The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-04-06
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

wAsnrScroS, D. G., April Q, 1877.
The following cases argued In the United States
Supreme Court yesterday
No 2ol CloH collector vs. Mason ct al Error the
Circuit Court Tor Nassachu This action ~
recover succession tax paid under protest. The tax
was upon Mason aud Others as successors to tho estate
OF tho widow OF W. r. Mason. and II WAS GAINED that
tho property aid not vest until her DEATH which oc
Cured subsequently 10 October |, 1870. tho date on
which the repeal oi The succession tax took effect and
that the TAX had not accrued at that date TO
como within the saving clause of Tho ACT OF ropeah u
was not Justly collected The Court so held, and tho do
cson Is assigned error where Is urged Lhat u was
within the saving clause. Assistant Attorney General
Smith Tor tho government; George Putnam for defend.
ants IN error
No 2o2 Fate and vito and Whitfield and wife vs.
Norton ct aLAppeal from tho Circuit Court tor the
Eastern district OF Arkansas The questions IN this
whether tho debts created by the admins
traitor Of estate TO Tho appeees wore lawful valid
debts The Court below found them SO, but is
here urged that they wholly unauth when
contracted, aud that the proceedings ~ which the
Judgment was obtained were barred by the statute Of
limitations Rose l. Garland for appellants, PIKE Il
No 20t. haciay OF al. VS.. Sands-Error TO the Su-
prcme Court OF the Territory OF Montana ques
ton In tins case Is ono OF practice The action was In
tort and The Court held the be sham and irre
evant because Il did not deny the damages alleged "
is hero said In such acton failure To deny tho
damages alleged does not admit them, and the PLAIN
,ins mast prove The damages before they WIN &c a.
IN error, Msrrick Il Morris Tor defendant.
No 20a Hansell ct al Va Woods-Appeal from tho
Circuit Court tor tho Eastern District OF Pennsylva-
MIA. This an action 10 restrain tho infringe
ment Of patcnt-ior an infringement IN the manulac
ture oil knapsacks. Tho Court below dccrecd per-
pctuai injunction. aud " IS hero commended that tho
decision erroneous, In that 1t sustained the patent
whom 1t was void Tor want OF novelty. The particular
characteristic OF the design which IL Is said has been
used is tho flexible principle introduced between tho
frame ana tho shoulder Of the knapsack TINS IS said
10 have been In use before tho patent +. Is. smith
and }. y. Blar Tor appellants; Hastings Strowbridgc
Tor appellee.
No. 205 Howell ct al vs. McAdcn ct al.-Error to
the Circuit Court OF North CaroIina.-ihis was SUIT
upon bonds oil the Western Railroad Company. tho do
fence being that they wcro issued In pursuance OF
fraudulent COLLISION 0 Interested parties. and that tho
stipulation IN them tna upon aiiurc 70 pay tho inter-
est the principal should become duo and the mortgage
might be forecloscd contrary the charter Of tho
company and rendered the bond void. The defence
was Sustained. and ~ Is here urged that there
fraud and that the stipulation void only the
matter stipulated and docs not affect the validity OF
tho bond A. s. Merriman for appellant; W. n. II.
smith Tor appellccs
No 206 Fuller vs. Stone aL Error to tho Circuit
Court for the Northern district Of Illinois This
action on promissory note Tho error assigned Is
In respect To the denial OF motion for new trial. tho
argument being that the motion should have been
granted IL Is said In opposition that error not
.,sna1e on such motion A O. storey Tor pla'nth
No. 2OS Davis c al VS.. Crouch CT al.-Error to the
Court OF Appeals Of Virgna-Thc question III this
is whether the Judgment Of the Court below affirming
decision OF the Chancellor OF the State overriding
exception TO the allowance OF investments OF
executor Of the funds OF the estate In Confederate
STATE bonds erroneous. IL Is SAID that the invest
ment was contrary tho laws OF tho United States,
contrary 10 tho policy OF the government and that tho
Court sanctioned H. although II was means VI aiding
the Confederate States 10 carry against tho
United states such decision. IL Is said, Will DO
sustained On the other hand, II Is SAID that II
within tho law OF virginia. aud that THIS tact warrants
the investment and protects the execution. Randolph
Tucker tor appellants; Conway Robinson for appcces.
No 09--Joshua Neral, appellant, VIZ David W. NJ.
Yeomans ana Daniel J. Goss.
This cause was argued by Mr.. Charles NJ. Reed and
Mr. Chaunccy smith OF counsel for the appellant, ana
by Mr.. Causten browne Tor tho appcces Adjourned.