The weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 186?-1869, 1869-05-26

a,T!Sa C1kcuff c6thr ofntoN 81 CHfEr
gusrroE CHASE "a Chief Justice Chase de-
Hyeted she following opinions Saturday last.
The case came iup'o on appeal from the Dis
trict Court Of the United States, for the Dis
tfict of North Carolina .pnk NJ slsigs 3a'f
Etya1 r. Moore d. fSssamsr ocaorlss W
iLorrdM In Admittedly. This is a case in af-
freighfm1eennt." TIE libcllants purchased GER
tain tgoods id New York, which we're ship
ped BY his agent, on the steamer Charles W.
Lord for Wilmington. Bills Of lading were
given ZEN in the usual form by the master ofthe
staass,a,dd.in51 l.a9d sEa hilfaf9 bse 3Aiis#'i34
Before the lading Of the goods had been
completed d writ of attachment was issued
from one Of the courts Of New York in favor
Of a creditor Of tie libellant. Under this
attachment the sheriff seized the goods, not
actually or, board, and levied the writ upon
the remainder Of the goods already in the
hold OF the vessel, as it would occasion great
inconvenience to discharge the cargo for the
purpose Of taking actual possession Of the
goods in the hold. The sheriff consented to
receive stipulation from the master of the
vessel and from the agent Of the libellant,
for the safe return Of the goods from Will
mington to New York, and their delivery
upon arrival to him. '@''l r."
Under these circumstances the steamer
proceeded to Wilmington. where the freight
money was tended by the libellant and de
livery Of the goods demanded. The master
Of the steamer refused compliance with this
demand, and carried the goods to New
York and delivered them to the sheriff in
fultillment of his stipulation. " 80 : ~.
: Subsequently the libellant effected COM
promise with the attaching creditor, and
the goods were delivered in his possession in
New York. P3li'' -''- 't'''s't' y ~
Under these circumstances damages are
claimed by the libel for non delivery Of the
goods at Wilmington according to the bills
of lading. l=,il y. 1"3 .ii' '''i or"
The only question presented for consid-
erution by the Court IS whether the master
of the steamer was excused from compliance
with his contract with the libelIant by &C
ton of the sheriff under the writ o. attach
ment and the stipulation made with him.
Undoubtedly it was the right and duty of
the sheriff, under the writ of attachment, to
seize the goods described in the writ. He
had the right to remove all the goods on
board, so far as such removal was necessary,
to reach, and take possession of those goods.
The authorities cited to us in argument
sufficiently establish the law of New York
to be that the sheriff. instead of pursuing
this course, had right to take from the
master a stipulation for thesafe return ofthe
goods. The time he had possession under
this stipulation was the custody of the
sheriff. He had no more right to deliver
the goods to the libellant at Wilmington
than the sheriff would have had to convey
the goods to that port and make the de-
livery. The right of the creditor in attach
ihcuI VlspidCcu iOI tuC tiulC uCiuS IuC
right of the purchaser and assignee of the
goods. ''f %" %.
1t follows that the master was under no
obligation to deliver the goods when de-
manded by the libellant; on the contrary.
The decree of the District Court must be
reversed; which is ordered accordingly.
80
OPINIONS OF CHIEF JUSTICE CHASE
Chief Justice Chase, Saturday, gave an
opinion in the case of the State and the
Board of Education cs Chas. Dewey, assignee
of the Bank of North Carolina. The main
point was that the Court held that the State,
as stakeholder in the Bank of North Caro-
lima, was not entitled to prove the amount
Of IFS stock in the Bank as debt against the
assets ofthe Bank.
In the matter of the United States rs
John T. Deweese, charged with criminal
abuse Of the franking privilege, the Court
held that the accused was guiltless OF the
charge, and he was therefore honorably ac-
quilted. .r .ti..,,. h.. ..,..i.