National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-04-20
THE COURT RECORD.
The Supreme Court of the United States yes
erfAY rendered the following decisions:


terday rendered the following decisions
In case No. 1SS, Johnston VS.. The Dstricto
Columbia, decree below affirmed.
No 1899. The United States VS.. VIM. J. Ian.
DRAM Appeal from the court of claims. Ian.
dram was collector Of internal revenue for the
eighth Kentucky district, aud brought this
suit to recover the u per cent; commission on
under the act of July ~. 1868. Tho court of
claims gave Judgment in his favor and the
Supreme Court affirmed that judgment. Judge
WOODS delivered the opinion.
No. 90. The South Boston Iron Company
VS.. the United States, q suit brought by the
iron company to recover $40 1000 damages aud
$4,000 profit on the claim that the Navy De.
partment had entered into contract with
them to build new boilers for several United
states vessels and had aiterward suspended all
work by them under the contract, the Supreme
Court nilirms the Judgment OF the court of
claims in favor OF the United States. The
chief Justice deliveredthe opinion OF the court.
No. 2O2. John Dobson ct nj. VS., John Dormau
ct al, &c. Final decree reversed with costs
and cause remanded with direction TO dis
allow the award of damages, and 10 award o
cents damages, and to allow the defendants
recovery for their costs after interocutory de-
cree, and to the plaintiffs n recovery for their
costs to and including, interlOcutory decree.
+ opinion by Mr.. Justice Blatchford.
No 157. Tho United States Rifle and Cart
| ridge Company ct al. VS.. the Whitney Arms
| Company ct al. Decree confirmed with costs.
| opinion by Mr.. Justice Gray.
| No. Dos. Winfield $. Reyes ct al. VS.. James D.
| Grant ct al. Judgment reversed with costs,
and cnuse remanded with directions to award
New 2S The Goaaty 2 COURT s% cape aTardeaa
County No, ct al. VS.. the United states ex rel.
John. I. Hill: Judgment affirmed with costs,
Opinion by Mr. Justice Harlan.
No. ll0i. The sun Mutual Insurance Com
pany Unterveniorl VS.. the United States ex REL
Judah Hart. Judgment affirmed with costs.
| Opinion by Justice Field
No. 1928. The Board of Liquidation of the
| City Debt of New Orleans vs.. the United States
ex rel Judah Hart, Judgment affirmed with
gEs0 nW.kW. fnWN htV ItUgNN Rn Mana
No. 1906. The Cambria Iron Co. vs. Thomas
| @. Ashburn, trustee. Sc. Decree affirmed with
costs. Opinion by Chief Justice Waite.
No. 1888. George eastman w. the Amador
| and Sacramento Canal Co. ct al. Decree at-
hrmed with costs. opinion by Chief Justice
Waite.
| braska. Motion to dismiss denied. Announced
by Chief Justice Waite.
No. 1915. Elizabeth 7, Oakley vs.. Edward X.
| Goodnow. Motion to dismiss denied and Iudg-
| ment affirmed with costs Opinion by Chief
Justice Waite.
No. $50. The Raleigh and CASTOR Railroad
| Co. VS.. The Board OF Commissioners OF Wake
| county. Dismissed with costs.
| No. $50. The Mexican National Construction
| Co. VS.. Guilliame Reussens. Motion to require
plaintiff in error to give additional security de-
No. l63 The Chicago an Alton Railroad Co.
vs.; The Virgins Ferry Co. Motion to dismiss
No. 1854. The schalder Mining and Manu-.
to dismiss or affirm submitted.
| NO. coo. George >. Wells 81 al VS.. Joseph IL.
| Wilkins sheriff, %c; no; 65S' OTTO Goldstucker
| et oil. VS. Joseph II. Wilkins, sherili, NC; No
| 619, george >. wells ct al. VS.. joseph II. Will
kins, sheiii, &c; NO, goo George =. Wells ct a..
w. Joseph IL, WILKINS, sherlii, %e.i NO; COL
George ), Wells et al. VS.. Joseph H. wilkins
sheriff, &c.: NO. 652, George ). Wells ct al. VS..
Joseph IL. wilkins sheriff. &c. Motion 10 re-
lnstate ana 70 recall mandates submitted by
Mr. Alexander Porter Morse In support OF mo.
| ton, ana by Mr.. q. y. Young, ST., IN opposition
thereto
No; 1853 The Central Trust Company vs.
Lewis seasongood, &c motion 10 dismiss or
affirm submitted In opposition thereto.
NO; 2S2, VIM. r. Graham et al, appellants,
vs. the Boston, Hartford and Erie Railroad
Company; argument concluded by Mr.. ID. f..
Butler for appellants.
| No. III. VIM. Gardner, ct a., VS.. Martin
Herr, ct al. argued by Mr.. H. N. DickerSon for
appellants and by Mt. James L. Foster, for
anpellees.
No, 233 J, a. Fay y co. vs.. n, ID. Fraser,
administrator, &c. dismissed with costs per
stipulation. -......,.,-...---
No. 24. Margaret Sherman vs.. EllIda j..
Middleton; dismissed with costs under rule 10.
No. $50. salt Lake City, appellant, VS., D. j:
HOLSTER, collector, &c. Argument commenced
by Mr., I, s. RlehaTds for appellant further
argument postponed Tor appellant