The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-08-31
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.


LIFE Observation-Disclosures or rHx INSURED uros rns
ISSUING roLIcY-IY ANYTHING Is SAID
BIZ rRuA
No 1872 The Etna Life Insurance Company. Of
Hartford, plaintiff in error David rranoe and Lu
cets France. his wife, TO OF Samuel b. Sewage
In Circuit Court for the Eastern district OF
Pennsyvaua-The action assumpsit, to recover
$1,000 the amount Of policy Issued upon The life OF
Andrew j. Chew July, 1868. Tho issuing of the rol
ICY the death OF Chew, and the service Of the neces
sary proofs of his death seriously disputed.
The policy contained the following ciauso:-"And 10
also understood agreed to be the true intent and
meaning hereof that II the proposal, answers, and
declaration made by said Andrew j. Chew, aud bearing
date the 18th day July 1865, and which hereby
made part and parcel OF this policy MS fully AS II herein
rooted and upon the faith OF which this asrcems
is ado shall he found in any respect false or lraudu-
lent, then and in such case this policy shall be
null and void" Tho issuing OF the policy
was preceded by proposal for insurance
which contained a number of questions propoundca TO
Chew by the company, with the answers made by ham,
this at is hereby declared that tho
above correct and true answers 10 the foregoing
questions and 1t Is understood and agreed by the I'M
dcrsgned that the above statements shall form the bA
Sis the tor insurance, aud also that
true fraudulent suppression OF facts IN
regard to party's health neglect pay the
mum before the day becomes due shall render
the poicv null and void and forfeit III payments made
thereun.n Among others the following questions
and answers VIZ :-"Question 4-flhce and date OF
birth OF the party whose life is 10 be nsuredf Born
In 1895, interlined October IS, Gloucester county,
New Jersey. q. 5--Age next birIndsys A. thirty
years y IL Has Tho party over had any OF the follow
ing diseases; If so, how long, and 10 what EXTENT
Palsy. dropsy pap,tation sp,ng OF blood epilepsy,
yellow fever consumption rupture. apopexy, asthma,
conyulsions paralysis bronchitis disease the heart
disease tho lungs insanity, govt nstula Affection
OF the brain, fits. A. None Evidence on both
given to the age Of Chew, tending 10 show
that he thirty years old, or At least thirty
i've years old, when he signed the application. and
upon the question Of his having suffered by rupture
before the submitted to the jury, number Of
REQUESTS charge made 10 the Judge which will
referred to presently In its main features this
bears u close resemblance to that OF Jenries va The
Economical Insurance Company, decided at the last
term Of this (22 Wall, AZ. In that In
this, il insisted that the alsity OF statement
application did not vitate the policy issued
upos it, unless the statement so madc was material to
the risk assumed. The opinion then delivered con-
the following language in answer to that claim
''The pro position at the foundation Of this point IL
this-that the statements and declaration made In the
policy shall This stipulation is not expressed
10 be made as TO important or material ements
only those supposed 10 be material but as 10 all
statements The statements eed NOT como up to the
degree OF warrantcs. They may not be representa-
even, If this term conveys an idea OF affirmation
having any technical character Statements aud
declarations Is the expression-what the applicant
states and what the applicant declares Nothing
be more simple. If he makes any statement in tho
application II must be true. II he makes any dccia-
ration in the application II must be true. faithful
performance of this agreement is made express
condition existence OF liability the part Of
the company" This decision Is reafirmed, ana the
ruling made below on request to charge that II the
deceased although no had been ruptured, was really
not suffering inconvenience from at the time, 1t
obstacle the way of recovery is held erroneous;
aad il Is said this was grave error and must have I'M
posed great strain upon the powers OF the jury Rc
verscd and trial ordered. ME Justice Hunt de-
hvcred the opinion.
