Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

21. Congress may authorize a territorial corporation to construct a railroad
in a Territory, and may make land grants in aid thereof, which will
be valid after a part of the Territory becomes a State. St. Paul, Min-
neapolis &c. Railway Co. v. Phelps, 528.

22. A State cannot be deemed guilty of a violation of its obligations under
the Constitution of the United States because of a decision, even if
erroneous, of its highest court while acting within its jurisdiction.
In re Converse, 624.

23. When a person accused of crime within a State is subjected, like all
other persons in the State, to the law in its regular course of adminis-
tration in courts of justice, the judgment so arrived at cannot be held
to be such an unrestrained and arbitrary exercise of power as to be
utterly void. Ib.

24. The Fourteenth Amendinent to the Constitution was not designed to
interfere with the power of a State to protect the lives, liberty and
property of its citizens, nor with the exercise of that power in the
adjudications of the courts of the State in administering the process
provided by its laws. Ib.

25. In convicting the petitioner of embezzlement under section 9151 of
Howell's Annotated Statutes of Michigan, upon his confessing that he
had been guilty of embezzlement as attorney-at-law, instead of under
section 9152, the Supreme Court of Michigan did not exceed its juris-
diction, or deliver a judgment which abridged his privileges or immuni-
ties or deprived him of the law of the land of his domicil. 16.
26. The distribution of and the right of succession to the estates of deceased
persons are matters exclusively of State cognizance, and may be dealt
with by a Territorial legislature as it sees fit, in the absence of a pro-
hibition by Congress. Cope v. Cope, 682.

27. No statute of a Territory will be declared void because it may in-
directly, or by a construction which is possible but not necessary, be
repugnant to an act of Congress annulling legislation of the Territory;
but such a result must be direct and proximate in order to invalidate
the statute. Ib.

28. No State can deprive particular persons or classes of persons of equal
and impartial justice under the law, without violating the provisions
of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Caldwell v. Texas,
692.

29. Due process of law, within the meaning of the Constitution, is secured
when the laws operate on all alike, and no one is subjected to partial
or arbitrary exercise of the powers of government. 16.

30. No question of repugnancy to the Federal Constitution can be fairly
said to arise when the inquiry of a State court is directed to the
sufficiency of an indictment in the ordinary administration of crimi-
nal law, and the statutes authorizing the form of indictment do not
obviously violate these fundamental principles. Ib.

31. An indictment, framed in accordance with the laws of Texas, which

charges that the prisoner at a time and place named did, "unlawfully
and with express malice aforethought, kill one J. M. Shamblin by
shooting him with a gun, contrary to the form of the statute," et cet.,
does no violation to the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment to
the Constitution. Ib.

CONTRACT.

1. If one party to a contract intends to rescind it on the ground of failure
of performance by the other, a clear notice of such intention must be
given, unless either the contract dispenses with notice, or it becomes
unnecessary by reason of the conduct of the parties. Hennessy v.
Bacon, 78.

2. The mere receipt of a bill on payment of money is not an assent to the
proposition that the bill contains the whole contract between the par-
ties; but whether it is so or not is a fact to be determined by the jury.
Bank of British North America v. Cooper, 473.

3. A party receiving moneys from another to be transmitted for him to a
named destination, in order that they may be used there to pay his
liabilities, cannot change the destination at the desire of the party to
whom the money is sent, without becoming liable for the loss, in case
loss ensues in consequence of the change. Ib.

4. In the relation of principal and agent, strict compliance by the latter
with the instructions of the former is an unvarying condition of
exemption from liability. Ib.

5. C in New York, who had had business relations with M. & Co. of Glas-
gow, drew upon them for £5000, to mature February 29. On February
26th he bought of plaintiff in error, who had an office in London, a
cable transfer of this amount in favor of M. & Co. to be transmitted
in a check by post from London to Glasgow, and took from the bank
a receipt "for cable transfer on the Bank of British North America,
London, in favor of " M. & Co. "Glasgow." The cable message was
accordingly sent, but the London office, under previous directions from
M. & Co. as to all such matters, but without knowledge of C, instead
of forwarding the check to Glasgow, deposited it to the credit of M. &
Co. in the Bank of Scotland in London, which action was approved
by M. & Co. On the 28th or 29th of February M. & Co. suspended.
It was in evidence that on the 28th they applied similar moneys to the
payment of similar obligations, and that if the check had been sent
by mail as directed, it would have reached Glasgow on the morning of
that day in time to be applied to the payment of C's draft. The
Bank of Scotland appropriated the £5000 to the payment of the bal-
ance due from M. & Co. to it, and C was obliged to meet his draft.
In an action by him against the Bank of British North America, Held,
(1) That whether the bill contained the entire contract between the
parties was a question for the jury; (2) That the bank, having
received the money with knowledge that it belonged to C, and that it

was to be used in the payment of his liabilities, could not substitute
for his instructions the wishes of the party to whom he was remitting
the money; (3) That when his instructions were disobeyed and a loss
ensued, that loss would prima facie fall upon the bank, and the burden
was upon it to show that obedience to the instructions would have
produced a like result. Ib.

See ARMY OF THE UNITED STATES, 1;

EQUITY, 1;
INSURANCE.

CORPORATION.

1. Where a foreign corporation is not doing business in a State, and no
officer is there transacting business for the corporation and represent-
ing it in the State, it cannot be said that the corporation is within the
State so that service can be made upon it; and evidence that the
president of a foreign corporation so situated was induced by false
representations to come within the jurisdiction for the purpose of
obtaining service of process, and that process was there served, is
immaterial, inasmuch as the corporation must be held to have known
that it could not be brought into court by such a service. Fitzgerald
& Mallory Construction Co. v. Fitzgerald, 98.

