the Court is opened.
On Petition David Leonard Barns Esquire4 of Taunton in the State of Massachusetts is admitted to practice as a Counsellor of this Court and is sworn accordingly.
On motion of William Bradford Junior Esquire Attorney General of Pennsylvania, Thomas Smith Esquire of Carlisle in Pennsylvania is sworn and Jacob R. Howell5 is solemnly affirmed and are admitted to practice as Counsellors in this Court, agreeably to Order.
| William West Pltff in Error | |
| vs | |
| David L. Barns & Others Def[endan]ts. |
Mr. Bradford offered to the Court a Writ, purporting to be a Writ of Error, Issued out of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court for Rhode Island District directed to that Court and commanding the return of the Judgment and proceedings rendered by them in this Cause to this Court with such return &c.
On motion of Mr. Bradford of Council for William West the said Writ and papers annexed to it were read.
Mr. Bradford moved for a rule that the Defendant rejoint to the errors assigned in this Cause.
David L. Barns one of the Defendants and a Counsellor of this Court objected to the validity of the Writ in question and on that principle, to the rule moved for— The arguments on both sides being heard, the Court informed the parties that they would consider the question.6
The Court adjourned till ten oClock to morrow.
Wednesday August 3rd. 1791—
Present.
The Honble. John Jay Esqr. Chief Justice.
The Honble. William Cushing, James Wilson, John Blair, and James Iredell Esqrs., Associate Justices.
On motion of the Attorney General Charles Swift Esqr.7 of the City of Philadelphia is admitted to practice as a Counsellor of this Court, and is sworn agreably to their Order.
And now bond is given with two sureties, approved by the Court (Vizt. Charles Pettit and John Nicholson Esquires)8 by Samuel Bayard their Clerk, for the faithfull performance of the duties of his said Office &c. as by Law directed— Ordered that this Bond be delivered by Mr. Bayard to the Treasurer of the United States, and that his receipt for the same be filed in the Clerks Office of this Court.
It appearing from the Information of the Attorney General, that a certain Eleanor Mc.Donald is confined in the Goal of this City of Philadelphia charged with an Offence against the Laws of the United States, and that for the relief as well of the said Eleanor, as of such other Persons as may be charged with Offences against the Laws of the United States it would ^be^ expedient that a Special Sessions of a circuit Court in and for the district of Pennsylvania should be speedily held.
Ordered, that a special Session of a circuit Court for the trial of criminal causes be held at the City of Philadelphia in and for the district of Pennsylvania on the fifteenth day of August instant, and that authenticated copies of this Order be transmitted by the Clerk of this Court to the Judge and to the Clerk of the said district and to the Attorney of the United States for said District.9
| William West Pltff | |
| vs. | |
| David Barnes & others Def[endan]ts. | in Case. |
The Court refused to grant the rule moved for, in this Cause yesterday, being unanimously of opinion, that writs of error to remove Causes to this Court from inferior ones, can regularly issue only from the Clerks office of this Court.
Supreme Court of the United States.
| Jacob Van Staphorst & Nicholas Van Staphorst | |
Rule. |
| vs | ||
| The State of Maryland |
It being suggested to the Court that several persons who are material Witnesses to both Parties in the above Cause reside in Amsterdam in Holland—It is therefore Ordered on motion of Mr. Randolph of Counsel for the Plaintiffs and with the consent of Mr. Ingersoll of counsel for the Defendants, that a Commission do issue to Rutger Jan Schimmelpenninck, Pieter Stadnitski and Hendrick Vollenhoven as Commissioners on the part of the plaintiffs and to Nicolaas Bonds, Christian Van Eeghen, P. C. Nahuys and Wilhem Willink as Commissioners on the part of the Defendants, for the purpose of taking the Depositions of such witnesses as shall be brought before them, so that one of the said Commissioners named on the part of the Plaintiffs and one of the said Commissioners named on the part of the Defendant do attend the execution thereof, and that the depositions so taken and certified under the hands and Seals of the Commissioners so taking the same shall be read and received as evidence on the trial of the above Cause.10
Saml Bayard Clk
D, DNA: RG 267, General Records: Engrossed (Fine) Minutes of the Supreme Court; , 1: 191–96. Original Fine Minutes of Samuel Bayard, D, DNA: RG 267, General Records, Original Minutes Books; , 1: 345–48.
1. Here and below names placed in columns with braces are converted to paragraph form with punctuation added.
2. John D. Coxe (1752–1824) of Philadelphia. , 1: 192n94.
3. On the Van Staphorst case, see the editorial note “The Supreme Court: Procedures and Cases,” above.
4. David Leonard Barnes (1760–1812) of Taunton, Mass., sought admission as counsellor in order to argue his side in the case of West v. Barnes, on which see below. , 1: 192n96., 6: 8–9.
5. Thomas Smith (1745–1809) of Carlisle, Pa., and Philadelphia lawyer Jacob Roberts Howell (c. 1763–93), a Quaker. , 1: 193nn97–98.
6. On West v. Barnes, see the editorial note “The Supreme Court: Procedures and Cases,” above.
7. Charles Swift (1757–1813) of Philadelphia. , 1: 194n100.
8. Philadelphia merchant Charles Pettit and John Nicholson (1757–1800), comptroller general of Pennsylvania from 1792 to 1794.
9. The Judiciary Act of 1789 gave the district courts jurisdiction over crimes committed on the high seas. Captain Henry Williams of Massachusetts accused Eleanor McDonald of theft of eleven gold doubloons from his vessel while docked in the Delaware River. District Court Judge William Lewis contended that because the ship was scheduled to depart shortly and the next circuit court session in Pennsylvania was not until 11 October at York, Pa., it would be so harmful both to the seamen who were witnesses and to the prisoner to experience such a delay, and so troublesome to have to transport them such a distance, that a special court should be convened at Philadelphia. Lewis to William Rawle, 2 Aug. 1791, DNA: RG 267, Records of the Office of the Clerk; , 1: 194–95n104.
10. See note 3, above.