text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1890

 INDEX. cxxx.ix .. Indiam, AmmClln--Continued. cooperation of Smithsonian Institution with States, etc., in ethnological Paae. researches among_____________ 413 amount authorized to be expended for _______________ .. __________ 413 allowance to States, etc., contribut- ing__________________________ 414 work under direction of Secretary of Smithsonian Institution________ 414 in Indian or National Park, bnds, under regulations by Secretary of the Interior________________ 414 Indians in California, all claims of, against United States for lands taken without compensa- tion to be submitted to Court of Claims by Attornev General of California, on behalf of the Indians________________ ._ _ __ _ 602 jurisdiction conferred, with right of appeal to the Supreme Court___ 602 declaration of ground for equitable relieL __ __________ __________ _ 602 settlement of equit.J .ble rights notwith- standing lapse of time, etc_ ____ 602 any decree to equal compensation as provided by unratified treaties__ 602 prior payments may be pleaded as set-offs _____________________ _ claims to be filed within three years __ _ evidence admitted _______________ _ 602 602 602 reimbursement to California if judg- ment against United States____ 602 judgment to be placed to credit of; interest allowed _____________ _ use of fund for benefit of the Indians; no per capita payments_______ _ roll to be made of persons entitled thereto _____________________ _ 603 603 603 applications to be made within two years_______________________ 603 revision within three years to be final________________________ 603 rules, etc., to be prescribed_________ 603 IndU8tria HomeforColoredChildrtm, D. C., appropriation for. salaries and ex- penses ___________________ 67~ 1292 for repairs, etc _________________ 676,1292 for rebuilding barn_ ____ ______ ____ _ 1292 deposit of receipts from sale of products __________________ 676,1292 I ndU8trial Home School, D. C., appropriation for salaries and expenses_ 676, 1292 for repairs and improvements_ ___ 676, 1292 Ind1.l.8triallnstitution for Women, Federal, appropriation for maintenance, etc_ _ 82, 1113 deficiency appropriation for _ _________ 22 erection of a chapel at, authorized from funds donated therefor __ _______ 1509 right of wav granted across premiaes of, to Alderson, W. Va., for high- way________________________ _ 53 IndU8trial, Mechanical, etc.,~, appropriation for establishing stand- ards, methods of testing, etc., of; cooperative ________________ 93, 1123 Ind1.l.8trial Property, I~ Bureau for Protection of, appropriationforquota ____________ 74,1105 Ind1.l.8trial ReformaUJrll, United Statu, appropriation for maintenance, etc_ -- 83, 1113 for remodeling, etc., buildings, etc___ _ 1114 Industrial Reformatory, United Stat&-- 1'." Continued. deficiency appropriation for construct- ing brick plant, etc_ __ __ ______ 22 employment of inmates restricted to Government supplies, etc____ 22 for construction, etc_______________ 906 unexpended balance reappropri- ated_________________________ 1647 portion of Camp Sherman reservation, Ohio, transferred as site for_____ 759 Inerarity Point, Fla., bridge authorized across Perdido Bay, to Baldwin County, Ala., from__ 771 Infancy Hygiene, Maternity, and, appropriation for executing Act for promoting ________________ 108, ll38 Infant Mortality, appropriation for investigations, etc_ 108, 1138 Infantile Paralysis, appropriation for prevention of epi- demic ____________________ 17~ 1040 Infantile Paralysis, D. C., appropriation for preventing ______ 667, 1284 Infantry School, Fort Benning, Ga., appropriation for instruction expenses_ 344., 1366 Influenza, appropriation for prevention of epi- demic ____________________ 174,1040 I nJormation at Source, . returns to be made by persons making fixed payments to others of $1,500 or more ay'ear _________ 836 regardless of amounts, if of obligations of corporations, foreign coupons, etc" _____________________ . ___ _ 837 names and addresses of recipients on demand______________________ 837 interest on Federal securities ex- cept~d_______________________ 837 Information Ojfice, Depart1Tlefll 01 Agricul- turt'l appropriation for salaries and expenses_ 540, 1190 for printing and binding for _____ 540,1191 Ingraham Street NW., D. C., appropriation for paving, etc., Thir- teenth Street west, to end of pnvement____________________ 653 InjUries to Distriet 01 Columbia Employees, appropriation for compensation lor_ 648, 1265 deficiency appropriation for compensa- tion ________________________ 8.1628 Injuries to Employees, provisions of Longshoremen's, etc., Compensation Act applicable to, in District of COlumbiA________ 600 deficiency appropriation for allowances from compensation fund_____ 5, 1626 I njuriu to Govem7lMf'lt Employua, appropriation for 9lI0wances from com- pensationfund_____________ 677,1235 Injuries to Per,om in Federal Park" etc., actions to recover on account of, to be brought in courts of State where located ___________ ~ ___ ____ __ _ I nland Water Route, 54 investigations directed as to feasibility of extending to, from Boston, Mass., to Beaufort! N. C ., the fa- cilities of Inlan<1 Waterways COrporatioll.._ __ __ ___ __ __ ___ __ _ 981

