The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1879-10-28

COMMON P1EAs-srEcrAL TEnM-Held by Judge
Beach.-Nos. and H.
COMMON PLEAs-EQuIry TERM-Held by Judge y.
+. Daly.-Nos. Z, ], 81. a. 3D.
COMMON PLEAs-TRIAL TEnM-Part Held by
io9s 1915. ilo6. 1850, $685. 9OO $780, 1925 1852 ll46
Part 2-Held by Judge Larremore.-Nos. 12l7 asa.
1885, 22ii ll49. 1862 s41. S7s 1867 1852. lll9. 70
MARINE CouRr-GENERAL TERM-Held by Chief
Justice Alker and Judges McAdam and Goepp.-Ap
peals from orders-Nos. and o. Appeals from
iudgments--Nos. 20. q, 4, 10. 4.
MARIsE CoURr THAI TERM.-Part 1-Adjourned
,for the term Part 2.-Adjourned until November 8.
Part 3.-Adjourned until Friday the 31st inst.
COURT or GENERAL SEssIoNs-Part Held by
Judge Cowng.-The People vs. Francisco A. r. San
Same vs. John Kerrigan. burglary; Same vs. Edward
Dowd. felonious assault and battery. Part 2.--Ad-
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CouRT-Held by Judge
Choate.-A. Forsyth M. Ferdon; M. Ferdon VS..
Schooner J. T. Earll; A. Merollo vs.. William Ruger
ct al; Traders Insurance Company Steamtug
u. s. Grant; j. q. Unnevehr vs. Steamship Hindoo;
H. Fleming VS.. Steamship Stainclife; p. Rockaway
VS.. Barge New Baltimore; W. A. Duell vs. Steamship
Niagara; George Matot VS.. steamtug A. b. Preston;
Ii. j. Myers j. L. Stow; Mary Scott VS.. Steamtug
A. b. Preston ]. Smith ct al. vs.. q. f. Drew ct all
Charles Grum VS.. W. L. Frost ct al; " Exposito vs..
A. Hardy.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
WASHINGTON. Oct. a. 1879.
The following business was transacted in the Su-
preme Court of the United States to-day
On motion of II. I. Merrick David T. Watson of
Pittsburg. and Welty Mccullough. Of Greensburg,
Pa. were admitted to practice.
Powell ct al-Appeai from the cKcuit Court Of the
United States for the Northern District of Illinois.
ing the petition of the appellant for leave to file
bill OF review in the case of Nathan Powell Samuel
j. Walker. Kicker and others in said court. Without
intending to decide that appeal will lie to this
court from order of the Circuit Court refusing
leave to file bill OF review for newly discovered
evidence this Court Is df opinion that the refusal
in the present case was right The decree OF the
lower court is therefore affirmed with costs. The
No. Sol. Matthew 8. Baldwin, appellant, VS.. r.
Bowers, treasurer, &C.; appeal from the Circuit
Court OF the United States the Southern District
OF Mississippi.-Decree affirmed with costs. The
decision was announced by the Chief Justice. No
written opinion.
Vs. William Jennison ct al-Moton to dismiss denied
No. 725 H. c. Digger ct al, plaintiffs in error,
w. P. Docok ct al-Motion to dismiss postponed to
the hearing OF the cause on its merits. Z
No. 0 (orginal ex partc). Augustus b. Perry, Pc
titioner.-Rule to show cause granted. returnable
No. 10 (orignal parte). The Denver and Rio
Grande Railway COMPANY. pettitioner.-Assigned for
No. l,O28. The District of Columbia ct al appel
lants, VS.. Charles King. Appeal from the supreme
Court of the District of Columbia. On motion of
w. Willoughby docketed and dismissed. with costs.
No. $780, II. r. Shepherd and l.. Clepham, plaintiffs
in error. vs. Otis Bigelow.-On motion Of S. s.
No. S4o The National Bank of the Republic. niau.
tiff i'll error, Rus j. Willard.-Motion to dismiss
submitted by X. d. Mussey in support and Joseph
No S42 Jacob O.Tirestman plaintiff in error vs. The
First National Bank Of Mount Pleasant Westmore
land county, Pa.-Motion to dismiss submitted by
D. T. Watson in support, and Welty Mccullough,
No. (original ex parte) Ira G.. French, petition
for observation-disclosures by John Reynolds, In
favor, and w. II. Smith, in opposition.
No. 8. Samuel +. Craig. appellant vs. Jacob Smith
and George d. Hale.-Argument continued by G. 8.
Whitman for appellant and NJ II. Carpenter for APP
pellees. and concluded by c. s. Whitman for appel
liant.
Hagood. substituted &c.-Passed.
No. s. Original OK parte Alvin r. Reed petitioner.
Argued by George h. Boutwell, for petitioner and by
Attorney General Devens in opposition to the petit
No. 50. The Memphis and Charleston Railroad
Company, plaintiffs in error, the State Of Tonnes
see ct al.-The Memphis and Charleston Railroad
Company is a creditor of the Bank Of Tennessee.
This bank was chartered aud wholly owned by the
State. BY the charter the State was pledged to the
banks support. to make good any deficiency in its
fpom such densiency The bank having failed and
made assignment, and its affairs being in iquida-
ton in the Chancery Court for Davidson county at
Nashville in q suit brought by the State. the present
plaintiff in filed its bill for the enforce
ment OF the guarantees contained in tho banks
charter The State demurred on the ground that. as
o sovereign State, she could not be sued in her own
courts except with her own consent. and that she
in no way responsible for the liabilities OF the
Bank of Tennessee. The demurrer was sustained
and the cross bill dismissed. Upon appeal
the decree below affirmed. on the sole
took away the right to sue the State. consti-
tutional and effective exercise OF power To reverse
this afirmance the present writ of error Ia prose-
cuted Tho case is submitted here on the brief Of
the late g. j. Pillow for the plaintiff in aud by
g. j. for the defendant in error. George Hoadley
and 4. L. Andrews also file brief OF the New York
committee of Tennessee bondholders. who
equally interested in the decision of the question
whether or not the act OF 1865. which Withdrew the
right OF action against the state Of Tennessee pro-
vided for in the constitutions Of 1884 and 1870 and
given in the act of 1865. was constitutional
Nos. G, Z, and o. Thomas s. Dobbins ct al. plain
tiffs in error vs. the United States.-Dismissed ut
the cost of the plaintiffs in error.
No. IL. Henry Gerke ct al. appellants. vs. Mary A.
and George II. Seaverns ct al.-Bsmissod with costs
under the nineteenth rule
No. IL. II. III. l. H. T. Green. appellants. VS.. w.
A. Gordon ct al.-On motion Of +. Miller on behalf
OF counsel continued.
No, Is. Otis Tufts and Sarah M. Bigelow. appel
lants. VS.. The Boston Machine Company.-Dismissed
under nineteenth rule
No. Is. The Board of Trustees OF the Wabash and
Eric Canal appellants, vs.. j. X. Gaspen.-Dismissed
under nineteenth rule.
No. l6. The American Emigrant Company. appel
liant, VS.. The County OF Acknowledgements COM
menced by p. d. Barrett for the appellant
Adjourned until tomorrow noon.