Germain v. Mason, 392 11. Where the plaintiffs in error, according to their Kearney v. Case, 395 Wadsworth v. Warren, 402 Freeborn v. The Protector, 463 R. R. Co. v. Whitton, 571 Idem, 571 17. The granting or overruling of a motion for a Dirst v. Morris, 722 Idem, 722 20. This court cannot review a finding of a jury 740 21. Where the charge puts the case to the jury on Idem, 740 Idem, 740 Erskine v. Hohnbach, 745 Idem, 745 9. Where a plea is erroneously overruled on de- R. R. Co. v. Bk., The Western Metropolis v. Low, 11. The assignee in bankruptcy of the plaintiff in 12. An objection insisted upon for the first time 16. Commissions to take testimony cannot be al- lowed in this court, as of course. A good and suffi- | ASSIGNEE. 20. It is sufficient reason for giving preference to 550 21. A party cannot take advantage of rulings up- 556 Ex-parte Russell, 632 peal was asked for or allowed, and the appeal bond Monger v. Shirley, 635 26. A bill of exceptions dated during the term at were taken at the trial. French v. Edwards, 702 27. When the court is composed of a single judge O'Dowd v. Russell, SEE BANKRUPTCY, 2, 6, 8, 10. ATTORNEYS. 3. The obligation of attorneys is not discharged AUDITA QUERELA. 1. The writ of audita querela does not lie, where Avery v. U. S., 405 parties may plead and take issue on the merits; it 1dem, SEE CARRIER, 5, 7. SEE CHATTEL MORTGAGE, 4. 1. No execution can issue on the judgment from 857 Idem, 857 857 ARMY. 857 Knox v. Bk., 2. The assignee in bankruptcy, alone, can bring Toof v. Martin, 4. The transfer to one creditor, of a large portion A Brigadier-General is above the rank of brevet able to meet his obligations as they mature. 10. The assignee need not sue the sheriff, but may sue the bank which directed the levy and sale and holds the proceeds in its vaults. Idem, 832 the shipper agreed that the goods should be stowed BILL OF REVIEW. A bill of review may be maintained on the discovery of an agreement which was absent at the ed for. 11. What is an unlawful preference under the trial, where its absence was satisfactorily accountBankrupt Act? Idem, BANKS. SEE ACTION, 4. 832 1. By the Currency Act of 1864, banking associations are prohibited from making any loan or discount on the security of their own capital stock. Bk. v. Lanier, 172 2. A deposit is a loan of money, and is within said prohibition, whether interest be obtained or not. Idem, 172 3. A contract pledging the stock of a national bank to it as security for loans is illegal. Idem, 172 4. Congress evidently intended, by the law of 1864, to relieve the holders of bank shares from the restrictions imposed by section 36 of the Act of 1863. Idem. 172 Easley v. Kellom, BILLS, NOTES AND CHECKS. 890 5. National banks may be sued in any state, county or municipal court in the county or city in which said association is located, having jurisdic-in tion in similar cases. Bethel Bk. v. Pahquioque Bk., 840 6. The act of the Comptroller of the Currency in appointing a receiver of a national bank does not work its complete dissolution, but the bank as a legal entity, continues to exist, and it may still sue and be sued, to close its business. Idem, 840 7. The decision of the receiver disallowing a claim against the bank is not final, but is subject to review in the state court. Idem, BEQUESTS. SEE WILL, 1. BILL OF LADING. 840 Hanauer v. Doane, 439 the hands of a person knowing the fact, are not 4. Due-bills given for the price of such goods in good consideration for a note. Idem, 439 8. Where, on the last day of grace, the indorsers wrote to the holder of the note that the maker was unable to pay the note, and added "but we hold ourselves responsible for its payment and shall see it done at any early day," held, that such letter was a waiver of demand and notice. 476 9. Satisfactory proof of waiver of demand, notice and protest of a note, is equivalent to a compliance with the requirement. Pugh v. McCormick, Yeager v. Farwell, BONA FIDE PURCHASER. SEE BONDS, 3, 11, 14. 789 2. A person who is lessee of real property, with the right to purchase the same at a fixed price, is not a bona fide purchaser without notice as against an unrecorded mortgage. Idem, BONDS. SEE CONTRACTS, 7, 8. 406 1. A finding that the plaintiff became the holder by transfer before maturity, does not imply that be purchased or received the coupons sued upon on any consideration whatever. Smith v. Sue Co., 102 2. Where there is no proof on these points, the plaintiff can occupy no better position than the one to whom the bonds were originally delivered. Idem, 102 3. Purchasers of bonds, in good faith,in the open market, supposing them to be valid obligations, are bona fide holders for value. 