plan was to impose on its officers by false measures, the court refused to sustain a
bill by one of the parties against another for an account. Bartle v. Nutt, 45.
ACCOUNT, 2; ASSIGNMENT; LIMITATIONS, &c. 9; LOTTERY.
LANDLORD AND TENANT; LIMITATIONS, &c.; SEISIN AND DISSEISIN; WITNESS.
1. A power which constitutes A and B "to be the lawful attorney or attorneys" of the
constituent, is several as well as joint. Greenleaf's Lessee v. Birth, 252.
2. A power to "sell, dispose of, contract, and bargain for," a certain tract of land,
does not authorize the attorney to relinquish it to the State for taxes which were
not a charge on the owner, but only on the land. Clarke's Lessee v. Courtney, 366.
ABANDONMENT, 5; Deed, 2; PUBLIC LANDS, 2.
Under the Maryland act of 1791, though a person was an alien when he bid off land
at auction, if he became a citizen before any title was acquired, his alien heirs do
not take by descent. Spratt v. Spratt, 111.
BETTERMENTS; NATURALIZATION.
The answer of a corporation, not under oath, and not made upon personal knowledge,
may be controlled by one witness. Union Bank of Georgetown v. Geary, 241.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 10.
EXECUTORS, &c.; LEX LOCI.
An agent of a consignor shipped property to consignees, and advised the latter of the
shipment for account of the consignor, and directed the consignees to receive and
hold it subject to the orders of the agent. Subsequently, the consignor assigned to
three persons, severally, different sums out of the proceeds of sale, as security for
debts due to them, and directed the consignees to hold the proceeds, subject to the
order of the assignees, as specified. After notice to the consignees of the above
assignment, the property arrived, and was received and sold by the consignees, but
they make no express promise to the assignees, and, soon after the arrival of the
property, attached it, for a debt due to them from the consignor. Held, that one of
the assignees could not maintain an action at law against the consignees, to recover
that part of the proceeds of sales which had been assigned to him, the receipt of the
property not amounting to a promise to him. Tiernan v. Jackson, 480.
CASES AFFIRMED; Insolvent; LOTTERY; SEAMEN, 2. 3.
ATTACHMENT.
CASES AFFIRMED, 1; REPLEVIN.
AUTHENTICATION OF RECORD.
EVIDENCE, 8-11.
1. If a counsellor is entitled to admission to the bar of this court under its rules, the
fact that his name has been stricken from the roll of counsellors of one of the district
courts of the United States, for a contempt, will not exclude him. Ex parte Til-
linghast, 21.
2. The attorney of an indorsee, who was prosecuting suits upon a note against the
the maker and indorser, agreed with the latter that if he would waive all defence,
and suffer a judgment, he would immediately issue an execution against the maker,
whose property he had ascertained to be unincumbered and sufficient. Held, 1.
The attorney had authority to make this agreement. Union Bank of Georgetown v.
Geary, 241.
3. 2. The consideration was sufficient, even though a subsequent decision of this court
showed that the defence of the indorser could not have prevailed. Ib.
4. 3. That the plaintiff, having refused to issue an execution against the maker, who had
sufficient property, the judgment against the indorser must be enjoined. Ib.
BANK OF THE UNITED STATES.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 13.
The life-estates of the tenants in possession under a marriage settlement having been
confiscated and sold, but the estates of the remainder-men, who were British sub-
jects, not having been devested, the purchasers under the State are precluded, by
the treaty of peace of 1783, (8 Stats. at Large, 80,) from making a claim for im-
provements under a state law. Carver v. Jackson, 1.
BILLS OF CREDIT.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 3. 4.
BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND PROMISSORY NOTES.
1. A promise to accept, to amount to an acceptance, must apply to the particular bill
alleged to be accepted, and describe it, in terms not to be mistaken. Boyce v.
Edwards, 22.
2. A general authority to draw cannot be treated as accepting the bills drawn under
such authority; it must be declared on as a promise to accept, by the promisee, or
the party taking the bills on the faith of it. 1b.
3. The drawee is liable only for the rate of interest fixed by the law of the place on
which the bill is drawn. Ib.