�


text: Talk:Ogden v. Parsons/Opinion of the Court

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1891

 exl Iflland Waterways Corporahoft, appropriation for purchase of capital stock of_____________________ _ use of amounts yearly ___________ _ capitalstoek incre88ed _____________ _ subscription and payment by United States______________________ _ additionalsUIn authorized_________ _ transportation facilities operated by Secretary of War to be contin- uedby _____________________ _ initiate water carriage on the Miss- issippi above Saint Louis ______ _ completion of channels on Missi88ippi River tributaries for barges and tow boats, to be certified to Sec- retary ______________________ _ ascertainment if traffic, terminals, joint route, etc., arrangements with connecting carriers, proba- . blyavailable ________________ _ services of Corporation may be ex- tended to tributaries when chan- nels completed and transporta- tion operated________________ _ transportation servioes of, continued untU navigable channels com- pletedfor regulartransportation_ terlnlnal facilities provided for joint raU and water service_________ _ joint tariffs with raU carriers reason- ably fair to both, secured _____ _ private persons, etc., are ready to en- gage in river common carrier serviC8- _____________________ _ lease or sale authorized of transporta- tion facilities of, or any unit, when channels available, etc___ _ units designated _________________ _ facilities of, not to be sold to any carrier by rail, etc___________________ _ if no satisfactory 888urance given that similar common carrier service will be continued_______ _ untO fair value ascertained, etc., and the President approves the sale or lease ____________________ _ any person, etc., including, conducting common carrier service on the Warrior, or Mississippi or tribu- tariesJ... may obtain from Inter- state vommerce Commission, cer- tificate of public necessity, etc __ order by Commission for all connect- illg carriers to join in through routes, joint rates, etc., with__ _ interstate common carriers required to negotiate for equitable divi- sions of the joint difterential rates _______________________ _ determination by order of Com- mi88ion on failure of carriers to &gree- --- - hearings at once upon complaint, of reasonableness or lawfulne88 of throug!J. !Oute or joint rate, by COmln18810n __________________ _ re&I!Onablen688 of minimum differ- entials______________________ _ reasonableness of any division of joint rates __________________ _ order to be made after full hear- ing _________________________ _ burde.n. of proof on carrier com- plalwng ____________________ _ INDEX. Pa&e. ' 1nland Waterways Corporation-Contd. hearing at once upon complaint; pref- erence anti speedy decision of 1380 1380 978 Palle. 978 978 978 978 979 979 such questions________________ 980 buyer or leBSCe of trar.sportation facili- ties of, entitled to certificate of publio oece88ity as a common carrier_______________________ 980 traffic, tariffs, etc., to remain in full force_'_ ____ _____ _______ __ ___ _ 980 changes by mutual consent of water carrier and other participating carrier_______________________ 980 joint rail and water rates construed__ 981 operations of transportation, etc., facili- ties, subject to interstate com- merce laws__ ______ ___________ 981 to provisions of Shipping Act_______ 981 veslle1s of, subject to laws governing merchant v688els _____________ _ investigation as to extending service of, to inland water route from 981 Boston, Mass., to Beaufort, N. C_ 981 Inquiries and Investigations, Senate, 979 appropriation for expenses oL _____ 520,1390 deficiency appropriationfor expenses oC 3, 884 Insane, Alaska, 979 appropriation for care oL _________ 240,1604 deficiency appropriation for care oL____ 1644 979 Insane Americanun Canada, 979 979 979 979 979 979 979 upon application, to be transferred to Saint Elizabeths Hospital, D. C., if legal residence not knoWD_____ 1495 Insane, D. C., appropriation for expenses executing lunacy writs_______________ 671,1287 for supportofindigent__________ 677,1293 for deporting nonresident ________ 677, 1293 deficiency appropriation for support (If indigent _________ :. __ __ _ 10,892,1631 for executing lunacy writs__________ 1630 Insect Infestations of Trees, deficiency appropriation for emergency expenses combating, in national forests____ ~ _________________ _ Insecticides, 12 appropriation for chemical investiga- tions, etc., oL __ .: __________ 557,1207 for preve.1ting sale, etc., o~ adulter- ated_______________________ 566,1218 deficiency appropriation for investiga- 12 tions, etc ___________________ _ 980 Insects (see also Entomology Bureau, Department of Agriculture), appropriation for investigations, etc_ 558, 1208 for study of, affecting health of man, 980 980 980 etc.; household, etc ________ 558, 1208 for taxonomy and interrelations of, etc_______________________ 558, 1209 importation of useful. _______ _ 558, 1209 insect pest survey____________ 558,1209 deficiency appropriation for study of, affectmg man, oetc_ ___ __ ____ ___ 1634 for investigating tropical and sub- tropical planL_ _____ ________ _ _ 1634 Inspection and Survey, N av'll, Board of, 980 appropriation for civilian personnel, Navy Department _________ 642,1470 980 I Ins)J8ctor General', Department, Army, deficiency appropriation for salaries, 980 1929________________________ 1689 Inspector General's Office, War Depart- 980 ment, 980 appropriation for civilian personneL 326. 1349 for mileage, expertaccountanL __ 330,1353

