The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-04-07

mical Mutual Life Insurance company-Error 70
the circuit Court ior the District q Missourl.-ln
tais Case II Is neld that where an applicant Tor
insurance npun hts life, WHO was married, when
asked II ne was married or single replied single;
II he mad appned elsewhere for insurance
replied Mo- Sucn replies amounted % lnten.
tlonal deception ana defeated the policy aud
THIS, notwithstanding the TACT tnat the answers
may not have been material 70 the risk
and when. though tney made the appncant
appear better subject Than the truth
woulu have done, inc express contract being that
the company should not 9e deceived, u makes no
difference where deceived, TO It's injury or benefit,
the result IS the same. Affirmed
MT. Justice Hunt delivered tue opinion.
the Supreme Court o. MlssourL--ln TINS case 1t is
hel1 that under the act 81 1886 Were the claimant
presented TO the Board Of Comms1 ners only me
org,nul concession without attempting 70 con-
meet himself with II, the confirmation, II made,
inu ed o tine cement oi the legal representatives,
was made; but where the claimant pronuc d De-
fore the Board, beside the original tt.e evidences
ana the CONFIRMATION q erated as a grant TO the
claimant altaongn ms name was omitted ~ . .ne
No 200. House ct a. VS.. Mullen ct aL-Appeal
from the District Court Tor tile Middle Dlsrict OF
Alabama.-lt Is mere ned mat where me Bill Vers
the piainrff was Jent13e covert from the time she
parted wlh the possession OF ne prop
erty In litigation until within three years
OF the commencement or suit IL cannot
be SAID that she acquiesced in adverse possession
ana tue statute OF limitations Will not run against
ner during that time. Also, tnat the other de-
PENDANTS, Gaining through deed from her wnlcn
she alleges to be void for want oil her Tree viii ana
consent IN making ~, are properly Joined. Re-
Versed. MI. Justice Miller de.Vered the opinion.
No. (origuaD. State OF Texas VS.. Ches.-ln
this case IL IS decided that Chlles, the de endant
NAV, under he act OF Congress, be compelled 10
testify by the State, ana an oruer is mace direct
ing MS deposition 10 be taken. Mr.. Justice
Swayne delivered the opinion.
No. III. Treat ct al. Vs. Jennison-Error to the
Circuit Court Tor the DIS rlct o Caiornia.-Ihe
motion TO set aside the order Of atrmance here
t0lore made In this case denied. The Cnlef JUS
tlce delivered the opinion.
No. 700. Thomas ct al. Woodbridge ct al
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Southern
Dstrlctof Mississippi Is here eaiirmed tnat an
appeal will not lie rom decree dlssolvlng an in-
Junction without dlsmlssing the Dlll Appeal ais
missed. The Chez Jus Ice delivered the oplnion.
In the Supreme Court to-day the following pro-
ceedings look place:-
No. 3 (orgnaI. The State OF Florida, complain
ant, VS. Il. q. Anderson ct aL-The motion oil Hol-
land 10 discharge he receiver was argued by Mr..
Matt II. carpenter IN support OF the same and ny
Mr.. Ii. Bsoee, Mr.. W. W. MdcFarland and Mr.. w.
w. Buyce III opposition thereto.
No. 1S4 tAsslgnedl. James +. French ct al,
appellant, vs.. Alexander Hay, administrator, &C.,
&c.
No. 800 (Assignedl. Robert S. French, trustee,
appellant, vs.. Joseph B. stewart ct al.-Tne
argument OF these causes was commenced by MI.
w. W. Willoughoy, oil counsel for the appellants.
Adjourned until to- morrow.