SUPREME COURT OF THE CANAL ZONE.

. It appears that one of the appellants, Frank Feuille, as Head of the Department of Law of the Isthmian Canal Commission, caused the following notice to be served upon the respondents and further caused them to be notified that they would be required to remove or destroy the buildings on their property before January 1, 1914, or such buildings would be destroyed. Said notice reads as follows:
ISTHMIAN CANAL COMMISSION.
DEPARTMENT OF LAW.
NOTICE.
DECEMBER 9, 1913.
You are hereby notified that it will be necessary for you to remove from this land, and to remove or destroy this building, before January 1, 1914.
It will be necessary for the Isthmian Canal Commission to destroy this building if it is not removed before January I, 1914.
FRANK FEUILLE,
Head of the Department of Law.
The foregoing notice was given by the appellant, Feuille, it is claimed, in pursuance of the terms of the Executive Order dated December 5, 1913, which order was authorized by the Panama Canal Act of August 24, 1913.
On December 23, 1913, the respondents presented to Hon. W. H. Jackson, Judge of the Second Circuit Court, their bill praying for an injunction against appellants. Thereafter such proceedings were had that on the 31st of January, 1914, the follo-ing order and decree was entered of record.
'he court hereby grants the motion to vacate and set aside the final judgment and decree granting a permanent injunction and the respondents to the bill are allowed two weeks; that is, until February 14, 1914, in which to answer the allegations thereof.
It is further ordered, adjudged and decreed that the defendants, their servants, agents and employees be enjoined and restrained from seizing, destroying or burning the houses and properties of the plaintiffs, or from in any way interfering with the plaintiffs in the management or ownership of their properties until final judgment and decree in said cause or until the further order of this court. However, with leave to the defendant to move to vacate this injunction when a Joint Commission may be organized for the hearing of claims.
From this decree appeal is brought to this court.
The court below in granting the permanent injunction vacated by the above quoted decree, held, among other things, that real property in the Canal Zone could not be taken by the Government unless there was existing opportunity to present the question of compensation for property so taken to the Joint Commission

318