137 U. 8. 355-370

Notes on U. S. Reports.

1066

036, 13 U. S. App. 68, and Union Pac. Ry. v. Novak, 61 Fed. 580, 15 U. S. App. 400.

Miscellaneous.- Howard v. United States, 75 Fed. 992, 43 U. & App. 678, 34 L. R. A. 514, and n., Northern, etc., Ry. v. Forbis, 15 Mont. 455, 48 Am. St. Rep. 694, 39 Pac. 571, and Kelly v. Clark, 21 Mont. 338, 69 Am. St. Rep. 691, 53 Pac. 970, 42 L. R. A. 634.

137 U. S. 355–365, 34 L. 703, CENTRAL, ETC., BANK v. UNITED STATES.

National bank must include in its returns, under revenue act of 1864, moneys retained for State tax, p. 364.

Internal revenue.- Liability of banks to account, under war revenue act of 1864, stated, p. 364.

Internal revenue.- Bank paying too much war revenue tax, under act of 1864, denied recovery, p. 364.

Not cited.

137 U. S. 366-370, 34 L. 706, HANDLEY v. STUTZ.

Corporations. Suit for unpaid stock subscriptions must be by one or more creditors for all, not himself exclusively, p. 369.

Approved in First Nat. Bank v. Peavey, 75 Fed. 157, bill must be framed for benefit of all; Compton v. Jesup, 68 Fed. 299, 31 U. S. App. 486, arguendo, co-lienholders should be parties to suit of any one of them.

Distinguished in Tatum v. Rosenthal, 95 Cal. 132, 29 Am. St. Rep. 98, 30 Pac. 137, objection to misjoinder cannot be taken, unless complaint shows there are other creditors.

Circuit Court may admit other creditors, in suit for unpaid stock subscription, where amount of original claim gives jurisdiction, p. 369.

Approved in Alkire Grocery Co. v. Richesin, 91 Fed. 84, in creditors' bill, amount claimed by, creditors determines jurisdiction, and not amount held by debtor's assignee; Thornton v. Tison, 95 Ala. 592, 10 So. 640, distributees' shares of estate may be less than $500.

Distinguished in Holt v. Bergevin, 60 Fed. 2, claims of employees for services are separate; Putney v. Whitmire, 66 Fed. 387, in creditors' bill, interests are separate.

Appellate court has jurisdiction, where fund decreed exceeds $5,000, though some creditors get less, p. 369.

Approved in New Orleans, etc., Ry. v. Parker, 143 U. S. 52, 36 L. 68, 12 S. Ct. 367, bondholders, under mortgage, have common Interest.

Distinguished in Clay v. Field, 138 U. S. 480, 34 L. 1050, 11 S. Ct. 425, action for widow's dower is separate and distinct from claim of SOE.

1067

Notes on U. S. Reports.

137 U. 8. 370-388

137 U. S. 370-386, 34 L. 708, HAMILTON v. HOME INS. CO. Contract for payment of money on contingency, making arbitrator's award final as to amount, but not liability, is valid, p. 385.

Reaffirmed in Kahnweiler v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 57 Fed. 564, Connecticut, etc., Ins. Co. v. Hamilton, 59 Fed. 263, 16 U. S. App. 366, Mutual, etc., Ins. Co. v. Alvord, 61 Fed. 755, 21 U. S. App. 228, Manchester Fire, etc., Co. v. Koerner, 13 Ind. App. 378, 55 Am. St. Rep. 235, 40 N. E. 1111, Lesure Lumber Co. v. Insurance Co., 101 Iowa, 522, 70 N. W. 763, Dee v. Key City, etc., Ins. Co., 104 Iowa, 170, 73 N. W. 594, Chapman v. Rockford Ins. Co., 89 Wis. 578, 62 N. W. 424, 28 L. R. A. 407, and dissenting opinion in Railway Co. v. Burke, 54 Ohio St. 131, 43 N. E. 288.

Insurance policy, forbidding action thereon, until after arbitration, makes that a condition precedent, p. 385.

