Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-10-15
NATIONAL CAPITAL.
Standing Of the Pacific Coast Cases
in the 0. S. Supreme Court.
TRIBUTES TO JUSTICE MILLER.
instructions Issued to Customs
Officers Regarding the Duty
on Starch-Etc.
IesuL DISPATCHES TO THE RzooRD-UN1oN.l
NATIONAL CAPITAL.
TarsuAL DISPATCHES TO THE RzooRD-UNoN.l
INTEREST TO LAWYERS.

Standing of Pacific Coast Gases Before
the o. =. Supreme Court.
WASHINGTON, October 14th.--There are
nearly ], 400 cases on the United States Su-
preme Court docket. The Clerk has been
besieged with hundreds of inquiries by
letter and telegraph from attorneys and
their clients from all parts of the country
as to the status Of different cases on the
docket The Clerk has furnished the Cali
fornia Associated Press with list of cases
appealed from California, Oregon and Ne
vada Courts, and states that not more than
400 cases out of the 400 can be disposed of
this year, and it will take two or three
years TO reach those last on the docket
Below is a list of the cases, with the
number of each, which shows at glance
its position on the docket and its chance of
being considered at this term. II is safe to
say that those cases numbered beyond 400
will not be reached this term, while those
beyond 1000 may not be reached for two
or three years:
California No. As, United States VS..
Central Pacific Railroad Company; rs,
Henry Mccartney VS.. James L. Crittenden
ct al Ill, George f. Packer VS.. Jake Bird
ct al; 112 United States vs.. Alfred Biggs
ct al; 129, United States vs. William II.
Fry Forse; 144, William Lent ct al. VS..
Charles Tilton, Tax Collector ct al 166,
Dora A. Blunt ct al VS.. The Sierra Butte
Gold Mining Company; 49, Amador Queen
Mining Company VS. William Dewitt; $50,
Silas Tubbs VS.. R. E. Without and r. B.
Thompson, executors; 462, John Ell. Nc
Kee VS.. Peter J. Donohue; SAL, J. l.. Porter
VS.. James NJ Banks, executor of Abbie L.
Waterman, deceased 54S, Clinton G. Trip
VS.. The Santa Rosa Street Car Company
ct al; 562 B. f. Gilman VS.. William B
Lake ct al ST. Pacific Steamship Com
psny VS.. Michael O'Rourke; 622, Michael
Grotty vs. Union Mutual Life Insurance
Company of Maine; 644, George W. White
VS.. Ira p Rankin ct al; 755, The South
Spring Hill Gold Mining Company VS.. The
Amador Medan Mining Company; sos, r
B. Hooper VS.. The People of the State of
California; $40, Malcolm Macdonald VS.. E.
William Mclean; 878, City and. County of
San Francisco VS.. Eugene LIE Roy ct al;
I,0l7, John S. Hager, Collector, etc. VS.. R.
H. Swayne: LOIS and 1,019, United States
vs. Moses Mock; 1.020, United States VS..
John HUMPHREYS; 1 GA State of California
VS.. The San Pablo and Tulare Railroad
Company; 1,045, Henry Courtner VS.. The
United States; 1,046, W. B. Carr VS.. John
Quigley; 1,047, Gillaume Abadie VS.. The
United States; 1,116, I. G. Phelps,
Collector, VS.. j. c. Siegfried ct al;
1,163, Peter Ulrichs ct al. VS.. Henry
Dalblac Harrison; 1,196, George D.
Haven vs. Archibald Borland; 1879, John
Dover ct al. VS.. William c. Richards ct al,
executor; 1917, P. Crowley, Chief of
Police, VS.. Henry Christensen 1,347,
Thomas Knight VS., the United States
Land Association and Clinton G. Trip;
I,36S. Southern Pacific Railroad Company
vs.. the United States; 46S, William T.
Coleman vs.. James 7. Walker; 528, T. P.
Heath VS.. NJ. T. Wallace; $40, Robert w.
Waterman VS.. James NJ. Banks, executor
of the estate of Abbie L. Waterman, de-
ceased. There are also about fifty Chinese
cases rs the United States appealed from
California Courts, and they all occupy
positions on the docket beyond No. 500, so
they will not be reached this session.
Oregon-No. 3d. England Mortgage Sc.
curity Company VS.. j. F. Groves (SberifD
ct al; 234, e. G. Cross ct al. VS.. L. 81. AL
Ter; 306, Ellis G. Hughes vs.. Dundee Mort
gage aud Trust Investment Company (Lim-
ited); 307, same; 308, same; 1853. United
States VS.. William Ball ct al !; $50, same;
376, United States vs. r. E. Bryan, admin
istrator, ct al; 457, James Il. Fisk vs. D. V.
B. Henarie ct al; $50, William Crawford,
appellant, vs.. Charles A. Neal; 6S7, Charles
A. Neal VS.. John A. Crawford ct al; 752,
Oregon Railway and Navigation Company
VS.. the Oregonian Rail way Company (Lim-
ited); goo, John Paulsen ct al VS.. the City
of Portland ct al; 1900, the Stayton Water
Ditch and Canal Company VS.. the Salem
Capital Flour Mills Company (Limited);
1881, B. T. Dowell VS.. Daniel w. Apple
gate; s53, M. B. Holmes VS.. L. Goldsmith
& Co $50, A. Marks vs. Ida j. Hawthorn;
1854, Herman r. HarGenburgh VS. Thomas
l.. Ray ct al; 1,215. United States VS.
Northern Pacific Railroad Company; 1,218
United States VS.. The Dalles Military ROAD
Company ct al; 1,2l9, United States vs. tht
Oregon Central Military Road Company e
al 24S, United States VS.. Willamette
Valley and Cascade Mountain Wagon r 'as
Company ct al; 1880, Sylvester Pennoye
VS.. r. 7. McConnaughy ct al.
Neyada-No 157, Joseph T. Williams vs.
United States; 696, Union Pacific Railway
Company vs.. the Central Trust Company o
New York; So, Henry Demo VS.. Griffen
SS3 and SS4, S. A. Knapp VS.. George j
Garrison ct al 1,197, United States VS.. thu
Richmond Mining COMPANY of Nevada,