The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-04-17
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
WASHINGTON. April Ia. 1874.

WASHINGTON, April 10. 1878
No. I99 Dair ct al VS.. United States-Error ia
the Circuit Court for the District OF Indiana
This was an action on a dstiliers bond. The de-
fence of the sureties that the bond was signed
by them In blank upon condition that one Cloud
should become joint obgor before the delivery or
the bond; but that 1t was delivered by the princi
pals without obtaining the signature Of Cloud, and
without their knowledge. The District Court found
ior sHe ,an as against the principals ons
that decree, and upon second trial the
verdict was against principals and sureties.
passed out Of the possession OF tho obligors with
their consent, it was not valid. and that having
been by them placed In the hands Of another for
certain purposes the possession OF that other u
their possession. as their agent and those who
acts are within his authority. The government
contends that, as the bond was regular and per.
feet on Its face and actually delivered without q
stipulation, it cannot be avoided the plea here
made. Messrs. Mcdonald ana Butler, for plaintiffs
in error; Assistant Attorney General Hill for gov.
ernment
No. 154. Grape ct al. Va. Kelly, Sheriff OF the City
and County OF New York-Err0r to the New York
Supreme Court.-Thls was proceeding in attach
ment against the ship Arctic, at the suit Of New
York creditor. The assignees Of the owners under
the Massach usetts insolvent laws gave bond pur-
suant to the New York statutes, and recovered
possession Of the ship and the question WAS 10 an
tied to the property The ship was registered a.
FAIR Haven, Conn.,, where all the owners resfdedx
and about fifty days before the attachment the
plaintiffs in error became the assgnees OF the
owners OF an undivided ene-half for the benefit Of
their creditors by proceedings taken in the Court
Of Massachusetts, the ship at the time being at
sea-. The Supreme Court gave the insolvcnt pro-
ceedings in Massachusetts no force ~ to
property beyond tine jurisdiction OF the Court
because the insolvents themselves made no trans
fer holding that as the Court had only Jurisdictions
OF the persons OF the ins0venJs, 1t was necessarE
that they should aid the Court by Joining the trans
fer In order to give 1t any effect abroad This Court
IL n hn nf tha lin
by the lns0vents was vested In CraEo and his ASSOC
ciates by virtue OF the proceedings in the lnso<
vency Court, and that this being the case they
II 1t had gone down In the Pacific seas In which
case they would have been bound to collect the tn-
snrancs and distribute It among the creditors the
Judgment Is reversed. Mr.. Justice Clifford did not
agree with the opinion, but concurred in its con-
illusions. Mr.. Justice Bradley disscnted. Mr.. Jus
tice Hunt delivered the opinion OF the Court.
No. go Carlisle ct al. vs.. United States.-Ap-
peal from the Court OF Claims.-In this case tho
appellants claimed the proceeds OF sixty-ive balea
Of cotton captured by the government. The Court
Of Claims found that they were entitled to recover
unless debarred by having given aid ana cQmiore
lion, held, they being aliens. that they
were not entitled to claim the benefits OF amnesty
and could not, therefore, recover This Court hold
that the amnesty prOcamatlOns Of the President
apply to aliens as well as to citizens and reverse
tho Judgment, directing the Court Of Claims to
enter Judgment for the claimants. Mr.. Justice
Field delivered the opinion.
No. COL Honneronikle vs. Mayor, &C., OF George
town.--Appeal from the Supreme Court Of the Dis
trictof Columbia.-This was the anlrmance Of 4
decree declaring the right OF the old corporation
appellant q tax for certain street improvements.
Mr. Justice Hunt delivered the opinion.