BANKRUPTCY JURISDICTION THE COURTS
CONSTRUCTION THE or 1861
No. 1875 William W. Lathrop, assignee IN bankruptcy
OF James w. Adams appellant, VS. Samuel Drake ell al
Appeal the Circuit Court for the Eastern District
oil Pennsylvania The question In tEis case is whether
under the Bankrupt act as passed in 1861 an assignee
tn thar ttt
parties could maintain for the recovery OF assets
in Circuit Court OF the United States in any district
other than that in which the decree OF bankruptcy was
made II not whether the anendatory act of 1874 Us
STAT IFS, Sec 81 validated such suit already
menced. The Jurisdiction OF the Circuit Courts in
OF bankruptcy as conferred by the act OF 1857
WAS twoiold-origina and appelate-the latter beng
exercised in two different modes by petition OF review
and by appeal Of But The enactng clauses
which confer this jurisdiction make zach
direct reference to the Jurisdiction o. the DIS
trict court that It is unnecessary first to
examine the latter jurisdiction. OF this there two
distinct classes; nrsi jurisdiction as court OF bank
. rup,cy The proceedings in bankruptcy initiated
by the petition and ending in the distribution OF as
among the creditors and the discharge refusal
OF discharge OF the bankrupt; secondly, Jurisdiction
as an ordinary OF suits at law equity
brought by against the assignee IN reference 10
alleged property Of the bankrupt or 10 claims alleged
be from or TO him. The language conerrng
this jurisdiction OF the district very broad
and general. 1t is that they shall have original Jurs
dicon their Respective districts IN ali matters and
proceedings in bankruptcy The various branches of
this jurisdiction are afierward specified. ting, how
We're not Tor the words in their respective dtrics
the jurisdiction would extend to oil bankruptcy
arising any where without regard to locality. II is
that these words connne II arising
in the district, but such is not The language. Their
jurisdiction Is confined to their respective districts II
but II extends TO all matters AMI proceedings In
bankruptcy without limit. When the act says that
they shall have jurisdiction In their pecve DISTRICTS
1t means the jurisdiction 10 be exercised IN their
respective districts Each within its own DIS
may exercise the powers conferred but those
powers extend 10 all matters OF bankruptcy wthout
ltvptta inn hAP 1 4 m n au hAr
the act; but they AFFECT only the matters to which
they relate such jurisdiction was conferred upon
District but upon the Circuit courts. The anenda
tory act, II is said removed any ambiguity that may
have existed; but It aid not thereby impress q more
restricted ning upon the language OF tho original
than due TO /; by fair Judicial construction.
On the merits the case 10 said 10 be too plain for
mcnt in favor OF the appellees. Reversed. Mr.. JUS
too Bradley delivered the opinion.
COLLECTION or THE REvESuEs-RrGHr
TO rHK couRrs-rHE STATUTE TO
No. leo william A Cheatham and Adilicia Cheat
ham. his wife, plaintiffs in error vs.. Henry L. Nor
veil Collector OF Internal Revenuc-1u error 10 the
Circuit Court for the Mddle District OF Tennessee
Plaintiffs in error paid to tho defendant, who COL
lector OF internal revenue, the sum $50 074 under
protest. and brought their suit 10 recover The money
on ground that the tax, assessed wa. illegal IL
was assessed as income tax for the year 1864 against
the female plaintiff who was then a widow, named
Acklin. The tax originally assessed amounted to
500, 1876 From this assessment Mrs Acklin appealed
TO the Com issioner OF Internal Revenue who on the
1th October, 1867, rendered his decision setting
that assessment and directing the local
TO make new one anu Ewing hm directions as TO the
principles which II should be made On the 18th of
March, 1865 tho new assessment WA made the
OF $40 OIL 81. THIS sum- with interest and penalty,
was paid at three different times as foows:-April 80
1865, So. 100; Ju% rs. 1865, $50 900; October 90
1865, SIS 275 Total, s32,o7% The present suit for
recovery OF the money so paid
menced By a writ oil summons issued January rs. 1859
The cause being transferred from the court In
which IL was commenced TO the Circuit Court Of tho
United States for the Middle District o. Tennessee that
court on the trial instructed the Jury that the
teen section OF the act OF July ID 1866, imposed
moi
eover and was not merely statute Of limitations
nd as plaintiffs had not brought this SUIT witnin
months IRON The decision Of the Commissioner on
their appeal and had taken appeal from the second
assessment made March Is, 1865 they had right OF
action The soundness OF this construction OF tho
statute il the only question in the case After review
OF the statute IL is SAID that the government has the
r,rbt To prescribe the which II Will sub
jec, itself to the judgment oil he court IN tne CORRECTION