48 U.S. 279 7 How. 279 12 L. Ed. 700 WILLIAM CRAWFORD AND DAVID FILES, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. THE BRANCH BANK OF ALABAMA AT MOBILE. January Term, 1849 THIS was a writ of error sued out under the twenty-fifth section of the Judiciary Act, and directed to the Supreme Court of Alabama. In May, 1841, the following promissory note was executed:—— '$3,817.50. 'Two hundred and fifteen days after date, we jointly and severally promise to pay to B. Gayle, cashier, or order, three thousand eight hundred...
48 U.S. 646 7 How. 646 12 L. Ed. 855 WILLIAM AND FRANCIS SADLER, COMPLAINANTS, v. THOMAS B. HOOVER, SYLVANUS CHAMBERS, AND SAMUEL H. DINKINS, PARTNERS BY THE STYLE OF THOMAS B. HOOVER AND COMPANY. January Term, 1849 THIS case came up, on a certificate of division, from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Mississippi. The following is the statement of facts agreed upon in the court below, by the counsel for the respective parties, and sent up with the record. 'WM....
48 U.S. 89 (1849) 7 How. 89 CHARLES WILKES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. SAMUEL DINSMAN. Supreme Court of United States. *111 The case came up to this court upon these bills of exceptions, and was argued by Mr. Bradley and Mr. Toucey (Attorney-General), for the plaintiff in error, and Mr. May, for the defendant in error. *122 Mr. Justice WOODBURY delivered the opinion of the court. The original action in this case was trespass by a marine in the Exploring Expedition against its commanding officer. It...
48 U.S. 234 (1849) 7 How. 234 PETER K. WAGNER, AND SIDONIA PIERCE WAGNER, HIS WIFE, JOHN LAWSON LEWIS, LOUISA MARIA LEWIS, THEODORE LEWIS, ELIZA CORNELIA LEWIS, ALFRED J. LEWIS, JOHN HAMPDEN LEWIS, ALGERNON SIDNEY LEWIS, GEORGE WASHINGTON LEWIS, AND BENJAMIN FRANKLIN LEWIS, ALL RESIDENTS AND CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS AND STATE OF LOUISIANA, AND JOHN BOWMAN, AND MARY PIERCE BOWMAN, HIS WIFE, LATE MARY PIERCE LAWSON, RESIDENTS AND CITIZENS OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, AND GEORGE C....
48 U.S. 784 (1849) 7 How. 784 JEREMIAH VAN RENSSELAER, APPELLANT, v. JOHN WATTS'S EXECUTORS. Supreme Court of United States. Mr. Blunt, of counsel for the appellant. Mr. Seward, for appellees, united in the application. *785 This motion was made on the 9th of March, when the court took time to consider. On the 12th, Mr. Chief Justice TANEY announced the decision of the court as follows: On consideration of the motion made in this cause, on the 9th instant, by Mr. Blunt, of counsel for the...
49 U.S. 41 (1850) 8 How. 41 THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFFS, v. THOMAS STAATS, JUNIOR. Supreme Court of United States. *43 Mr. Johnson (Attorney-General), on the part of the United States, contended, &mdash. Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the Court. The prisoner was indicted under the third section of the act of Congress, passed 3d March, 1823, entitled "An act for the punishment of frauds committed on the government of the United States." The section provides, that if any person...
48 U.S. 833 (1849) 7 How. 833 THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. RICHARD KING AND DANIEL W. COXE, DEFENDANTS. Supreme Court of United States. *834 The United States being plaintiffs in error, the argument was opened and concluded by Mr. Toucey, (Attorney-General,) who was replied to by Mr. Coxe and Mr. Gilpin, on behalf of the defendants in error. *844 Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. This case is one of much interest to the parties concerned, and to the...
48 U.S. 658 (1849) 7 How. 658 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. THE HEIRS OF LOUIS BOISDORÉ. [*] Supreme Court of United States. Mr. Fendall moved to dismiss the appeal, upon the grounds stated in the opinion of the court, which motion was opposed by Mr. Toucey (Attorney-General). Mr. Justice McLEAN delivered the opinion of the court. This is an appeal from the decree of the District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. *659 The bill was filed against the United States, under the...
48 U.S. 185 (1849) 7 How. 185 THE UNITED STATES, COMPLAINANTS, v. THE CITY OF CHICAGO. Supreme Court of United States. *188 The cause was argued by Mr. Toucey (Attorney-General), on behalf of the United States, no counsel appearing for the city of Chicago. *190 Mr. Justice WOODBURY delivered the opinion of the court. This case comes before us on a certificate of a division of opinion between the judges of the Circuit Court in the District of Illinois. A preliminary question has arisen as to our...
49 U.S. 1 (1850) 8 How. 1 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. BURROUGHS E. CARR AND JOHN PECK, CLAIMANTS OF SIXTEEN BOXES OF HAVANA SUGAR, TWELVE BASKETS OF CHAMPAGNE WINE, &c. THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. BURROUGHS E. CARR AND JOHN PECK, CLAIMANTS OF TEN BOXES, TWENTY HALF-BOXES, AND SIX QUARTER-BOXES OF RAISINS, FOUR KEGS OF GRAPES, &c. Supreme Court of United States. *5 The cases were argued by Mr. Johnson (Attorney-General), for the United States, and by Mr. Wood, of New York, for the...
