Ex Parte Hitz

Supreme Court of the United States
Ex Parte Hitz, 111 U.S. 766 (1884)
4 S. Ct. 698; 28 L. Ed. 592; 1884 U.S. LEXIS 1832

Ex Parte Hitz

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the ^.pinion of the court. He stated the facts in the foregoing language and continued:

Precisely what the relations of Mr. Hitz to the United States were as' Political Agent of the Swiss Confederation we have not been advised, and on application to the Department of State, made on the suggestion of the court by the counsel in this proceeding, we are informed that the records of the department show nothing upon this subject except a letter from him under date of March,30th, 1868, enclosing his letter of credence, and soliciting an interview with the Secretary of State for its formal presentation; the answer of Secretary Seward according such an interview, and fixing the 2d of April as the time; and a letter from Secretary Fish to Mr. Hitz, under date of June 28th, 1870, informing him that he *768 (the Secretary) did not find in his relations to the United States-any ground for continuing the privilege to him of a free entry of goods imported for his use.

Under these circumstances, as the writ of certiorari, when applied for - by a defendant, is not a writ of right, but discretionary With the court (Bac. Ab. Certiorari A), we deny this application, leaving the parties to such remedies as they may be entitled to elsewhere, or under any other form of proceeding.

Petition dismissed.

Reference

Full Case Name
EX PARTE: HITZ, Petitioner
Cited By
25 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Certiorari โ€” Diplomatic privilege. A writ of certiorari when applied for by a defendant is not a writ of right but discretionary with the court. On arr application by a person indicted for an offence committed while president of a national bank against the provisions of ยง 5209 for certiorari to bring up the indictment on the ground that when the alleged offence was committed he was a political agent of a foreign government, the application- was refused when it appeared that his own government had requested his resignation .prior to the finding of the indictment, although it was not actually given till subsequent thereto, and that the political department of the Government of the United States had refused him the privilege of free entry of goods usually accorded to a diplomatic representative.