New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-01-08
THE COURTS.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

dered in Supreme Court Of the United States to-day
on the important patent OF Jacob Estey, ct al
against Riley Burett brought here upon appeal from the
Circuit Court Of the United States from the District OF
Vermont This a suit brought by Burdctt who was
plaintiff at the oourtbeow against Eey et al for alleged
infringement Of patent granted to the former in 1859
upon an improvement in reed organs. The
court below rendered a decision IN favor OF
Burdett and gave him decree for sl61,OOO
The decree Circuit reversed and the ease Is
bill.
decision was also rendered by the Court to-day in the
patent OF william f. Clements, appellant, against
the OdOress Excavating Apparatus Company; appeal
from the Circuit Court Of the United States for the DIS
| trict Of Maryland. This was SUIT for alleged IN
| fringemont OF q rolssued patent, owned by the
appellee upon improvement in apparatus for cleann1
outhouses The Court holds that claims and three OF
the ressued patent invalid because they are for In
venons indicated in the original patent az Inventions
and made for the purpose OF covering features do
I'm patents Is ued to others during the interval be-
the granting Of the original and the application for
the reissue The decree OF the Circuit Court is reversed
and the remanded with directions TO dismiss the
| bill. opinion by Judge Batchford.
decision was also rendered by the Court to-day in
OF series of Virginia Coupon Tax cases. namely:
A. Austin Smith, plaintiff In error against Samuel o.
| GreenhOw. This a suit brought by taxpayer OF
Richmond Va. in a State Court against Grecnhow, the
treasurer OF that city, for alleged trespass
in entering the house OF the former ana
selling certain household furniture. The Treasurer
up the plea Justification Of the trespass that was
his official duty levy the property Of the plaintiff
aud se I'm satisfaction OF certain taxes then due and
owing. To this the plaintiff filed replication. alleging
previous tender payment Of said taxes OF coupons cut
issued by the State of Virginia under the au
thoy OF act Of the General Assembly OF that state
approved March %, 1879, making such coupons recey-
able for such taxes The dcfcndent reOned that by the
Oft tho n virginia OF
1892 he was orb dden receive these coupons I'm pay
ment Of taxes After further proceedings the case
was on petition Of the plaintiff removed TO the Circuit
Court OF the United States for the Eastern District OF
Virginia On the 4th Of September, 1888
IL was remandcd to the State Court
whereupon the plaintiff brought the here,
upon a w11t OF error This Court holds that ii sufficiently
appears from the record that the plaintiffs case arises
under the Constitution of the United States within the
rule rs laid down in Bridge Propretors HobOkcn Co.
II followed, therefore, that the United states Circuit
Court in holding that did not raise constitutional ques
ton and in remanding IL for that reason to me state
Court, committed error. The order remandng the case
to the state Court Ia reversed ana the cause IS eated
in the Federal Court with directions TO proceed therein IN
conformity with law OpnIon Of justice Matthew Inc
printed briefs is set aside and they are restored TO lne
docket TO be argued orally when thcy are fcachel.
This will have the effect OF posponns them for three
The Court also rendered decision today in the two
involving the same question, entitled Frederick T.
Frelmghuyscn, Secretary OF STATE, planth In error,
AGAINST tie United States ex rel John j. Key aud the
talnst ftGesi,n G ~ me District Of oI1mba
These suits brought to obtain wTis OF mandmus re-
quirng the Secretary Of STATE to pay to me REALTORS tue
amounts alleged to be due them from the insalment
of lss2 of the awards made by the International Mex
can Claims Commission under the treaty concluded pc
tween the Governments OF the United states ana Mexico
on July f. 1865 The refusal OF the Secretary OF state to
pay the claimants the amount OF the sixth lnslamght
received from the Mexican Government ana nomhaly
due them under the awards or the Compassion, was
based upon the fact that after President ArtGm
came into office he mace luTthef tAdIhlnat13n
Of the cases and believing that tho awards
had been obj aimed 10y fraud ana perjury ne nesolateI
now pending tine senate, aud directed that the pay
mcu Of the sixth instalment be withheld In the court
missed, hut in the OF John j. Key wit Of man
damus was awarded. This Court holds that the whole
purpose of the treaty with the United states and Mexico
was to ascertain how much was due from one Govern
spective citizens. Az between the United states and
Mexico the awards final and conclusive until set aside
wise Mexico cannot under the terms OF the treaty, re-
fuse TO make the payments at the tiin agreed Upon II
rcGured by United states. But this she does not
seut of the Tinted states 10 her release from liability
underthe convention, account of the particular awards
dispute, because OF the alleged Fraudulent ch2f-
acer Of the proof support OF the claims which the
United states induced 10y the claimants to furnish
for consideration OF the Commission As 10 me ght
of the United states 20 treat with Mexico Io feHd OF
these cases the Court eutelins doubt Each Govern.