4. Under the law of Kentucky, the assignor of a promissory note assumes to pay it, if,
by legal process and due diligence, the assignee is unable to recover the amount
from the maker. Bank of the United States v. Tyler, 100.
5. Rules of due diligence, under this law, stated. Ib.
6. It was not incumbent on the assignee to take an execution returnable on a rule
day; and when the greatest time intervening between the date of an execution and
placing it in the hands of the marshal, was thirty-one days, and from the return of
one execution, or venditioni exponas, to the issuing of another, thirty days, this was
due diligence. Ib.
7. The law of Kentucky requires the assignee to pursue the jailer and his sureties for
an escape of the maker of a note, before resorting to the assignor. Bank of the
United States v. Tyler, 100.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 4; PARTNERSHIP, 3.
1. A bond, voluntarily given by a disbursing officer and his sureties to the United States,
through the proper department, to secure the faithful performance of his duties, is a
valid contract, though the taking of such a bond may not be prescribed by any act
of congress. United States v. Tingey, 248.
2. But no officer of the government has the right to require from any subordinate
officer, as a condition for his holding office, that he should execute a bond with a
condition different from that prescribed by law; and a bond thus obtained is illegal
and void. Ib.
3. Where an act requires a bond to be taken with a condition for the faithful disburse-
ment of public money, and also for the faithful discharge of duty, and the former
is omitted from the condition, quære, whether the latter can be shown by proof to
cover it. Farrar v. United States, 386.
4. Against sureties on an official bond, judgment cannot be rendered beyond the
penalty, to be discharged on payment of what is actually due. 1b.
5. The 26th section of the Judiciary Act, (1 Stats. at Large, 87,) does not apply to a
case of judgment on a verdict, but only to judgments upon demurrer, or by default,
or confession. Ib.
6. Construction of a bond executed by persons who were the president and directors
of the Bank of Somerset, to the United States, for the performance of an agree-
ment made by the bank with the United States, for the payment of a debt due to
the United States, arising from deposits made in the bank, for account of the United
States. United States v. Robertson, 507.
1. The cases of Conard v. The Atlantic Insurance Co., 1 P. 386, and Harris v. Den-
nie, 3 P. 292, confirmed. Harris v. D'Wolf, 33.
2. Conard v. The Atlantic Insurance Company, 1 P. 386, affirmed. Conard v. Nicoll,
COMPACT BETWEEN STATES.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 4; LIMITATIONS, &c. 8.
CONSIDERATION.
ATTORNEY, &c. 3.
CONSIGNOR AND CONSIGNEE.
ASSIGNMENT.
1. An Indian tribe, or nation, within the United States, is not a "foreign State,"
within the meaning of the 2d section of the third article of the constitution, and
cannot sue in the courts of the United States. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 178.
2. A law of the State of Rhode Island, imposing a tax upon the capital stock of a
bank, does not impair the obligation of the contract arising from its charter, which
contains no stipulation on the subject of taxation. Providence Bank v. Billings, 171.
3. Certificates, issued by the State of Missouri, in sums not exceeding ten dollars, nor
less than fifty cents, receivable in payment of all state, county, and town dues, &c.,
the faith and funds of the State being pledged for their redemption, were held to be
"bills of credit," the emission of which was prohibited by the constitution of the
United States. Craig v. Missouri, 116.
4. A promissory note given to the State in exchange for such certificates is void. Ib.
A letter of credit from E., addressed to A., in Havana, "in favor of R., to the amount
of $40,000, or $50,000, which sum he may wish to invest through you in the prod-
uce of your island," was shown to B., and resulted in a contract between R. and B.
for the latter to purchase coffee for account of R., for which B. was to be repaid by
bills on New York at sixty days. This contract was made known to E., who
assented to this use of his letter of credit: Held, that the stipulation for the mode
of reimbursement by bills on New York, at sixty days, was a material part of the
contract, and R. and B. having afterwards agreed to substitute, for bills on New
York, bills on London, which were protested, E. was not bound. Edmondston v.
Drake, 498.
ACCOUNT, 2; ATTORNEY, &c. 3; BOND, 1. 2; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 2–4; LOTTERY.
