New York.
South Carolina.
See JURISDICTION, A, 5;
MUNICIPAL BOND, 1.
See TAX AND TAXATION, 1.
See ASSIGNMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF CRED-
ITORS, 3, 4;
MUNICIPAL BOND, 3.
See EQUITY, 1.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, A, 7.
See BILL OF EXCHANGE;
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, B, 1;
MECHANICS' LIEN, 2.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, A, 6.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, A, 10.
See ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREditors, 1.
See RIPARIAN OWNER, 3.
MAILS, TRANSPORTATION OF.
The postal appropriation act of July 12, 1876, c. 179, fixed a rate of pay
to railroads for carrying the mails, and provided that roads constructed
in whole or in part by a land grant, conditioned that mails should be
transported at a rate to be fixed by Congress, should receive only 80
per cent of that rate. As applied to a line of road a part of which only
was constructed with such aid, the department held, and acted in accord-
ance therewith for many years, that it was entitled to the percentage
pay for the portion of the line so constructed, and to full pay for the
remainder. Subsequently, the Department reversed this construction,
and claimed that the mails should be carried over the whole line at the
reduced rate, and it accordingly withheld from sums due for current
transportation not only the 20 per cent thereon, but a sufficient amount
settle claims for past transportation on that basis. The railroad
company sued to recover the pay withheld. The Court of Claims gave
judgment in its favor, and this court affirms that judgment. United
States v. Alabama Great Southern Railroad Co., 615.
1. Mandamus will not lie to compel a railroad corporation to build a station
at a particular place, unless there is a specific duty, imposed by statute,
to do so, and clear proof of a breach of that duty. Northern Pacific
Railroad Co. v. Dustin, 492.
2. A petition for a mandamus to compel a railroad corporation to perform
a definite duty to the public, which it has distinctly manifested an in-
tention not to perform, is rightly presented in the name of the State,
at the relation of its prosecuting attorney, and without previous de-
3. The Northern Pacific Railroad Company (whose charter authorized it
to locate, construct and maintain a continuous railroad from Lake
Superior to Puget Sound, "by the most eligible route, as shall be deter-
mined by said company," within limits broadly described, and directed
that its road should "be constructed in a substantial and workmanlike
manner, with all the necessary draws, culverts, bridges, viaducts, cross-
ings, turnouts, stations and watering places, and all other appurte-
nances,") constructed its railroad through the county of Yakima, and
stopped its trains for a while at Yakima City, then the county seat
and the principal town in the county; but, on completing its road four
miles further to North Yakima, a town which it had laid out on its
own land, established a freight and passenger station there, and ceased
to stop its trains at Yakima City. Thereupon a writ of mandamus
was applied for to compel it to build and maintain a station at Yakima
City, and to stop its trains there. Afterwards, and before the hearing,
Yakima City rapidly dwindled, and most of its inhabitants removed to
North Yakima, which became the principal town in the county, and
was made by the legislature the county seat; there were other stations
which furnished sufficient facilities for the country south of North
Yakima; the earnings of this division of the road were insufficient to
pay its running expenses; and the passenger and freight traffic of the
people living in the surrounding country, considering them as a com-
munity, would be better accommodated at North Yakima than at
Yakima City. Held, that a writ of mandamus should not issue. Ib.
1. A mechanics' lien is a creature of statute, not created by contract, but
by statute, for the use of the materials, work and labor furnished
under the contract, and the contract is presumably entered into in
view of the statute. Van Stone v. Stillwell & Bierce Manufacturing Co.,
2. It is settled law in Missouri that a contractor does not waive his right
to file a mechanics' lien by receiving from the owner of the building a
promissory note for the amount due, payable at a time beyond the
expiration of the period within which he is required to file his lien;
but, within the period within which suit must be commenced to en-
force the lien, the taking of the note merely suspends the right of
action. Ib.
MORTGAGE.
See BANKRUPT, 3.
MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL.
See PRACTICE, 5.
1. A statement, in the bond of a municipal corporation, that it is issued
under the provisions of the act of the general assembly of Colorado of
February 21, 1881, and in conformity with its provisions; that all the
requirements of law have been fully complied with; that the total
amount of the issue does not exceed the limits prescribed by the con-
stitution of that State; and that the issue of the bonds had been
authorized by a vote of a majority of the duly qualified electors of the
county, voting on the question at a general election duty held, estops
the county, in an action by an innocent holder for value to recover on
coupons of such bonds, from denying the truth of these recitals.
Chaffee County v. Potter, 355.
2. When there is an express recital upon the face of a municipal bond that
the limit of issue prescribed by the state constitution has not been
passed, and the bonds themselves do not show that it had, the holder
is not bound to look further. Ib.
