The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-06-08

claimant shows that ne entered the spirits
- Of The growth production aud nufao.ars OF inc
United States. exported board OF certain vessels
named from New YORK and New Orleans. upon which
and remported from Matamoros, Mexico, frce that he
executed bond to the United States for tho OF
$1A0OO, with approved suretics, conditioned that
proper certificates to show thai the articles were
ufactured IN tho United States and all taxes paid
thereon, would be produced within six months here-
after, or that ho would pay The customary Custom
House duties required upon such articles OF foreign man.
uiacturc" that tnercupon the proper landing certn-
cato was issued aud the spirits transferred IRON
the ferryboat in which they had been imported the
schooner Island Belle for nsportation Indianon
ana Galveston The evidence offered support OF tho
libel shows that Andre purchased the spirits mt Maia
moros at tho price OF hityfve per gallon that
they we're shipped from New Orleans 10 Matamoros
June 20 1865, on the British schooner Village Belle,
and after being duly euered at the Custom House at
Matamoros were landed at that port The District At
sorhey % sne un1ed States then offered IN evidence
sworn examined copies OF the original entry OF the
spirits BY Andre at tho Brownsville Custom House, to-
gether with sworn and examined copies Of the bond
Iectors OF tho ports Of New York aud New
Orleans. upon which the bond was can
entry, bond and ccr.incates were on die at tho
Custom House in Brownsville. moro than hundred
miles dis,an, IRON Galveston To the introduction OF
such copies Andre objected, but they were admitted.
Tho certificates showed shipments from New York TO
Aata9oros, with no record OF drawbacks The In
DO iIeaioe The decision below that there should
be forfeiture. and the 10 hero affirmed, the
Court nn0ing the evidence sutiCent ana properly au
mitted The Chief Justice delivered the opinion.
EEcrASNT ExoEProS--DurY or rnE COURT.
No. 90 Thomas Beaver. plaintiff 10 error, Va s.
StaAs Taylor and Miles A. Gbcrt-In error 10 the Cur
cult Court OF tho United States for the southern DIS
trict 81 Illinois action Tor eJcctmept TO
undivided interest in certain
Cairo, Ill Tho defence was actual possession under
CLAIM and color OF title for successive years and
payment during that period OF all taxes legally assessed
upon tho premises claimed. (Rev. Stat OF ILL.,. 1874
p. 67A) Evidence wus given sustaining tho defence,
aud verdict by the jury was rendered In favor oil the
Jury the plaintiff requested the Court to charge as
SGT forth by him in cPht several propositions. Tho
Court declined 70 charge as requested but charged In
Its own language and fully upon tho case as presented
by she evidence The plaintiff excepted to tho refusal
Of tho Court and excepted also Ito so muon Of tho
charge Of the Court gwen conflict with anu
variant IRON the several propositions presented by
him. II upon this presentation OF the case that this
Court asked 10 reverse tho Judgment entered upon
tho verdict Tho entire series Of propositions was
presented rs ono request and II any ono proposition
was unsound an exception 20 refusal TO charge tho
series cannot be maintained. III N. r. r., 4l6, TO-,
2a3; 10, 1861 All OF the propositions presented wcro
NOT sound notably tho Nth request could not be CON-
piled with. II the entire charge OF tho Court
Is excepted 10, or series of propositions contained IN
10 excepted 10 In gross, and any portion thus cx-
ccptcd TO Is sound, the exception cannot BIO sustained
Ter, ID, 32s; Demo- 2i3 Jones vs. 0sgood Seldom.
1881 Caldwell vs.. Murphy, II n. Y. H.. 40; Walsh W.
Icssedly sound in the most OF its points 3 An exceD-
ton ~ such portions OF charge as variant from tho
requests made by party not pointing out tho var.
AuCob CouuOs uo t4u oooS
h., 570 IL Is not the duty OF judge At tho Circuit
Court or OF an appellate court 10 anaiyzc and
compare the requests and the charge discover what
the portions thus excepted TO- one object OF
exception call the attention Of Circuit Judge
tho precise point as 10 which is supposed no has
erred that he may then and there consider II and give
new and different instructions to the jury, II 10 his
judgment II should be proper to do So (Ayraut Va.
The Pac,uc Board, ~ U. I. Il, 576) An exception In
the form considering entirely defeats that OBJ
j,ct For these three the bill OF exceptions
fails 70 present any point that we can consider We
also OF tho OPINION, upon an examination OF tho
record that tue case was well submitted TO the jury,
Affirmed. Mr. Justice Hunt delivered the opinion.