199. R. R. Co. v. Cowdrey, 4. Distiller's bond, conditioned to conform to all the provisions of the internal revenue Act, is valid. U. S. v. Mynderse, 241 5. The United States may maintain an action against the principal and sureties in such a bond, for violation of the requirements of sections 39 and 45 of the internal revenue Law of July 1, 1862. Idem. 241 6. Where the law authorizes a corporation to sell its own bonds, the giving collateral security on such sale, is not inconsistent with the transaction being a sale. R. R. Co v. Bk., 385 7. Where a receiver of public moneys has given bond for the faithful performance of his duties, proof that be had been robbed of such money is no defense to a suit on such bond. Boyden v. U. S., 527 8. His liability is to be measured by his bond, and where that binds him to pay the money, a cause which renders it impossible for him to do so is of no importance. Idem, 527 9. Where a marshal or receiver of public moneys was in default for not paying over public moneys for some time before they were prevented from payment by the public enemies, such prevention is no defense to an action on their bonds to recover such moneys. Bevans v. U. S., Haliburton v. U. S., 531 333 10. Where a county received in exchange for its bonds, a certificate of stock of a railroad company, and held it seventeen years and still holds it, the county is estopped from asserting that the conditions on which the bonds were to be issued had not been fulfilled. 2. If the charter-party let only the use of the vessel, the owner at the same time retaining its command and possession, the charterer is a mere contractor for a designated service, and the duties and responsibilities of the owner are not changed. Idem, 756 3. Under a clause in the charter-party by which the Government agreed that, in case the vessel should be destroyed or damaged by any extraordinary marine risk the owners should be indemnified, held, that a collision with a sunken anchor in the harbor was an ordinary risk for which the Government was not liable. 756 Idem, CHATTEL MORTGAGE. 1. A chattel mortgage which was never deposited in the proper office is void, as against creditors, under the Statute of Kansas. Bk. v. Hunt. 190 2. A chattel mortgage without seal is valid, unless a seal is required by Statute. Gibson v. Warden, 797 3. A chattel mortgage on partnership property executed by one of the partners is good, if the other partners authorized or acquiesced in its execution. Idem, 797 4. A chattel mortgage is not void as to an assignee in bankruptcy in Ohio, which was executed before, but filed within four months before filing the petition in bankruptcy. 797 Idem, 5. As between the mortgagor and the mortgagee and subsequent mortgagees and purchasers with notice, a mortgage is valid from its delivery without filing. 6. Where the mortgaged property has been converted into money, the lien of the mortgage follows the fund into the hands of an assignee, and binds it there. Idem, CITIZENS. SEE CORPORATION, 3. COLLECTORS. 797 Under the Act of June 17, 1864, a collector is authorized to retain all fees paid him, not in excess of $2,500. U. S. v. Ballard, COLLISION. SEE DAMAGES, 1, 3-5. INEVITABLE ACCIDENT, 1-3. 845 1. Whether the lookout on the schooner was sufficient can make no difference, where the want of a proper lookout did not contribute to the disaster. The Fannie v. The Forrester, 114 9. That the other owners are also sued with him is no bar to a recovery against him, as it is in accordance with admiralty practice to decree against one of several respondents to a libel for a tort, and to discharge the others. Idem, 419 27. The violation of maritime law by the injured vessel in carrying a white light, and carrying it in an improper place rendered her in fault, and deprived her of all remedy for a collision. Idem, 822 28. Where two ships are running in the same di10. Where both vessels were in fault, the dam-rection, the ship astern, if she is sailing faster than ages must be divided. The Sapphire v. Napoleon III., 127 11. In waters crowded with shipping, the duty of the lookout is of the highest importance, requiring indefatigable care and sleepless vigilance, and every doubt as to the performance of such duty, arising upon the evidence, should be resolved against the vessel owing such duty. the one ahead, must adopt the necessary precautions to avoid a collision. 828 The Cayuga v. Hoboken Land Co., 29. Where ships are running on intersecting lines, the one which has the other on her starboard side must keep out of the way of the other. Idem. 828 34. Where a collision occurs exclusively from nat ural causes, the loss must rest were it fell. The Mabey v. Atkins, 881 35. This rule has no application to a case where negligence is shown to have been committed on either side. Idem, 881 COMMERCE. SEE NAVIGABLE WATERS, 1-4. 787 CONFISCATION. 17. Where the question of fault in a collision lies between a vessel at a wharf, out of the track of other vessels, and a steamer navigating a channel of sufficient width, the fault generally will be held to be with the steamer. Idem, 787 |