New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-02-14
THE COURTS.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

THE CLAIMS OF INSURANCE AGENTS FOR COM
MISSION.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 13-The following deci-
son were rendered to day In the United states Supreme
Court:
No. 49, stogg agt The Connecticut Mutual Life Insu
Company the Circuit Court Tor the ds
trct OF Missouri. The question in this cause was,
whether the plaintiff in error entitled to commits
sion on premiums paid on the renewal OF pOnces a.er
his removal agent by the Company In support Of his
csim IL was insisted that by usage OF the Insurance
Companies Throughout the country the renewal cOns-
sions we're paid, after the agent had ceased W %
connected With the Company ana as ong a. tne
express agreement between the agent ana the company
In TINS case that the commissions were TO continue OILY
the Complain This court aairmed that judgment also
finding mat the contract was against the plaint ah
express contract Mr. Justice Miller delivered the
opinion Of the Court.
No. AIS. stoyall for use Of &c. agt Banks.-Error to
the District Court for the Northern District Of Georgia
This was an action OF covenant upon an administrator
distributors OF estate In Georgia formerly belong
ing TO Alfred Embanks deceased. The Court below ex
cauS Which had aGudcated the question at ISSUE hold
ing that II not final decree and gave Judgment for
the defendants error rms Court evefses te Jc1s
which find that certain sum OF money s due from the
defendants TO the ana awards the
TO collect it, is not final decree. IT has never
been doubted, by the Court that such DEGREES are na
THE BOSTON, HARTFORD AND ERIE BANKRUPTCY
STATE RECEIVERS IN BANKRUPTCY-AN IN
JUNCTION MODIFIED
In the United States District Court, yester-
day in the bankruptcy case of James Alden against the
Boston Hartford aud Erie Railroad, Judge BlatchfOrd
gave the following decision. denying the right OF United
states Courts to interfere with receivers appointed by
state Courts unless the title Of such receivers u I'M
peached for some for which 10 mpeachable under
the bankruptcy act:
Az the property the receivers Of the Company must @
the several state Courts which
appointed such receivers aud such reeers were appointed
tho railroads and other property Of he Company before
proceeugs b1nkr1ptcY instituted aul as lhdS
State Of railroads and other prop
possession OF the since Il no M tns our
with such until the title Of the receivers IS
mpesched which mpachabe under Vie hahA
uptcy such title thus npeaehd 10
control o. such railroads an Othe
property such Courts By such receivers under he oes OF
such State
A. 10 the disconnuance Of New-York, in which the
ers appointed d,connuane has the effect 70 revoke
then the Injunction Of this Court does not restrain mem DI
doing ANYTHING ~hch they virtue Of uch appointment ami
such Injunction be vacated mshd II TIE seonnuhce
Of null title which such receivers a1urel
through the proceedings such suit and they still acting
appointment inside in the 10 such suit they mus Or
regarded behalf Of the court ~ which t was ps
ami A. h agents tathsttning the suit IS discontinued
70 proper that the injunction heretofore lssel
herein January 1871 be modified that the making
receivers the contract asd tue giving ~ th
the
Massachusetts, the 2i OF December 1879 SHAH not ne et
taken OF such aud that IN al
other respects sleh Injunction be continued in force