42 7 FEDERAL REPORTEILT _
S.ee, also, upon this point, Mayor of Hull v. Ilorncr, Cowp. 110,
deo1ded by Lord NIANSFIELD. ·
These considerations lead to the conclusions-—Fir.st, that the lapse
of time constitutesa good defense to this suit, upon the general prin-
ciples of equity above stated, and which would be administered as
between two citizens litigating in this tribunal; and, second, that the
United States 1S bound by the same law. `
These conclusions render it unnecessary to consider the other im—
portant questions discussed by counsel.
The court, however, deems it proper to say, in view of some re-
marks of the counsel for respondents, that, in its opinion, the official
action of the attorney general in directing that the bill be tiled, can-
not properly be made the subject of adverse criticism. The bill was
filed upon the recommendation of the secretary of the interior, for
the declared purpose of having the questions which were being
pressed upon the attention of the land department in connection
with the claims of the Philbrook heirs, determined by the judicial
department of the government. Those questions are important and
unsettled. An appeal to the courts was, therefore, entirely proper
The demurrer to the bill is sustained; and, unless the complainant
asks leave to amend, there will be a decree for respondents, dismiss-
ing the bill.
Crnnwnnn, J., being interested, took no part in this case. _ V
·· See Speidell v. Henrioi, 15 FED. Rnr. 753, and note, 758.
AnAMs, Trustee, and another, Assigneepv. CRITTENDEN and others}
(Oircait Court, N. D. Alabama. 1881.)
1. INJUNCTION. _
‘ It is neither regular nor proper to issue a perpetual injunction, at the_first
hearing of a cause, where no evidence was taken or considered, and an injunc-
tion so issued will be considered as temporary only.
2. Junrsnrcrrozv rn Bsxxnuvrcr. _
After the property of a bankrupt has been sold and the proceeds received,
and neither the court, nor the assignee, nor the creditors have any further in-
terest in it, the court will not interfere, at the instance of the purchaser, to
prevent, by injunction, parties from asserting any claims they may have, or
pretend to have, against the property in any of the courts of the several
states; and this, notwithstanding no final distribution has been made in the
bankruptcy. The bankrupt court will not interfere where no advantage can
result to the bankrupt’s estate. ‘
Hewitt v. Norton, 1 \Voods, 71, distinguished. `
In Equity. ‘ - ‘
1 Reported by Joseph P. Hornor, Esq., of the New Orleans bar.