Approved in Mutual, etc., Ins. Co. v. Alvord, 61 Fed. 755, 21 U. S. App. 228, condition precedent must expressly or impliedly prohibit suit; Harrison v. German, etc., Ins. Co., 67 Fed. 585, where company makes appraisement different from policy, it waives condition precedent; Kahnweiler v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 67 Fed. 486, 32 U. S. App. 230, and Philip Schneider Brewing Co. v. American, etc., Mach. Co., 77 Fed. 145, 40 U. S. App. 382, non-performance of condition precedent must be specially pleaded; Manchester Fire, etc., Co. v. Koerner, 13 Ind. App. 378, 55 Am. St. Rep. 235, 40 N. E. 1111, condition precedent waived by company itself adjusting loss; Lesure Lumber Co. v. Insurance Co., 101 Iowa, 522, 70 N. W. 763, provision for award, upon disagreement, is not condition precedent, unless demanded; Zalesky v. Home Ins. Co., 102 Iowa, 620, 71 N. W. 568, appraisement, if demanded, is condition precedent; Dee v. Key City, etc., Ins. Co., 104 Iowa, 170, 73 N. W. 594, arbitration is condition precedent, where payment is not due until sixty days after award.

Insurance. If arbitration not a condition precedent, it is collateral, and separately, actionable only, not a bar, p. 385.

Reaffirmed in Smith v. Preferred, etc., Acc. Assn., 51 Fed. 523, and Harrison v. German, etc., Ins. Co., 67 Fed. 589. Approved in Hudmon v. Cuyas, 57 Fed. 358, 13 U. S. App. 443, to bar, plea must show that arbitration was condition precedent; Connecticut, etc., Ins. Co. v. Hamilton, 59 Fed. 260, 16 U. S. App. 366, affirining S. C., 46 Fed. 45, 46, joint demand of arbitration by several companies cannot take place of separate demand; Burke v. Pierce, 83 Fed. 97, 55 U. S. App. 63, agreement that arbitration shall be final, to be a defense, must have been acted on; Summerfield v. North, etc., Ins. Co., 62 Fed. 259, insurer's refusal to arbitrate, except upon terms not stipulated, is no bar to suit; Read, etc. v. State Ins. Co., 103 Iowa, 313, 64 Am. St. Rep. 185, 72 N. W. 667, provision for arbitration on disagreement, is collateral; Baillie v. Western Assur. Co., 49 La. Ann. 661, 21 So. 737, denial of all

137 U. S. 386-395

Notes on U. S. Reports.

1068

liability precludes setting up plea of want of appraisement, as condition precedent; Kahn v. Traders' Ins. Co., 4 Wyo. 452, 62 Am. St. Rep. 61, 34 Pac. 1068, where insurer denies all liability, he cannot plead failure of condition precedent; Connecticut, etc., Ins. Co. v. Hamilton, 59 Fed. 268, 270, 271, 272, 16 U. S. App. 366, arguendo, holding terms of policy were not condition precedent; Cole Mfg. Co. v. Collier, 91 Tenn. 529, 30 Am. St. Rep. 900, 19 S. W. 673, arguendo, provision in building contract, for submission upon disagreement, held not condition precedent; Zalesky v. Home Ins. Co., 102 Iowa, 620, 71 N. W. 568, condition precedent must prohibit bringing suit till after award.

Distinguished in Chapman v. Rockford Ins. Co., 89 Wis. 578, 62 N. W. 424, 28 L. R. A. 407, when appraisal is demanded upon disagreement, it is condition precedent; Connecticut, etc., Ins. Co. v. Hamilton, 59 Fed. 264, 16 U. S. App. 366, arguendo, holding arbitration was made condition precedent.

137 U. S. 386-392, 34 L. 731, THE PROPELLER BURLINGTON. Appeal.- Supreme Court has jurisdiction, where award in admiralty over $5,000, though each claimant received less, p. 391. Reaffirmed in The City of Alexandria, 44 Fed. 361. Appellate jurisdiction is not divested, libellant having recovered more than $5,000, by another suit reducing his pro rata, p. 391. Admiralty appeal is limited to law questions in record, bill of exceptions, and sufficiency of findings for decree, p. 391.

