The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-03-06
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

lo2s 1929. 1885, 1882, 1854, 1885, 1882 1o4a, 1o44
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
WASHINGTON, b. c., March s. 1873.
No. 90. Kennecott ct al. vs.. Board of Supervisors
OF Wayne County-Appeal from the Circuit Court
for the Southern District Of Ihnois.-The Court in
this case affirm decree of the Court below dis
missing the bill of Kennec0tt and others, claiming
Railroad Company, brought to foreclose mort
gage executed by the county upon 100 900 acres Of
swamp lands belonging to 1t to secure payment Of
the bonds. Mr.. Justice Hunt delivered the opinion.
No. 176. Mitchell ct al. VS.. Hawley-Appea; from
the Circuit Court for Massachusetts, --This was q
bill for an alleged infringement OF patent for ma
chimes used in making hats after extension. The
question was whether parties licensed to manufac
ture and use the patent for the original term
Sv the sale Of the machines the rirht to se them
after the expiration Of the term. The Court ruled
they could not and the decree was against the
appellants for such use. This Court affirm the de-
cree helding that 1t for the appellants to look
to the title Of their vendor and to know what
rights lie could convey. Mr.. Justice Clifford de-
hvered the opinion. e.t
No. 429. Huntington and First National Bank Of
Washington vs.. State OF Texas, and 43O, latter
against the former.-Writs Of error to the Supreme
Court Of the District of COlumbia.-The question In
w o e
redeemable or overdue, from a party receiving
them before maturity, stands in the place OF the
party from whom IL took, and Is entitled to the
bonds and their redemption, Notwithstanding the
fact that they were not endorsed by the Governor
hold that the bank stands in the place and holds
the title OF the party taking before maturity, and
State is entitled to the bonds, although they were
not endorsed by the Governor Judgment reversed,
the Chief Justice delivering the opinion.
No. l16 Sweeny vs. United States-Appeal from
rUt.g.
vices OF the steamer Benjamin Franklin during
the war. The decision Is that as the owner re-
ceiyed certain sum for the use OF the steamer
from DISTURBING oficer of the government, and
and receipt 10 q bar to claim for further award Mr..
Justice clifford delivered the opinion.
Nos. 10s and l09 Duncan ct al. VS.. Jaudon, and
National City Bank vs.. same-Appeas from the
Circuit Court for the Southern District OF New
man a Co. and the bank for certain bonds placed
with them, as collateral to Jeans, by the trustee OF
iau"oh inc Dona hos belonging 20 yaadon ana the
stock, but which proved bad investment. The
claim was that the pledge by the trustee unau-
thoriZed and might have been SO known TO the
banks had they exercised due diligence. This
Court afirm the Judgment, Mr.. Justice Davis dc.
livering the opinion. Ht
No. 90. Town of Grand Chute vs. winegar-Error
to the Circuit Court for the Eastern District OF Wis.,
consin.-This was q recovery on certain bonds
issued by the town OF Grand Chute to the Wolf
River Plank Road Company. This Court hold that
conformity to the act authorizing the issue of
the bonds In not holding special election, nor
publication OF act &C., precludes recovery upon
them, and the Judgment Is reversed. Mr. Justice
Hunt delivered the opinion.
No. TO- Same vs.. Same ct al.-Appeal from the
same Court.-This was an aflrmance OF q decree
Diminishing the complaint in equity because the !,
complainant was not the real party In interest.
Mr.. Justice Hunt delivered the opinion.
No. 900. Peabody vs. Droughn; 2s1, Same w.
Mason ct al; 2o2 Same VS.. stork ct al.-writs OF
Error the Circuit Court for the Middle District Of
whether, II copy OF the survey OF dtstileries is
not delivered to the distilers In accordance with
bound to pay tax on eighty per cent Of their pro-
duclng capacity, although they might in fact know
the results Of the survey. The Court below held
that the neglect TO serve copy Of the survey re-
leased the distlllers from the obligation imposed by
the act and that judgment Is here afirmcd MI.
Justice Miller delivering the opinion.
No. la. Carpenter vs. Longon-Appeal from the
Circuit Court for Colorado Terrtory--This was the
reversal Ola judgment in foreclosure suit brought
by Carpenter and which was against him, the
Court holding that the Court below erred Ia finding
that Carpenter had realized on cOllaterals placed
with him when he received the mortgage, which
had not been accounted for. Mr.. Justice Swayne
delivered the opinion.
No. 1l3. Branson ct al. vs. wirth-Error to the
Circuit Court for the Southern District Of Illinois,
This was suit in ejectment to recover quarter
eectl0n Oh l2nd IN fulton county, ILLINOIS, brought
by wirtn. The Judgment was for wirth under
pateut granted in 1858 TO one Leonard, through
whom he derived title, and which was sustained BY
the Court. This Court hold that by reason OF q
patent granted in 1918 to one Egerton, for the
land In controversy, from whom title was claimed
by Brans0n, there was an outstanding title which
defeated Wrths claim, and that by reason OF this
fact and other matters OF record Affecting the
Mr.. Justice Bradley delivered the opinion.
No. q. Mahan vs. United States-Appeal from the
Court of Claims.-This was the afnrmance Of a
Judgment Of the Court OF Claims to the effect that
there never had been legal transfer by mortgage
OF certain cotton captured by the United States.
and for the proceeds OF which suit was brought by
the owner or the plantation on which II was grown
to the claimant; and that the claimant had there
fore no title. Mr.. Justice Miller delivered the
opinion.
No. Ill. Hamlin va. Hawkins-Error to the Cir
cult Court for the Eastern District OF Wisconsin,
Affirmed by divided Court.
No. 255. Bank ofNew Orleans vs. Caldwell-Error
TO the circuit Court for Louisiana.-Anlrmed. No
opinion.
No. o. Diaz vs. United States-Appeal from the
Circuit Court Of CaifOrna.-Affrmed. r
No: 1l9. Olcott vs.. wilkes-Appeal from the Cir
cult Court OF North Carolna.-Ahirmcd.
No. 200. Smith vs.. McCool-Error to the Circuit
Court Tor Northern District OF Ahnois.-Aflrmed.
No. 1o4. Smith vs. Adseh ct al-Error to the su.
preme Court or Illfhois.-Wrt OF error dismissed.
No. 1913. Gardner vs. Goodyear Dental Vulcante
Company-Appeal from the Circuit Court for
Rhode Island.-Dismissed.
No. 4l4. Graham vs.. Norton-Error to the Circuit
Court for Louisiana. nded, with directions TO
dismiss for want OF jurisdiction.
No.629. Clifton ct al. vs. Mayor, &C. Of Mobile
Error to the Supreme Court OF Alabama.-Dis-
missed.
COURT or APPEALS CALENDAR.
The following ia the calendar Of the Commission