National Republican., 1882-11-21
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

Tho following business was transacted IN the
Supreme Court OF the United States Monday:
Admissions 70 the bar, John 8. Miller, OF Chi.
cago, NJ, and Marcus Barclay, of Washington G.
No. 7s George W. w.Mntenbergcrct ct al, appellants,
VS. The Lognnsport, Charlottesville and South
western Railway Cimpany ct al. Appeal from the
circuit court Of the United States for the district
OF Indiana. The object OF this appeal Is TO review
the action OF the circuit court In ordering paid
out of the funds derived from the sale Of the
railway property certain rcceivership debts. This
court holds that the allowances made claimants
by the court below were proper and that It's action
must be sustained The decree is there fore affirmed
with costs. Opinion by Justice Blatchford.
No. %. The Standard Oil Company OF Cleveland,
plaintiff in error vs.. George II. Van Ellen. In
error to the circuit court of the United States for
the eastern district Of michigan. This was 9 suit
Drought by Van Elen as assignee OF ]. j. Merritt
& Co. 10 recover from the Standard Oil Company
balance alleged TO be due on certain contraction
headings of oil-barrels The judgment of the
court below Is affirmed, with costs and interest
Opinion by Justice Matthew'S
No a. The United States, plaintiff In error, vs.
Frederick FreriChs, claimant. In error TO the cir
cult court of the United States for the southern
district of New York. Judgment affirmed. opiu-
ion by Justice Woods.
ono 577. Samuel Osborne, jr, plaintiff in error,
VS.. The County Of Adams. State of Nebraska. In
error 10 the circuit court OF the United States for
holds that steam grist- is not work of in
ternal improvement within the meaning of the
statute of Nebraska, approved February Is, 1869,
which authorizes counties cities, aud precincts
ol organized counties to issue bonds to aid in the
construction of any railroad or other work of iif
telnal Improvement" The Judgment of the court
below is affirmed, with costs. Opinion by Justice
Harlan.
. No. 70. Edward @. Mason, appellant ys. The
Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company.
Appeal from the circuit court of the United states
for the northern district Of Illinois. This was an
appeal from decree OF the circuit court fore
closing a mortgage upon certain premises beloug-
Ing to the appellant In the city of Chicago. This
court holds that is apparent from the lace OF the
decree and from the principles enunciaied by this
court In Brineys. Insurance Company (96 U. 5. go
that both the original bill of sale and the subse
quent decree of confirmation were erroneous in
| refusing to allow the right of redemption under
the statute. The decree is therefore reversed and
the cause remanded for further proceedings.
| Opinion by Justice Miller Justice Harlan was
not present at the argument of this case, ud took
| no part In the decision.
No. ~ Alexander ana Francis P. Frazer, plaiti
In error VS.. William Jennison ct al. III error 10 the
circuit court OF the United States for the eastern
district OF Michigan. Order remUnding this cause
TO the circuit court Of Wayne County, Michigan,
affirmed, with COSTS Opinion by Chief. Justice
| Waite.
No. IS. John A. Nichols ct al plaintiffs in error,
| vs. Henry 5. Clnrk, administrator &c. In error to
| the supreme court Of Montana. Decree affirmed,
| with costs, 10 per cent. damages OH amount found
due and interest. Decision announced by Chief
No. SO. The United States, appellant, vs. Samuel
| McKeeyer. Appeal FROM the Court of Claims.
Judgment affirmed. Decision announced by Chief
No, Gl2. Henry c. Brown, plaintiff in error, vs.
The State Of Colorado. In error to the supreme
dction. Opinion by Chief Justice Waite.
No. II. The Ciiy Of New orleans, appellant, VS..
| The New Orleans, Mobile and Texas Railroad
Company. Cause aud pending motions continued
un'il next term, appeal to be then dismissed in
accordan.e with stipulation on file, unless the
board of liquidation of the city debt begins and
| prosecutes without unnecessary delay III some
| court Of competent Jurisdiction an appropriate
proceeding 70 set aside the compromise which has
| been made with the city council. Decision an
| nounced by Chief Justice Waite.
mi, NO. lO41 Charles 1. King plaintiff In error, vs..
| No. 10S6. Albert Grant, appellant, VS.. The Phm-
| nix Mutual Life Insurance Company. Arguments
| submit ed on motion to dismiss
| No. 1l63. Richard II. aud Laura II. Cain, appel
| lanls, vs. The Galveston, Harrisburg, and San An-
| tonic Railroad Company. Appeal from the dis
| trct court of the United States for the western
district Of Texas. Docketed and dismissed with
| costs.
| No. 80. L. F. Hodges ct ALL plaintiffs in error, VS.
| James II. Easton ct al. Argument concluded.
No. SO. Peter W. Geekie, sheriff. &c, plaintiff in
| error, vs. The Kirby Carpenter Company. Argu-
ment commenced. Adjourned