73 U.S. 35 (_) 6 Wall. 35 CRANDALL v. STATE OF NEVADA. Supreme Court of United States. *37 No counsel appeared for the plaintiff in error, Crandall, nor was any brief filed in his behalf. Mr. P. Phillips, who filed a brief for Mr. T.J.D. Fuller, for the State of Nevada. *39 Mr. Justice MILLER delivered the opinion of the court. The question for the first time presented to the court by this record is one of importance. The proposition to be considered is the right of a State to levy a tax upon...
73 U.S. 543 (_) 6 Wall. 543 CLARK v. UNITED STATES. Supreme Court of United States. *544 Messrs. Norton and Weed, Solicitor and Assistant Solicitor for the Court of Claims. Mr. Hughes, who filed a brief for Mr. McCalla, contra. *545 Mr. Justice MILLER delivered the opinion of the court. 1. Among the facts found by the court it is stated that "the officers of government interfered with claimant in the execution of his work, compelling him to dump loose earth where it was exposed to the direct...
73 U.S. 723 (_) 6 Wall. 723 WILLIAMSON v. SUYDAM. Supreme Court of United States. *728 Mr. David Dudley Field, for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Justice CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court. The action was ejectment to recover the possession of two lots of land, situated in the city of New York, and numbered sixty-four and sixty-five, as delineated on a certain map made *729 by the city surveyor. Exceptions were taken by the plaintiffs to the instructions of the Circuit Court, in directing...
73 U.S. 443 (_) 6 Wall. 443 WHITE v. CANNON. Supreme Court of United States. *446 *447 Hughes, Denver, and Peck, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. Louis Janin, contra. Mr. Justice FIELD, after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court as follows: Aside from the affidavit of John McLaughlin, which appears to have been made as if he were troubled with a consciousness of his guilt, the evidence establishes beyond question that he never cultivated any portion of the land claimed by him, and,...
73 U.S. 139 18 L. Ed. 819 6 Wall. 139 WEST v. AURORA CITY. December Term, 1867 ERROR to the Circuit Court for Indiana. The twelfth section of the Judiciary Act provides: 'That if a suit be commenced in any State court against an alien, or by a citizen of the State in which the suit is brought, against a citizen of another State, . . . and the defendant shall, at the time of entering his appearance , file his petition for the removal of the cause for trial in the next Circuit Court, . . . and...
73 U.S. 210 (_) 6 Wall. 210 WEBER v. LEE COUNTY. Supreme Court of United States. Messrs. Dick and Grant, for the plaintiff in error; Mr. Thomas Ewing, Sr., contra. Mr. Justice CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court; stating the case. Bonds to the amount of four hundred and fifty thousand dollars were issued by the proper officers of Lee County in the State of Iowa, in favor of three railroad companies, in equal proportions. Recitals of the respective bonds were, that they were issued to...
73 U.S. 481 (_) 6 Wall. 481 WALKLEY v. CITY OF MUSCATINE. Supreme Court of United States. *482 Mr. J. Grant, for the appellant. Mr. W.F. Brannan, contra. Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court. We are of opinion the complainant has mistaken the appropriate remedy in the case, which was by writ of mandamus from the Circuit Court in which the judgment was rendered against the defendants. The writ affords a full and *483 adequate remedy at law. There are numerous recent cases in...
73 U.S. 124 18 L. Ed. 853 6 Wall. 124 WALKER v. VILLAVASO. December Term, 1867 ERROR to the Supreme Court of Louisiana. This was a motion by Mr. Janin to dismiss the writ of error. The suit,—a suit instituted by Villavaso against Walker, in the District Court of the parish of St. Bernard, Louisiana,—was one of the ordinary sort for foreclosure and sale under a mortgage according to the practice prevailing in Louisiana. Between the 25th January and the 17th August, 1861, Louisiana had passed an '...
73 U.S. 452 18 L. Ed. 846 6 Wall. 452 VOSE v. BRONSON. December Term, 1867 APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Wisconsin. In December, 1856, the La Crosse and Milwaukee Railroad Company, to secure ten millions of dollars in bonds, to be issued by them, executed a mortgage o Bronson, Soutter, and Knapp, as trustees for the bondholders. This mortgage was amended in 1858, so as to limit the issue to four millions. Bonds to that amount were issued, and became a lien on the road. In consequence of the...
73 U.S. 385 (_) 6 Wall. 385 UNITED STATES v. HARTWELL. Supreme Court of United States. *389 Mr. Stanbery, A.G., and Mr. Ashton, special counsel for the United States. Messrs. H.W. Paine and R.M. Morse, contra. *391 Mr. Justice SWAYNE delivered the opinion of the court. This case comes before us upon a certificate of division in opinion of the judges of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts. As disclosed in the record the case is as follows: The defendant was...