Towage contract does not create common carrier's liability, and negligence or unskillfulness must appear, p. 391.

Reaffirmed in The J. P. Donaldson, 167 U. S. 603, 42 L. 294, 17 S. Ct. 953, and The E. E. Simpson, 60 Fed. 452, 455, 23 U. S. App. 265.

Towage. On facts, tug held liable for want of caution, p. 392. Miscited in Avery v. Burrall, 118 Mich. 676, 77 N. W. 274.

137 U. S. 393-395, 34 L. 713, IN RE LANCASTER.

Habeas corpus refused by. Supreme Court, where no application first made to Circuit Court issuing indictment, p. 395.

Approved in In re Chapman, 156 U. S. 217, 39 L. 403, 15 S. Ct. 333. Supreme Court refuses to interfere with proceedings in courts of District of Columbia, in advance of final determination; In re Hacker, 73 Fed. 469, prisoner will not be discharged, unless indictment fails to charge crime, or circumstances require early action; In re Peraltareavis, 8 N. Mex. 33, 41 Pac. 539, where court has jurisdiction of defendant and offense, court will not review on habeas corpus.

Distinguished in In re Greene, 52 Fed. 106, on warrant to remove to another district, Circuit Court should examine indictment.

1000

Notes on U. S. Reports.

137 U. 8.395-423

137 U. 8. 395-408, 34 L. 714, FOND DU LAC COUNTY ▼. MAY. Patents. If void, court should so instruct jury, p. 403.

Reaffirmed in Market, etc., Ry. v. Rowley, 155 U. S. 625, 39 L 287, 15 S. Ct. 226, Overweight Elevator Co. v. Improved, etc., Hall Assn., 94 Fed. 161, and Singer Mfg. Co. v. Brill, 54 Fed. 382.

Patents. May patent double door, for protection of jailer, held not patentable novelty, p. 406.

Followed in May v. Juneau Co., 137 U. S. 409, 411, 34 L 729, 11 8. Ct. 102, 103.

Patents.

Grating, with old device for swinging jail door, held not a patentable combination, p. 407.

Reaffirmed in May v. Juneau Co., 137 U. S. 409, 411, 34 L. 730, 11 8. Ct. 102, 103. Applied in National, etc., Mach. Co. v. John R. Williams Co., 44 Fed. 193, 12 L. R. A. 109, and n., to cigar-bunching machine; Potts v. Creager, 44 Fed. 685, to clay separator; Campbell v. Bailey, 45 Fed. 565, to catch-basin covers.

Distinguished in Singer Mfg. Co. v. Brill, 54 Fed. 382, sewingmachine treadle held not void on its face, though elements old; whether it produced new result, was for jury.

137 U. S. 408-411, 84 L. 729, MAY v. JUNEAU COUNTY. Patents. May's jail-door patent held invalid, p. 411.

Patents.- Want of patentability is available defense, though not set up in answer or plea, p. 411. .

Not cited.

137 U. S. 411-423, 34 L. 724, UNION, ETC., BANK v. GILLESPIE. Bank receiving factor's deposit, known to be principal's money, cannot apply same to payment of factors' overdraft, p. 415.

Distinguished in Adams v. Citizens' Bank, 84 Fed. 272, 55 U. S. App. 519, bank advancing to consignor has no equitable lien on stock, or proceeds of sale by consignor's commission men.

Factors.- One receiving from factor for debt, money known to be his principal's, must account therefor, p. 419.

