8 S.Ct. 1395
127 U.S. 774
32 L.Ed. 323
April 9, 1888.
J. B. Haskell, for appellant.
After an examination of the record in this case, which was submitted on printed arguments, we have not been able to find any evidence of the value of the land in controversy which is the subject of this suit. It is therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Mr. Haskell, on the 26th April, 1888, submitted a motion to reinstate the cause, accompanied by affidavits of the value of the property in dispute.
(April 30, 1888.)
This case was dismissed by the court on April 9, 1888, because there was no evidence of there being a sufficient amount in controversy to give this court jurisdiction. A motion is now made to reinstae it, and affidavits submitted on the part of the appellant intended to show that the value of the land in controversy is $5,000. Although notice was given to the opposite party by telegraph, there has been no sufficient opportunity or time for him to produce counter-affidavits, nor are we entirely satisfied with the sufficiency of those produced by the appellant. This motion to reinstate the case is therefore continued until the next term of the court, with leave for either party to file additional affidavits on this subject.