73 U.S. 770 (_) 6 Wall. 770 UNITED STATES v. HART. Supreme Court of United States. *772 Mr. Robert Leech, for the appellee, and in support of the decree below, contended that &mdash. Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court. The Supreme Court in reversing the judgment below, held, that the act in question did not extend to, or embrace proceedings under the act of 17th of July, 1862, providing for confiscation of the property of persons engaged in, or aiding and abetting the...
73 U.S. 484 (_) 6 Wall. 484 UNITED STATES v. ECKFORD. Supreme Court of United States. *485 Mr. E.P. Norton, for the United States, appellant. Mr. S.E. Lyon, contra. *486 *487 Mr. Justice CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court. Statement of facts shows that the United States, in June, 1839, brought an action of debt in the Circuit Court on the official bond of the collector of the port of New York, against the executors of Henry Eckford, who was one of the sureties in that bond. Purpose of...
73 U.S. 514 (_) 6 Wall. 514 UNITED STATES, EX REL., v. COUNCIL OF KEOKUK. Supreme Court of United States. Mr. Howell, for the plaintiff in error, and by Messrs. Strong and Craig, contra. Mr. Justice CLIFFORD stated the case and delivered the opinion of the court. The General Assembly of the State of Iowa, by a law passed January 29th, 1857, authorized the corporation defendants to levy a direct tax of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars for the benefit of the Keokuk, Mount Pleasant, and...
73 U.S. 573 (_) 6 Wall. 573 UNITED STATES v. ALIRE. Supreme Court of United States. *575 Mr. Norton, solicitor for the Court of Claims. Messrs. Hughes, Denvers, and Peck, with Mr. Watts (by brief filed), argued, contra. Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court. The only question presented in the record, which we shall examine, is whether or not the court below had jurisdiction of the cause. It will be seen by reference to the two acts of Congress on this subject, that the only...
73 U.S. 101 (_) 6 Wall. 101 UNITED STATES v. ADAMS. SAME v. JOHNSON. SAME v. CLARK. Supreme Court of United States. *105 Messrs. Carlisle, Corwine, and Wills, in support of the motion to dismiss the appeals of Adams and Johnson. Mr. Norton, Solicitor of the Court of Claims, contra. *106 *107 Mr. Justice MILLER delivered the opinion of the court. Motions are made in the case of United States v. Adams, and of the Same v. Johnson, to dismiss the appeals, upon the ground that they were not taken...
73 U.S. 291 (_) 6 Wall. 291 UNITED STATES FOR THE USE OF CRAWFORD v. ADDISON. Supreme Court of United States. *295 Messrs. Carlisle and Brent, for Crawford, plaintiff in error. Messrs. Bradley and Wills, contra. *296 Mr. Justice FIELD, after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court as follows: When the application was made to this court for a mandamus to the Circuit Court to compel the issue of process upon the judgment of ouster against the defendant, Addison, *297 in the quo...
73 U.S. 759 (_) 6 Wall. 759 UNION INSURANCE COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. Supreme Court of United States. *762 Mr. Durant, for the appellants; Mr. Stanbery, A.G., and Mr. Ashton, special counsel of the United States, contra. *763 The CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the court. The first questions in this cause relate to jurisdiction. It was urged in argument, that the act of Congress does not authorize the proceedings instituted in the Circuit Court. The answer to this proposition must be...
73 U.S. 420 18 L. Ed. 868 6 Wall. 420 TURTON v. DUFIEF. December Term, 1867 ERROR to the Circuit Court for the District of Maryland. Dufief, acting without compensation and merely as a friend of a certain Mrs. Fowler, then a widow, in July, 1851, lent for her $2000 (money belonging to her) to Wheeler, taking from him a note payable in one year, and a deed of trust or mortgage security amply sufficient to secure the sum lent. These were delivered to Mrs. Fowler some time previously to October,...
73 U.S. 548 (_) 6 Wall. 548 TOME v. DUBOIS. Supreme Court of United States. *552 Mr. G.H. Williams, for the plaintiff in error. Mr. J.N. Steele, contra. Mr. Justice CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court. Careful attention to the facts of the case, as given in the statement prepared as a part of the opinion of the court, will very much facilitate the investigation, as it discloses very fully the substance of the entire transaction, the order of the events and the pretensions of the...
73 U.S. 134 (_) 6 Wall. 134 THOMPSON v. RAILROAD COMPANIES. Supreme Court of United States. *136 Messrs. Carlisle and McPherson, for the appellants, and in support of that view. Mr. H.H. Hunter, contra, for the Railroad Companies, appellees. Mr. Justice DAVIS delivered the opinion of the court. Has a court of equity jurisdiction over such a case as is presented by this record If it has not, the decree of the *137 court below must be reversed, the bill dismissed, and the parties remitted to the...