2. Where an officer of a railroad construction company has full charge for
it of the location and construction of a railroad, and is authorized to
draw checks and drafts, and charged with the general management of
the business of the company in the absence of contrary instructions
by the board of directors, notes given by him for moneys used to pay
off indebtedness of the company arising in the construction of the
road, cannot be held to be in excess of his powers. Ib.

3. It was the duty of the directors to give contrary instructions if they
wished to withdraw the general management from the president, and
to disaffirm the action of their agents promptly if they objected to
it. Ib.

4. If the notes were endorsed at the request of the party to whom the
general management was confided, the indorsee, if compelled to pro-
tect his endorsement, cannot be treated as a volunteer, and if he was
the superintendent of the work, and the money was raised and used
to pay off sub-contractors and material men employed by him, then
upon the refusal of the company to pay, he had the right to take up
the notes and have them assigned to him. Ib.

5. Compensation for official services rendered in the absence of a specified
compensation, fixed or agreed upon, may not be recoverable, but in
this case it was properly left to the jury to determine whether the ser-
vices rendered were of such a character and rendered under such cir-
cumstances that compensation could be claimed therefor. Ib.

6. At the trial of an action of tort upon a plea of nul tiel corporation,
evidence that the plaintiff, after filing a defective certificate of incor-

poration under a general corporation law, acted for years as a corpora-
tion, and recovered a judgment as such in a similar action against the
defendant without any objection made to its capacity to sue, is com-
petent and sufficient to prove it a corporation de facto, and therefore
entitled to maintain this action. Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Co.
v. Fifth Baptist Church, 568.

7. Misnomer of a corporation plaintiff is pleadable in abatement only,
and is waived by pleading to the merits. Ib.

COSTS.

See PRACTICE, 3.

COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES.
See PRACTICE, 1, 2.

COURT AND JURY.

At a trial by jury in a court of the United States, the presiding judge may
express his opinion upon matters of fact which he submits to their
determination. Baltimore and Potomac Railroad v. Fifth Baptist
Church, 568.

See CONTRACT, 2, 5;

CORPORATION, 5;
PRACTICE, 8.

COURT MARTIAL.

The decision of the President confirming or disapproving the sentence of a
general court martial in time of peace extending to the loss of life or
the dismission of a commissioned officer, or in time of peace or war
respecting a general officer, under the provisions of the 65th Article
of war, is a judicial act to be done by him personally, and is not an
official act presumptively his; but it need not be attested by his sign
manual in order to be effectual. United States v.
Page, 673.

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 9.

CRIMINAL LAW.

It is no defence to an indictment under one statute that a defendant might
also be punished under another statute. In re Converse, 624.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 23, 25.

CUSTOM.

See ADMIRALTY, 3.

CUSTOMS DUTIES.

1. Cloths popularly known as "diagonals," and known in trade as
"worsteds," and composed mainly of worsted, but with a small pro-
portion of shoddy and of cotton, are subject to duty as a manufacture

of worsted, and not as a manufacture of wool, under the act of March
3, 1883, c. 121. Seeberger v. Cahn, 95.

2. Schedule F of section 2502 of Title 33 of the Revised Statutes, as
enacted by section 6 of the act of March 3, 1883, c. 121, (22 Stat. 503,)
provided as follows, in regard to duties on imported tobacco: "Leaf
tobacco, of which eighty-five per cent is of the requisite size and of the
necessary fineness of texture to be suitable for wrappers, and of which
more than one hundred leaves are required to weigh a pound; if not
stemmed, seventy-five cents per pound; if stemmed, one dollar per
pound. All other tobacco in leaf, unınanufactured, and not stemmed,
thirty-five cents per pound." Tobacco was imported in bales, each of
which contained a quantity of Sumatra leaf tobacco answering the
description in the statute of that dutiable at 75 cents per pound, except
that it formed only about 83 per cent of the contents of the bale. The
rest of the bale consisted of inferior leaf tobacco, called "fillers," which
was separated from the 75-cent tobacco by strips of paper or cloth,
making the one kind readily separable from the other, on the opening
of the bale. More than 85 per cent of the 75-cent tobacco answered
the description of tobacco dutiable at that rate: Held, that the whole
of the 75-cent tobacco was dutiable at that rate, and that the contents
of the bale, as a whole, were not dutiable at 35 cents per pound.
Falk v. Robertson, 225.

3. The unit upon which the 85 per cent was to be calculated was not the
entire bale. Ib.

4. On a reappraisement by a merchant appraiser and a general appraiser,
under § 2930 of the Revised Statutes, the valuation of goods entered
in March, 1886, was raised, and the importer paid thereon additional
duties, for which he sued the collector, after protest and appeal. At
the trial, the plaintiff put in evidence chapter 3, part 3, articles 447 to
506, and chapter 5, part 8, articles 1399 to 1410, and 1415 to 1417, of
the general regulations under the customs and navigation laws pub-
lished by the Treasury Department in 1884; and extracts from the
instructions issued for the guidance of officers of the customs and
others concerned, by the Secretary of the Treasury, under date of July
1, 1885, being instructions of June 9, 1885, and June 10, 1885. The
importer had asked for the reappraisement, and the collector selected
the merchant appraiser. He took the prescribed oath in regard to the
goods in question. The defendant had a verdict in respect of the addi-
tional duties, under the direction of the court, and the importer had
a judgment in respect of another matter: On a writ of error: Held,
(1) The instructions of the Treasury Department gave the importer
all the rights to which he was entitled, and were not repugnant to that
provision of §§ 2902 and 2930 which required the use of "all reason-
able ways and means," in appraising, and the proper rights of the
importer were accorded to him in this case; (2) The question of the
dutiable value of the merchandise was not to be tried before the ap-

« AnteriorContinuar »