when entered into the compact under w1lcD the
awards made, evidently relied upon the honor ana
good faith Of the other for protection as ia as possible
against frauds imposition by the individual claimants.
The presentation by clHeh o! iTduuienC CAIN vi
false testimony for reference 10 the Commission wac an
mont aerward discovered that II had IN ths way oeen
instrument Of wrong toward friendly Power 1t
would be not only its right but s duty to repuddte the
act and make reraon far possible for the conse
queu6cs OF Is governmental neglect, II any
proceed On r NJ iincbnci r,Ihs of pIcadn% AZ an
nlied I'm Inc courts ought ever allowed 10 stand in
The way OF the national power to do what Is right under
an nG n he opnon Of the Court clearly Within the d-crc
ton Of the President 10 withhold all further payments To
he REALTORS until the diplomatic negotiations between
ne y Governments
cuicd The discretion Of the Executive Department OF
'"' The ndgnent in the case Of the La Abra Company
IL affirmed with costs and that in the case OF Key s re-
yers with and the remanded with instruc-
dccision was 20 rendered in the mandamus OF
A. NJ. Wyman, United states Treasurer, against the |
United states rel +. T. Iastcad administrator at al
The Court holds that the Treasurer Of the United states
cannut be compelled by wit OF manGanus 10 pay 10 an
admiusrao appointed in the District OF Columbia OF an
inhabnt OF one OF the states OF lhe UlHh the amount
OF draft payable the iueatate al the Treasury out OF
the Supreme Court OF the District OF Columbia awarding
a peremptory writ OF mandamus l. reversed and the |
the petition opinion ny Justice Gray.
Among other decisions rendered TO-DAY are the follow
So 1921 Winchester & Partridge Manufacturing |
CoW,naIy arpeIlauts AIT WIN W. Fuucc Appeal ffomtnc |
costs and Tcmaudcd with directions 70 reverse the
udgmcrt OF the District Court for the First Judicial
distinct OF Utah Territory and for such further pro
cecdngs may be according 10 law and in conformity
with the opinion Of the Court
No 100. Herman > BacIman ct al, plaintiffs in error.
ag James Lawson 81 al In error 10 the superior Court OF
the City OF New. York. Judgment affirmed Win costs.
No l4l. The Chicago AID Alton Ea!lIG&d company et !
a. appellants, agt the Union Rolling Mn Company and
No i72 the Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Com
pany appellant agt. The Union Rolling Mn Company.
Appeals from the Circuit Court Of The ILed Stales iOf
the Northern District Of Illinois Decree affirmed with
costs.
Nos l42 to So both inclusive The Cedar Rapids and
Missouri River Railroad Company ct at, plaintiffs IN en-
rOr agt. Benjamin Herring, j. /. Lake Lewis Iddngs,
d. T. Cutler Patrick DundOn, L. " Brooks Dayid Green
street CatnaIine NJ. Wooster and William I. Boyd. In
error 10 the supreme Court OF the State OF Iowa Judg
meni affirmed with costs.
No 374 The susquehanna Boom Company ct al,
plaintiffs In error agt the West Branch BOOm Company
In error tie supreme Court OF the STATE OF PcnhsyF
yanla. Dismissed for OF Jurisdiction.
No 700 The American Bible society ct al, appelanst