3. By virtue of Art. II, sec. 3 of the constitution of Iowa of 1857, which
ordains that "no county, or other political or municipal corporation,
shall be allowed to become indebted in any manner, or for any pur-
pose, to an amount in the aggregate exceeding five per centum on the
value of the taxable property within such county or corporation-to
be ascertained by the last state and county tax lists, previous to the
incurring of such indebtedness," negotiable bonds, in excess of the
constitutional limit, issued by a school district, and sold by its treas-
urer for the purpose of applying the proceeds of the sale to the pay-
ment of the outstanding bonded indebtedness of the district, pursuant
to the statute of Iowa of 1880, c. 132, are void as against one who
purchased them from the district with knowledge that the constitu-
tional limit is thereby exceeded. Doon Township v. Cummins, 366.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, A, 3.
1. Fifty shares of the stock of a national bank were transferred to F. on
the books of the bank October 29. A certificate therefor was made
out but not delivered to him. He knew nothing of the transfer and
did not authorize it to be made. On October 30 he was appointed a
director and vice-president. On November 21 he was authorized to
act as cashier. He acted as vice-president and cashier from that day.
On December 12 he bought and paid for 20 other shares. On January
2 following, while the bank was insolvent, a dividend on its stock was
fraudulently made, and $1750 therefor placed to the credit of F. on its
books. He, learning on that day of the transfer of the 50 shares, or-
dered D., the president of the bank, who had directed the transfer of
the 50 shares, to retransfer it, and gave to D. his check to the order of
D., individually, for $1250 of the $1750. The bank failed January 22.
In a suit by the receiver of the bank against F. to recover the amount
of an assessment of 100 per cent by the Comptroller of the Currency
in enforcement of the individual liability of the shareholders, and to
recover the $1750: Held, (1) in view of provisions of §§ 5146, 5147
and 5210 of the Revised Statutes, it must be presumed conclusively
that F. knew, from November 21, that the books showed he held 50
shares; (2) F. did not get rid of his liability for the $1250, by giving
to D. his check for that sum in favor of D. individually. Finn v.
Brown, 56.
2. A national bank, located in one State, may bring suit against a citizen
of another State, in the Circuit Court of the United States for the
District wherein the defendant resides, by reason alone of diverse citi-
zenship. Petri v. Commercial Nat. Bank, 644.
NAVIGABLE WATERS.
See RIPARIAN Owner, 1, 2, 3.
NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD.
See JURISDICTION, A, 10;
MANDAMUS, 3;
TAX AND TAXATION, 1.
See CAVEAT EMPTOR
CORPORATION.
Persons who jointly purchase land to hold it for a rise in value are not
partners, but are tenants in common, and either party can sue the
other at law for reimbursement of allowances made by him on the
joint account without there having first been a final settlement and
the striking of a balance. Clark v. Sidway, 682.
See ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS, 1.
POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT.
See MAILS, TRANSPORTATION of.
1. In regard to bills of exceptions Federal courts are independent of any
statute or practice prevailing in the courts of the State in which the
trial was had. Van Stone v. Stillwell & Bierce Manufacturing Co., 128.
2. Under the pleadings as framed and the issues as made up in this case
the court was bound to admit evidence. Ib.
3. In the absence of a specification wherein evidence offered was improper
or irrelevant this court is bound to presume that it was properly
admitted. Ib.
4. A matter resting in the discretion of the trial court is not assignable
for error here. Ib.
5. The overruling of a motion for a new trial in the court below cannot
be assigned for error.
6. A general exception to the charge of the court as a whole cannot be
considered here. Ib.
7. It was held that the plaintiff in error had no right to complain of the
action of the court below in allowing a remittitur of $2700.75 on a
verdict of $6700.75; or in allowing the jury to fill up, in open court,
the amount of a verdict which they had signed and sealed, leaving a
blank for the amount. Clark v. Sidway, 682.
If an act of an employé be lawful and one which he is justified in doing,
and which casts no personal responsibility upon him, no responsibility
attaches to the employer therefor. New Orleans & North Eastern Rail-
road Co. v. Jopes, 18.
PROHIBITION, WRIT OF.
See WRIT OF PROHIBITION.
1. This court takes judicial notice of facts concerning the pueblo of San
Francisco, (not contradictory of the findings of the referee in this
case,) which are recited in former decisions of this court, in statutes
of the United States and of the State of California, and in the
records of the Department of the Interior. Knight v. United States
Land Association, 161.
2. It is a settled law that a patent for public land is void at law if the
grantor State had no title to the premises embraced in it, or if the
officer who issued it had no authority to do so; and that the want of
such title or authority can be shown in an action at law. 1b.
3. The power to make and correct surveys of the public lands belongs
exclusively to the political department of the government, and the
action of that department is unassailabie in the courts, except by a
direct proceeding. Ib.
4. In matters relating to the sale and disposition of the public domain,
the surveying of private land claims and the issuing of patents there-
|
