ACCEPTANCE OF A RESIGNATION. See Officer of the Army. ACCOUNTING. See Mortgage, 3; Swamp and Overflowed Lands, 1.
ACTION, RIGHT OF. See Assignee in Bankruptcy, 1; Conditions Sub- sequent.
ACTION FOR MONEY. See Jurisdiction, 1.
1. A ship in tow of a steam-tug, each having its own master and crew, collided with and sunk a steam-dredge lying at anchor at a proper place, displaying good signal-lights, and having competent lookouts stationed on her decks. The tug and the ship having been libelled and seized, the former gave a stipulation for value for $16,000. Both were found to be at fault; and the court below entered a decree awarding the libellants $24,184.57 damages, with interest and costs, and directing that one half of the amount be paid by the ship, and the remaining half by the stipulators for the tug. Held, that the decree should be modified so as to further provide that any balance of the moiety decreed against either vessel, which the libellants shall be unable to collect, shall be paid by the other, or by her stipu lators, to the extent of her stipulated value beyond the moiety due from her. The “ Virginia Ehrman” and the “ Agnese,” 309. 2. A steamboat collided with and sunk a schooner towed by a tug. The owner of the schooner and the owner of her cargo severally libelled the steamboat and tug, both of which were found to be in fault. Held, that each libellant was entitled to a decree against each of the offending vessels for a moiety of his dainages, and for interest and costs, with a proviso that if either of said vessels was unable to pay such moiety, then he should have a remedy over against the other vessel for any balance thereof which might remain unpaid. The "City of Hartford" and the " Unit," 323.
3. The Alabama and the Game-cock (92 U. S. 695) and The Virginia Ehrman and the Agnese (supra, p. 309) reaffirmed. Id.
AID AND COMFORT TO THE REBELLION. See Rebellion, The, 1-4.
The provision in the Constitution of Alabama, which declares that "cor- porations may be formed under general laws, but shall not be created by special acts, except for municipal purposes," does not prohibit the legislature from passing a special act changing the name of an existing railroad corporation, and giving it power to purchase ad- ditional property. Wallace v. Loomis, 146
ALLEGIANCE. See Rebellion, The, 1-4.
AMNESTY. See Rebellion, The, 3, 4.
APPEAL. See Practice, 8.
ARMY. See Criminal Law; Officer of the Army.
ARTICLES OF WAR. See Criminal Law, 1.
ASSIGNEE IN BANKRUPTCY. See Judgment in Personam; Mort- gage, 3.
1. Where cotton was captured by the military forces of the United States and sold, and the proceeds were paid into the treasury, the claim of the owner against the government constitutes property, and passes to his assignee in bankruptcy, though, by reason of the bar arising from the lapse of time, it cannot be judicially enforced. Erwin v. United States, 392.
2. The act of Congress of Feb. 26, 1853 (10 Stat. 170), to prevent frauds upon the treasury of the United States, applies only to cases of voluntary assignment of demands against the government. The passing of claims to heirs, devisees, or assignees in bankruptcy is not within the evil at which it aimed.
ASSIGNMENT. See Assignee in Bankruptcy, 2; Claims against the United States.
AUTREFOIS CONVICT. See Criminal Law, 5.
AWARD. See Referees, 4.
BAD FAITH. See Bailment, 1; Contracts, 4.
1. Forty-four record-books, some deeds, mortgages, and other papers of a county having been stolen, the county officers deposited $3,500 in the hands of A., upon condition that it should, upon the return of the stolen property, be paid to the person causing the return. It was also stipulated that the failure to "deliver some small paper or papers" should not invalidate the agreement. Within the time limited, A. received a paper, signed by the deputy-sheriff of the county, acknowledging the receipt of the record-books, "also papers
and small index-books." He thereupon paid the money to the per- son presenting the receipt. The county then brought suit against A to recover the money, alleging that some of the books were, upon their return, in such a damaged condition as to be rendered com- paratively worthless, and that he had, therefore, not performed his contract. Held, that A., being a simple bailee of the money de- posited in his hands, without compensation, was not, in the absence of bad faith on his part, responsible for the condition of the prop- erty at the time of its return. Eldridge v. Hill, 92.
2. An incorporated company entered into a contract with A., the owner of letters-patent for an explosive compound called "dualin," whereby he undertook to manufacture it, as required by the company from time to time, in quantities sufficient to supply the demand for the same, and all sales produced or effected by the company. The con- tract provided that all goods he manufactured should be consigned to the company for sale, and all orders he received should be trans- ferred to it to be filled; that the parties should equally share the net profits arising from such sales, and equally bear all losses by explo- sion, or otherwise, so far as the loss of the dualin was concerned, but the company assumed no risk on A.'s building or machinery; that the company should, semi-monthly, advance to him, on his requisition, a stipulated sum, for paying salaries, for labor, and for his personal account, and such further reasonable sums as might be required for incidental expenses of manufacture; and should furnish him all the raw materials needed to manufacture said explosive in quantities sufficient to supply the demand created by the company, or should advance the money necessary to purchase them, the said advances and the cost of such materials to be charged to him against the manufactured goods to be by him consigned to the company. Certain of the materials which had been furnished him under the contract, and others which he had purchased with money advanced by the company, were seized upon an execution sued out on a judg- ment against him in favor of a third party. The company then brought this action, to recover for the wrongful conversion of the materials so seized. Held, that the delivery of them by the com- pany to A. did not create a bailment, but that, upon such delivery, they, as well as those purchased by him with the money so advanced, became his sole property, and, as such, were subject to the execu- • tion. Powder Company v. Burkhardt, 110.
