The New York herald., 1871-02-07
UNITED STATES SUPREME GO.RT.

Decisions~vir rinia Revolutionary Loan Ger
fncntes Not just Claims Against the Cav
erYment--lhe Authority OF States TO Tax
Horeign Insurance Companies Affirmed.
WASHINGTON Feb. 6, 1871.
The following decisions were rendered to-day in
the United states Supreme Court
No. 2. Ward. Erecu,o,, Us. The Uuited states-
ceeding to recover lortythree loan oiice certif
Gates or The United States iOr $500 each, with IN
ton was dismissed by the Court OF q iaims.
the Court finding that the certificates had
not been duly conalefsigned py a, commits
soner Tor The State or Georgia, by which
State they were issued and charged, as
required by law, and that this endorsement they
presented was not shown to be authorized. 1t was
also held that the fact that interest had been paid
some OF the certifcatcS ior some time did not
raise legal pr sumption that the person endorsing
them had been recognized commissioner 10
sign them. Thls Court now alirms tnat judgment,
Mir. Justice DAVIS delivering the opinion, ana hold
ing that the TACT Of payment o interest did not
bind the government: Ior no purpose TO ratify the
acts OF the alleged commission or lu endorsing the
certificates appeared, and the paper bearing ms Sig
nature was rejected as soon as the attention Of The
proper department. was Called to the subject. The
history OF the issue OF the certificates is examined
at length and the conclusion Is that they are
not just charge on the Treasury of the United
states. Mr. Justice Field dissents, being Of the
opln on that the demand before The court Is a just
obligation Of the United States rs binding as any
part Of the public DEBT of the country.
NO "a. me Lsre,poot ana London FIRE and
the SCrte Of Observation-Disclosures TO the Supreme
Con7J or Massachusetts. Court in this case
affirmed the right of the State Of Massachusetts TO
impose a tax OF .our per cent on all premiums paid
to insurance companies incorporated under the
laws OF foreign countries. The Court also ne!d that
notwithstanding the fact that these companies are
not strictly corporations under the British laws, STILL
having all the attributes OF corporations and hav-
ing conferred upon them all the essential privileges
Of corporations. they must be regarded as such in
this country. Mr.. Justice Miller delivered the opn
ion of the Court
No. 75 Martin US. TRANSFORMATION Company et
dl-ApDedl rom the Circuit court for the District
or WscOnsin-ThiS was q case Of collision, and the
Court below divided the loss holding that the neg
lect causing the accident was mutual. That de-
cree is now affirmed here. Mr. Justice Clifford de-
lvered the opinion.
No. SO. Wing Us. pDedl from the
Circuit court .tor the Northern District or Ne,o
YOrf.-Ths case presented the question whether
the principle upon the same Impression Is made on
different parts of the same Photographic plate by
means OF sliding plate holder IS an old or new
invention. The Court below decided that 1t was in
some years before the alleged invention OF the
appellant and dismissed the bill. The decree dis
missing the bill Is Alarmed here by divided court.
Mr.. Justice Nelson announced the decision.
No. I64. Pdrnteiee rs. Ldcrence-E,TOJ' to the
Supreme court OTIHnOs.-Writ of error dismissed
for want Of jurisdiction, the Court holding that
where the allegation is that State court has sus-
tanned local law claimed TO be in violation OF the
decision could have been arrived at without any
reference TO the particular statute the Is not
one for review In this court on writ OF error. Mr..
Justice Nelson delivered the opinion OF the court.
Herschel v. Johnson, OF Georgia, was admitted to
the bar o. TINS court.