49 U.S. 113 (1850) 8 How. 113 THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. THE HEIRS OF BOISDORÉ. SAME, APPELLANTS, v. THE HEIRS OF POWERS. SAME, APPELLANTS, v. THE HEIRS OF TURNER. Supreme Court of United States. *115 The motion to dismiss was sustained by Mr. Volney Howard and Mr. Henderson, and opposed by Mr. Gillet and Mr. Johnson (Attorney-General). *120 Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. A motion has been made to dismiss this case, for want of jurisdiction in this court to...
48 U.S. 769 (1849) 7 How. 769 GRANT B. UDELL AND JACOB MILLER, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. ALEXANDER B. DAVIDSON. Supreme Court of United States. A motion to dismiss it, for want of jurisdiction, was made by Mr. J. Mason Campbell, which motion was sustained by him, and opposed by Mr. Coxe. Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court. A motion has been made to dismiss this case, for want of jurisdiction. It appears that a man by the name of Gregory had obtained, by residence on the...
48 U.S. 573 (1849) 7 How. 573 JOHN TYLER, WHO IS A CITIZEN OF VIRGINIA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, AND SUCCESSOR IN OFFICE OF MARTIN VAN BUREN, AND TRUSTEE FOR THE USE OF THE ORPHAN CHILDREN PROVIDED FOR IN THE NINETEENTH ARTICLE OF THE TREATY WITH THE CHOCTAWS, OF SEPTEMBER, 1830, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. JOHN H. HAND, JOHN HUDDLESTON, AND THOMAS G. BLEWETT, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR. Supreme Court of United States. *577 It was argued, on the part of the plaintiff in error, by Mr. Clifford, then...
48 U.S. 706 (1849) 7 How. 706 THOMAS TOWNSEND, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. ROBERT JEMISON. Supreme Court of United States. *709 It was argued by Mr. Cocke, for the plaintiff in error. His argument was as follows. *714 Mr. Justice WOODBURY delivered the opinion of the court. The original action in this case was assumpsit. Though the declaration contained several counts, some on a special promise and some for money paid and received, it was indorsed on the original summons, that the action was "...
48 U.S. 819 (1849) 7 How. 819 GEORGE B. STEARNS, ADMINISTRATOR DE BONIS NON OF JOHN O. PAGE, APPELLANT, v. RUFUS R. PAGE. Supreme Court of United States. *820 It was argued by Mr. Evans, for the appellant, and Mr. Allen, for the appellee. *826 Mr. Justice GRIER delivered the opinion of the court. A brief history of the conceded facts of this case, anterior to the filing of the amended bill, may save the trouble of a more tedious analysis of the bill and answer, with their numerous amendments,...
48 U.S. 283 (1849) 7 How. 283 GEORGE SMITH, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. WILLIAM TURNER, HEALTH-COMMISSIONER OF THE PORT OF NEW YORK. JAMES NORRIS, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE CITY OF BOSTON. Supreme Court of United States. *287 The case of Smith v. Turner was argued at December term, 1845, by Mr. Webster and Mr. D.B. Ogden, for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr. Willis Hall and Mr. John Van Buren, for the defendant in error. Mr. J. Prescott Hall, for the plaintiff in error. *392 Mr. Justice McLEAN....
48 U.S. 198 (1849) 7 How. 198 JENNET SMITH, CALVIN S. POWE, AND THOMAS A. POWE, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. JOSEPH KERNOCHEN. Supreme Court of United States. *200 It was argued by Mr. Dargan, for the plaintiffs in error, and Mr. Sergeant, for the defendant in error. Mr. Dargan, for the plaintiffs in error. *215 Mr. Justice NELSON, after reading the statement of the case prefixed to this report, proceeded to deliver the opinion of the court. We are of opinion, that the charge of the court below upon...
48 U.S. 738 (1849) 7 How. 738 HEZEKIAH SMITH, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. WILLIAM HUNTER, TREASURER OF BUTLER COUNTY, JAMES B. CAMERON, AUDITOR OF BUTLER COUNTY, AND THE PRESIDENT AND TRUSTEES OF THE MIAMI UNIVERSITY. Supreme Court of United States. *740 It was argued by Mr. Schenck, for the plaintiff in error, and Mr. Vinton, for the defendants in error. Mr. Justice DANIEL delivered the opinion of the court. This is a writ of error to the Supreme Court of Ohio, prosecuted under the twenty-fifth...
48 U.S. 627 (1849) 7 How. 627 JOHN L. SHAWHAN, DANIEL SHAWHAN, GEORGE H. PERRIN, BENJAMIN BERRY, CATHARINE SNODGRASS, AND ISAAC MILLER, APPELLANTS, v. PERRY WHERRITT, ASSIGNEE OF THE BANKRUPT ESTATE OF BENJAMIN BRANDON. Supreme Court of United States. *633 It was argued by Mr. Trimble, for the appellants, and Mr. Bibb, for the appellee. *641 Mr. Justice GRIER delivered the opinion of the court. Perry Wherritt, as assignee of Benjamin Brandon, a bankrupt, filed his bill in equity in the District...
48 U.S. 612 (1849) 7 How. 612 PHILIP PECK AND WILLIAM BELLOWS, COPARTNERS, TRADING UNDER THE FIRM OF PHILIP PECK AND COMPANY, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. JOHN S. JENNESS, JOHN GAGE, AND JOHN E. LYON, TRADING UNDER THE NAME AND FIRM OF JENNESS, GAGE, AND COMPANY, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR. Supreme Court of United States. It was argued by Mr. Goodrich, on behalf of the defendants in error. C.B. Goodrich, for defendants in error *618 Mr. Justice GRIER delivered the opinion of the court. The defendants in...