Followed in Union, etc., Bank v. Moore, 79 Fed. 706, 49 U. S. App. 156, and Citizens' Bank v. Adams, 84 Fed. 270. Approved in Clemmer v. Drovers, etc., Bank, 157 Ill. 216, 41 N. E. 731, bank cannot apply deposit to factor's debt, though it knows not who is the consignor; Johnson v. Payne, etc., Bank, 56 Mo. App. 263, bank cannot apply deposit to pay guardian's debt; Rock Springs, etc., Bank v. Luman, 6 Wyo. 141, 42 Pac. 878, bank cannot apply proceeds of mortgaged chattels to its use; Munnerlyn v. Augusta Bank, 88 Ga. 338, 30 Am. St. Rep. 162, 14 S. E. 555, arguendo, it is not conversion for trustee to deposit money, to his credit as agent. Distinguished in Randolph v. Allen, 73 Fed. 42, 41 U. S. App. 117, bank not required to exercise supervisory control over deposit

137 U. S. 423-435

Notes on U. S. Reports.

1070

known for special purpose; Rock Springs, etc., Bank v. Luman, Wyo. 164, 42 Pac. 886, dissenting opinion, majority holding supra. Equitable owner of moneys in bank, in another's name, may sue bank in equity therefor, p. 420.

Reaffirmed, Clemmer v. Drovers, etc., Bank, 157 Ill. 217, 41 N. E. 732, Duckett v. Baltimore Bank, 88 Md. 20, 41 Atl. 163, Cady v. South Omaha Bank, 46 Neb. 763, 65 N. W. 909, Cady v. South Omaha Bank, 49 Neb. 129, 68 N. W. 359. Approved in San Diego Co. v. California Nat. Bank, 52 Fed. 62, county may recover from receiver, deposit by its treasurer, marked "special.”

137 U. S. 423-435, 34 L. 719, BUSELL TRIMMER CO. v. STEVENS. Patents.- Orcutt's rotary cutter, combining old elements, without new result, is not patentable, p. 433.

Approved in Ansonia Co. v. Electrical Supply Co., 144 U. S. 19, 86 L. 330, 12 S. Ct. 604, insulated electric conductor; National, etc., Mach. Co. v. John R. Williams Co., 44 Fed. 192, 12 L. R. A. 109, and n., Campbell v. Bailey, 45 Fed. 565, catch-basin covers; Johnson Co. v. Pacific, etc., Mills Co., 47 Fed. 591, street-railroad rails limited to form described; Johnson Co. v. Tidewater Steel Works, 50 Fed. 94, method of rolling rails; Vulcan Iron Works v. Smith, 62 Fed. 449, 15 U. S. App. 577, band-saw mills.

Distinguished in New Departure Bell Co. v. Belven, etc., Mfg. Co., 64 Fed. 864, a device which had been desired, is not anticipated by futile attempts.

Patents.- Orcutt rotary cutter shows great mechanical skill, but no original thought, p. 435.

Distinguished in Rubber Tire, etc., Co. v. Columbia, etc., Wheel Co., 91 Fed. 990, if successful and new result is accomplished it is invention.

Patents.- Improvement in degree only, but accomplishing same object, is not patentable, p. 435.

Approved in Bowman v. De Gaw, 60 Fed. 912, improvement in method of making flags; Electric Ry. v. Jamaica, etc., R. Co., 61 Fed. 673, electric railway; MacKnight v. M'Niece, 64 Fed. 118, artificial pavement; Ferris v. Batcheller, 70 Fed. 715, substitution of cord or tape for thread to fasten buttons, is not invention; Klein ▼. Seattle, 77 Fed. 204, 44 U. S. App. 741, insulating pins; William Schwarzwælder Co. v. Detroit, 77 Fed. 892, folding chair; Gibbon v. Lower, etc., Rounder Co., 79 Fed. 327, 39 U. S. App. 554, sole cutting machine; Frederick R. Stearns Co. v. Russell, 85 Fed. 230, 54 U. S. App. 617, pill-dipping device; Christy v. Hygeia, etc., Saddle Co., 93 Fed. 970.

Distinguished in Rubber Tire, etc., Co. v. Columbia, etc., Wheel Co., 91 Fed. 990.

Patent cannot cover function not deemed material, nor claimed as new, p. 435.