1. An act of incorporation for private purposes, does not bind any party affected by
it, unless he accepts or assents to it; and declaring it to be a public act, does not
dispense with this requirement. Beaty v. Knowler's Lessee, 36.
2. This assent may be inferred from acts, as taking benefits under the law. Ib.
3. Powers of directors of a corporation are construed strictly. Ib.
4. A power to tax lands of the corporators must be found clearly granted by the
charter, otherwise it does not exist. Ib.
5. A recognition in a charter, of the capacity of a body to take and hold lands by a
particular name, confers the power, if it did not before exist. Society for the Pro-
pagation, &c. v. Pawlet, 160.
ANSWER; LIMITATIONS, &c. 6; PLEADING, 1.
COUNSELLOR AT LAW.
ATTORNEY, &c.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES.
1. It is settled that this court may exercise its jurisdiction in suits against a State,
under the authority conferred by the constitution and existing acts of congress.
New Jersey v. New York, 343.
2. The kinds of process, the persons on whom it is to be served, and the course of the
court on the failure of the State to appear, are also prescribed. Ib.
3. In this case, the subpoena having been duly served, and the State failing to appear,
a rule was entered that the complainant be at liberty to proceed ex parte, and that
if the State, being duly served with the rule, should not appear and answer on the
second day of the next January term, this court would hear the cause ex parte. Ib.
4. Under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act, (1 Stats. at Large, 85,) this court has
not jurisdiction to inquire whether the 7th article of the compact between Virginia
and Kentucky, has been impaired by a law of Kentucky, when it does not appear
on the record that the plaintiff claims under a law of Virginia. Fisher's Lessee v.
Cockerell, 318.
5. Under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act, (1 Stats. at Large, 85,) this court has
not jurisdiction to reëxamine the decision of a state court concerning a right to
freedom, not claimed under any act of congress, &c. Lagrange v. Chouteau, 72.
6. The supreme court of Missouri having held the defendant in error entitled to her
freedom under the ordinance of 1787, for the government of the northwestern terri-
tory, (1 Stats. at Large, 51,) this court has not jurisdiction under the 25th section
of the Judiciary Act, (1 Stats. at Large, 85,) of a writ of error by her claimant.
Menard v. Aspasia, 446.
7. Under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act, (1 Stats. at Large, 85,) it is not neces-
sary that the record thould state, in terms, that the validity of a state law was ques-
tioned on the ground of its repugnancy to the constitution of the United States; it
is sufficient, if the record shows it must have been so, and that the decision was in
favor of the validity of the state law. Craig v. Missouri, 116.
8. If, by consent, the court tried the case without a jury, the facts found by the court
and placed on the record are to be considered as showing what questions were made.
Ib.
9. Where the whole case has been sent to this court, upon a certificate of division of
opinion, it will be remanded to the circuit court. Saunders v. Gould, 110.
10. A decree in an equity cause, brought by appeal from the district court of the
United States for the eastern district of Louisiana, was reversed, and the cause re-
manded, for the reason that the parol evidence did not appear on the record, in the
form of depositions. New Orleans v. United States, 418.
11. This court follows the decision of the highest court of the State, on a question of
interpretation of the state statute concerning executions, and reverses the judgment
of the circuit court, though that decision was made since the decision of the circuit
United States v. Morrison, 27.
12. A deliberate decision, by the highest court of a State, of the question whether the
statute of uses was part of the common law of the State, and as to the operation of a
clause in a will of lands, under that law, was received by this court as a rule of prop-
erty there. Henderson v. Griffin, 260.
13. The district court of the United States for the State of Alabama has not jurisdic-
tion of suits instituted by the Bank of the United States, unless the record contain
averments which enable the court to look behind its corporate character. Bank of
the United States v. Martin, 434.
ATTORNEY, &c. 1; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1; DEMURRER; EVIDENCE, 5; Ex-
CEPTIONS, 1-3; INTEREST; MANDAMUS, 1.
COVENANT.
PLEADING, 2.
DEATH.
EVIDENCE, 6; PUBLIC LANDS, 2.
|