remanded to the supreme court of the state of Montana, on motion of Mr. George F. Edmunds, for plaintiff in error. BERNHEIMER et al. v. ROBERTSON. Error to the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of New York. See 39 Fed. Rep. 190. Charles Curie and Stephen G. Clarke, for plaintiffs in error. The Attorney General, for defendant in error. No opinion. Judgment reversed, with costs, and cause remanded to be proceeded in according to law and justice, on motion of Asst. Atty. Gen. Maury, for the defendant in error, who confessed error. BIRDSEYE v. NICKERSON. SAME V. ROGERS. Error to the circuit court of the United States for the western district of Texas. See 87 Fed. Rep. 821. Bethel Coopwood and John Hancock, for plaintiff in error. No opinion. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction, per stipulation in the record in No. 920, to abide the decision in Birdseye v. Shaeffer, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 885. BLISS et al. v. HUGHES. Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the district of Kentucky. Lawrence Maxwell, Jr., and Wm. M. Ramsey, for appellants. C. B. Simrall, for appellee. No opinion. Dismissed, pursuant to the twenty-eighth rule. BLISS V. MCMICHAEL. (July 3, 1890.) Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the district of Kentucky. Lawrence Maxwell, Jr., and Wm. M. Ramsey, for appellant. C. B. Simrall, for -appellee. No opinion. Dismissed, pursuant to the twenty-eighth rule. BODART V. SCHELL'S EX'RS. (March 2, 1891.) Error to the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of New York. See 33 Fed. Rep. 825. A. W. Griswold, S. F. Phillips, and Frederic D. McKenney, for plaintiff in error. The Attorney General, for defendants in er ror. BONN V. THRASHER et al. (December 8, 1890.) Error to the supreme court of the state of Iowa. P. Henry Smyth, for plaintiff in error. W. E. Blake and S. W. Packard, for defendants in error. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, per stipulation, on motion of Mr. P. Henry Smyth, for plaintiff in error. BOWES V. MURRAY. (January 22, 1891.) Error to the supreme court of the territory of Montana. See 12 Pac. Rep. 858. George F. Edmunds and Hiram Knowles, for plaintiff in error. Walter H. Smith, for defendant in error. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, and remanded to the supreme court of the state of Montana, on motion of Mr. George F. Edmunds, for plaintiff in error. BRADFORD v. MILLER. (October 21, 1890.) Error to the supreme court of the District of Columbia. R. D. Mussey, for plaintiff in error. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, pursuant to the tenth rule. BROWN et al. v. HAZARD. Appeal from the supreme court of the territory of Washington. Leander Holmes, for appellants. A. H. Garland and W. W. Upton, for appellee. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, pursuant to the tenth rule, and cause remanded to the supreme court of the state of Washington. BUCKSTAFF v. MILES. (December 16, 1890.) Error to the circuit court of the United States for the district of Nebraska. C. S. Montgomery, for plaintiff in error. J. M. Woolworth, for defendant in error. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, per stipulation. BUAL et al. v. MURRAY. Error to the supreme court of the territory of Montana. See 12 Pac. Rep. 858. George F. Edmunds and Hiram Knowles, for plaintiffs in error. Walter H. Smith, for defendant in error. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, and remanded to the supreme court of the state No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, per of Montana, on motion of Mr. George F. Edstipulation of counsel. munds, for plaintiffs in error. CENTRAL IOWA RY. Co. v. PIERCE. (April 22, 1891.) Error to the superior court of the state of Iowa. Anthony C. Daly, for plaintiff in error. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, pursuant to the tenth rule. CENTRAL PAC. R. Co. v. UNITED STATES. (November 21, 1890.) Appeal from the court of claims. Joseph E. McDonald and Joseph K. McCammon, for appellant. The Attorney General and The Solicitor General, for the United States. No opinion. Dismissed, on motion of Mr. Joseph E. McDonald, for appellant. CABLE TRAMWAY CO. OF OMAHA V. OMAHA HORSE RY. Co. (March 24, 1891.) Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the district of Nebraska. See 30 Fed. Rep. 324; 32 Fed. Rep. 727; 33 Fed. Rep. 689. J. C. Cowin, for appellant. G. E. Pritchett, for appellee. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, per stipulation. CARSLEY V. TRAVIS et al. (January 21, 1891.) Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of New York. Samuel T. Smith, for appellant. C. A. Collins, for appellees. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, pursuant to the tenth rule. WON KEN HONG V. UNITED STATES. LEONG WE V. SAME. LUE WING V. SAME. GUN SIN HAN V. Same. MAR HAI YUNG V. SAME. HOM DAI QUANG V. SAME. QUOCK AH SHIP V. SAME. LEONG CHOY V. SAME. WONG TSUE JO v. SAME. HOM YER LING V. SAME. WONG AH YICK V. SAME. DAY KIM DUNG V. SAME. MOCK GEE V. SAME. FONG JONG V. SAME. BING CHEONG V. SAME. WONG GUN v. SAME. LIEW GUAS NEWY V. SAME. KONG GIM V. SAME. Tow NGEE v. SAME. MAR WE JING V. SAME. MAR LICK YEW V. Same. YEE QUONG LIN V. SAME. YEE QUONG NUEY V. SAME. WONG LI LIP v. SAME. JUNG DOK JIM V. SAME. WONG TU CHOY V. SAME. WONG YOU CHOY V. SAME. CHIN QUI FAR V. SAME. WONG QUI FONG V. SAME. POON CHUCK BEE V. SAME. LEE SING SUEY V. SAME. LOUI DEW CHONG V. SAME. LOUI LIN GAK V. SAME. LEM DOR ANG V. SAME. GEE KUM SUE v. SAME. LEE Aн Doo v. SAME. CHING TAI QUONG V. SAME. MACK SEW HEONG V. SAME. GUN HONG SUE V. SAME. CHUNG PING WO v. SAME. TOM АH FONG V. SAME. CHOY Yow YEE V. SAME. WO QUAN Goon v. Same. JEONG KEE V. SAME. YEE HOY JUNG V. SAME. (March 16, 1891.) States for the northern district of California. Appeals from the circuit court of the United S. G. Hilborn, J. J. Scrivner, and Thomas D. Riordan, for appellants. The Attorney General, for appellees. No opinion. Dismissed, pursuant to the CHASE V. MASSACHUSETTS HOME MISSION- tenth rule. ARY SOC. Nathaniel Myers, for appellant. C. A. Peabody, for appellees. George F. Edmunds and Hiram Knowles, for plaintiffs in error. Walter H. Smith, for No opinion. Dismissed per stipulation of defendant in error. counsel. EWART MANUF'G Co. v. MOLINE MALLE- (April 17, 1891.) Appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the northern district of Illinois. See 30 Fed. Rep. 871, 873. Charles K. Offield, for appellant. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, pur suant to the tenth rule. FAUCHE et al. v. SCHELL'S EX'RS. (March 2, 1891.) No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, and remanded to the supreme court of the state of Montana, on motion of Mr. George F. Edmunds for plaintiffs in error. FLORANG et al. v. CRAIG. Error to the supreme court of the state of P. Henry Smyth, for plaintiffs in error. W. E. Blake and S. W. Packard, for defendant in error. No opinion. Dismissed, with costs, per stipulation, on motion of Mr. P. Henry Error to the circuit court of the United | Smyth for plaintiffs in error. States for the southern district of New York. |