Viewing page 23 of 41

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

obtain it by virtue of such a controversy I am not prepared to say.  The opinion of Judge [[strikethru]]Dowdy[[/strikethru]][[?]] 
[[margin]] Deady [[/margin]]  in a Habeas Corpus is worthy of consideration

"By the constitution the Judicial power of the United States extends to all controversies between citizens of different states.  This is a controversy - a legal controversy - to be tried and determined by Judicial proceedings and Judgement..  The controversy arises upon the alleged legal right of the petitioner to the custody of his infant child and the denial and withholding the right by the respondent.  This is a controversy between citizens of different states."
     Bennet vs. Bennet - Dundy's U.S. Rep. 312

If the Court holds that to take Jurisdiction there must be a controversy between ^[[citizens of]] different states, or between a citizen of a foreign state and a citizen of one of the states, and we have proved that an Indian is neither a citizen of the United States nor of any foreign state then the federal court has no jurisdiction.

Third:-
Is this a case arising under the constitution,  the laws of the United States or treaties made under their authority; if so, has the District Court or its Judge & Jurisdiction of such a case?

The Judicial power of the United States extends to cases arising under the laws of

245

[[in margin]] 345 [[/in margin]]