Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-03-21
District Cases IN the u y. Supreme
Court,
SOME 1MPoRrAyr pECrsIoys.

Iu the United States Supreme Court a
number Of important decisions were rem
dertd yesterday In cases appealed from ma
Supreme Colrf Of tie District.
BKsPos siBILIIY OF THE DIsTRIC roR IN
JuRIEs BY BAD srr,erTs
in the case of William Sarnes plaIptlfT in
error, VS.. the District OF Columbia. in error
10 the Supreme Court of the District of ca
lumbia, Mr.. Justice Hunt delivered the
0pip ion of The court reversing the Judgment
Of the general term of the said Supreme
Court, with costs, and remanding the cause
with directions to affirm the Judgment of the
special term upon the verdict. This was an
action 10 recover for injuries sustained in
conseqnence OF the bad repair OF the streets,
and the court held that the old corporation
OF Washington was chargeable with the care
OF the streets and responsible for their con-
dillon; tnat the municipality created under
Inc act establishing the board of public
works, providing for governor legislature
anc succeeded 10 all the duties and responsi,
bilities OF the old corporation, all its depart
ments Delng members, and the whole repre-
sentiDg the authority of Congress, the source
from which the original charter emspated
and all power proceeds. The duty OF keeping
the streets IN repair is unQuestlonable aud
the Municipality is not relieved from ra-
spoDsibility by the fact that the immediafe
charge and direction of the work was under
The board or public works. or because the
governor ard certain other officers were an
poiL I'd by the President. That board was "A
part OF the machinery of the Corporation
and not iDdpendent of IL. The Judgment
below was reversed, with dire ,tions to afiirIn
The Judgment of the special term upon the
verdict obtained Justices Swayne, Eiel l.
Stroi and bradley dissented, being Of The
opinion that the District of Column oia should
rot he responsible for the neglect or omis-
slons OF ofncers IL did not select and could
not control.
In the cases of Charles ID. Maxwell. main.
tln IN error, VS.. the District of Columbia
and Fran els y. Dant. plaintiff In error. VS.
The District of Columbia, in which the same
questions were raised, the judgments below
rrnandp1 NO
trials.
BUILDING ASSOCIATION CASE.
III the case of John w. MOrSell ct al. an
pellants, VS.. tho First National Bank of
Washington, Mr.. Justice Swayne delivered
Tie opinion OF the court, reversing the decree
OF the District Supreme Court, with costs,
ana TemSnding the cause with directions to
override the exceptions to the auditors re-
port, and TO enter a decree in conformity
with the opinion of the court. The facts ia
the case are that in 1861 Morsell bought Ger.
tain real estate and gave q. deed Of trust In
secure the payment of $4,000 (the balance OF
the purchase money!. He was then a mem
Der OF the Washington Co operative Building
Association, and bought advances from time
To time to apply on the purchase money
giving, In 1869, to the association a deed of
tfust 10 cover these and other advances to
the amount OF 900. During the existence
OF TINS trust the bank and Messrs. Skinner q
Co. obtained judgment against MorselI.
Afterwards morsell obtained other advances
from the building association TO the amount
OF $3.50, and on the LIST of March. 1871. he
executed deed of trust 10 cover that aud
future advances to the amount OF $4,000
The whole amount due to the building asso-
clation was g. 900. In September, 1871. a bill
IN equity was filed by the bank, praying that
the property be sold, and after paying tie
DEEDS OF trust 10 apply the balance TO the
Judgments. The property was sold under q
decree In equity, and the net proceeds were
not sufficient TO pay the building associa.
tion. The auditor, in his report, gave pref
erence to the claims of the association, on
the ground that the rule of law in the Dls-
trict was that judgments were not liens upon
an equity OF redemption, which was all that
Moisell had at the time of their rendition.
The bank excepted TO the report of the audi
tor, and the case was heard in General Term
in September, 1873, and the court sustained
the exception of the bank, and directed that
the Judgment be paid before the amount due
10 the building association advanced under
The last deeds. The defendants appealed to
the supreme Court of the United States. and
the main question argued was: Whether q
judgment at law constitutes q lien upon an
equity OF redemption in lands In the District
Mr.. Totten argued the case for the bank and
Mr.. X. h. Elliot and j. j. johnson for the
appellants.
IN THE CASTS OF ALBERT GRANT lay
COOKE & CO.,
and Grant VS.. Rhawn. in which judgments
were given against Grant below. Chief JUS
tlce waite announced the decision affirming
the judgments.