LINTON V. MOSGROVE.
and Wife v.
(Circuit (Jourt, lV. D. Pennsylvania.
F.,qUITY-ENJOINING PROCEEDINGll IN STATE OOU-RTll.
Section 720 of the Revilled Statutes, which forbids United States courts to grant injunctions to stay proceedings in a state court, does not restrain the circuit enjoining an inequitable use of a trust judgment in a state court by execution and levy, prosecuted in violation of the trust and in fraud ' of the rights of the cestui l/U6 tru,8t.
'In Equity. AOHESON, D. J. The of ,this suit is a trust of real and personal property, evidenced by an instrument of writing executed by the trustee, James E. Brown, defendants' testator. The sutviv'ing '(Jestui qu.e trust is Mrs. Linton, one of the plaintiffs, in whose behalf the suit is proseouted.Beyond question. the case presenied by the bill is of equitable cognizance, and it is equally c'lear that in virtue of the citizenship of the parties this court has jurisdiction of the controversy. It is alleged that the judgments in the state court recited in the bill belong to the trust, and that Mrs. Linton is now the owner thereof under the terms of the trust; and Qne of the prayers of the bill is to have the trust in respect to said judgments judicially declared and enforced in favor of Mrs. Linton, and the judgments ll,ssigned to her. To this relief, it seem, she will be entitled if the allegations of the bill are sustained. We are now asked to restrain the defendants, nntil further order, from exercising any acts of Qwnership over the said judgments. or in anywise interfering with the same. If the plaintiffs' allegations are true, the defendants-the personal representatives of James E. Brown, deceased-are making a most inequitable and unwarrantable' use of the judgments by means of executions and levies, in violation of the trust, and in fraud of the rights of Mrs. Linton. Is this court powerless to arrest such wrong by reason of the statutory provision which forbids the courts of the United States togrant injunctions to stay proceedings in a state court? Rev. St. § 720. I am of opinion that the case is not within the purview of the prohibition. It is not proposed to interfere with the rightful authority of the state court ,in any proper sense. The contest here relates to the ownership of the judgments. It is alleged, and for the purpose of this motion it may be assumed to be satisfactorily shown, that they
belong to Mrs. Linton; and, if so, the defendants have no right to intermeddle with them. If these judgments appertain to the trust which is the foundation of this suit, they are an inherent part of the controversy, and must enter into our final decree if complete justice is to be done; and strange indeed would it be were this court impotent to restrain a trustee subject to our general equitable jurisdiction from making a fraudulent use of a trust judgment standing in a state court. Surely there can be no such defect in our judicial system. Under the admissions in the defendant's affidavits I think the present motion should be allowed without requiring security. By virtue of the judgments of revival and the execution attachments, every possible lien against the entire estate, real and personal, of the late Mrs. Finlay has been. acquired. Should the controversy not terminate within five years from the date of the revival of the judgments, we will allow alias writs of scire facias to issue. The injunction prayed for is allowed, the same to remain in force until the further order of the court.
UNITED STATES V. HOUGHTON.
(District Oourt, D. New Jerac!I.
October 20, 1882.)
MAKING OF Pmu,TC RECORD-EI,EMF.NTS OF OFFENSlll.
In order to a conviction of the offense defincd in section 5418 of the Revised Statutes, the jury must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt (1) that the time and pay roll described in the indictment was a false, forged, and counterfeit writing; (2) that the same was transmitted to the proper officer of the government by the defendant; and (3) that the false character of the writing was known by the defendant at the time of the sending, and that it was sent with the intent to defraud the United States.
SAME-DEFEKDANT AS WITNESS-WEIGHT OF TESTIMONY.
The laws of thc United States permit a person charged with crime or misdemeanor to be a witness in his own hehalf, and such weight is to be given to his testimony as, under all the it is fairly entitled to.
In criminal as well as civil affairs everyone is presumed to know everything that he can learn upon inquiry, when he has facts in his possession which suggest the inquiry, and this knowledge must be affirmatively shown by the government 4.
Proof of otller acts, which IHtve no connectIOn with the princfpal transaction, is admissable in cllse; wher" the kllulV1"dge or illtent of the pIU·tJ· is II material fact.