BANKRUPTCY. See Assignee in Bankruptcy.
1. In order to invalidate, as a fraudulent preference within the meaning of the Bankrupt Act, a security taken for a debt, the creditor must have had such a knowledge of facts as to induce a reasonable belief of his debtor's insolvency. It is not sufficient that he had some cause to suspect such insolvency. Grant v. National Bank, 80.
2. The sale of a bankrupt's property under proceedings in involuntary bankruptcy cannot be invalidated by the fact that he, before their commencement, had promised to pay in full his debt to a creditor who, at his instance, instituted them. Wallace v. Loomis, 146.
BILL OF EXCEPTIONS. See Jurisdiction, 10.
A paper incorporated in the record, and certified to be a part thereof by the court below, if it has all the requisites of a bill of exceptions, will be considered here as such, although it be otherwise entitled. Her bert v. Butler, 319.
BOND. See Clearance, 1-3; Estoppel, 1; Jurisdiction; Municipal Bonds; Pleading, 2.
1. Where bonds of a corporation, as prepared for issue and sale, promise payment in lawful money, and, as such, were guaranteed by a State, a stipulation that they shall be paid in coin, subsequently indorsed on them by the corporation, in accordance with the requirement of purchasers from it, is supplementary and subsidiary, and binds only the corporation itself. Wallace v. Loomis, 146.
2. Duties imposed upon an officer, different in their nature from those which he was required to perform at the time his official bond was executed, do not render it void as an undertaking for the faithful performance of those which he at first assumed. It will still remain a binding obligation for what it was originally given to secure. Gaussen v. United States, 584.
BREACH. See Condition Subsequent.
BRITISH SUBJECT.
BURDEN OF PROOF. See Infringement, 2; Internal Revenue, 5; Mort- gage, 4; Practice, 6.
CALIFORNIA, CLAIM TO LANDS IN. See Mexican Land-Grants. CAPTURE. See Rebellion, The, 1-4.
CAPTURED AND ABANDONED PROPERTY. See Assignee in Bank- ruptcy, 1; Rebellion, The, 1-4.
CHARTER. See Constitutional Law, 1–7, 14; Jurisdiction; Taxation, Ex- emption from.
CHARTER-PARTY. See Contracts, 2, 8.
'CHROMO-LITHOGRAPHS. See Imports, Duties on, 1.
CIRCUIT JUDGE. See Jurisdiction, 7.
CITIZENSHIP. See Jurisdiction, 8, 9, 10, 12.
CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES. See Assignee in Bankruptcy.
A. employed B. to collect a claim against the United States. Before its allowance, or the issue of a warrant for its payment, he drew, in
CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES (continued).
favor of C., an order on B., payable out of any moneys coming into his hands on account of said claim. B. accepted it, and D. became the holder of it in good faith and for value. A. refused to recognize its validity after the warrant in his favor had been issued, or to indorse the latter. D. thereupon filed his bill against A. and B. to enforce payment of the order. Held, 1. That the order became, upon its acceptance, and in the absence of any statutory prohibition, an equitable assignment pro tanto of the claim. 2. That, under the act of Feb. 26, 1863 (10 Stat. 170, re-enacted in sect. 3477, Rev. Stat.), the accepted order was void, and that D. took no interest in the claim, and acquired no lien upon the fund arising therefrom. Spofford v. Kirk, 484.
1. The third section of the act of May 20, 1862 (12 Stat. 404), autnor- ized the Secretary of the Treasury to require reasonable security that goods should not be transported in vessels to any place under insurrectionary control, nor in any way be used in giving aid or comfort to the enemy, and to establish such general regulations as he should deem necessary and proper to carry into effect-the purposes of the act. Held, that a bond taken by the collector of the port of New York, under regulations established by the Secretary of the Treasury, from a shipper and two sureties, in double the value of the goods shipped, to prevent such transportation and use, comes within the reasonable security specified in said third section. United States v. Mora, 413.
2. The right of the collector to refuse a clearance altogether included that to exact a bond. Such bond, when duly executed, is prima facie evidence that it was voluntarily entered into. Id.
3. Where the conditions of a bond which are not sustainable are sever- able from those which are, the latter hold good pro tanto, and evi- dence to show a breach of them is admissible. Id.
COIN. See Bond, 1.
COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS.
The twenty-first section of the act of Congress of March 2, 1799 (1 Stat. 644), makes it the duty of collectors of customs "to pay to the order of the officer, who shall be authorized to direct the payment thereof, the whole of the moneys which they may respectively receive" by virtue of that act. Held, that payments and disburse- ments of moneys received in his official capacity, if made by direc- tion of the Secretary of the Treasury, are within the range of the duty of a collector of customs. Gaussen v. United States, 584. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE. See Probable Cause, Certificate of.
COLLISION. See Admiralty.
« السابقةمتابعة » |