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1892

 INDEX. cx1i Impectors, Foreign Service, Pale. appropriation for expenses; per diem limitation__________________ 66, 1097 Inspectors, Indian Service, appropriation for expenses; subsistence allowance _________________ 204,1566 deficiency appropriation for__________ 46 Inspectors, Steamboat Inspection Service, appropriation fo~assistllnts, etc__ ___ 89, 1120 Instruchon and Transit Pay, Foreign Sl'I7'Vice Officers, appropriationfor _________________ 68,10119 Imular Affairs Bureau, Army, appropriation for civilian personnel, Office of Chief of, War Depart- ment _____________________ 326,1349 for care of insa...e Filipino and Porto Rican soldiers_ ___ ______ _ _____ 340 for care, etc., insane Filipino soldiers_ 1363 deficiency appropriation for care of insane Filipino soldiers_________ 1665 for salaries, 1929_________________ 1689 [mular P081leaaiona, appropriation for distinctive mail equip- ment for__________________ 192,1055 for fortification expenses ________ 336,1359 deficiency appropriation for fortifica- tions________________________ 936 establishment of Joint Congressional Commissicu to i!tudy, etc., re- organization of administration, etc., of______________________ 1700 In8urance Companie8 (8ee al80 Income Tax, Revenue Act of 1928), tax on net income of life_____________ 842 other than life or mlltuaL _________ 844 mutual, other than life __ _ _________ 846 IT.surance, D. C., allowed on lives of children, etc., by fraternal societies _____________ 953 Insurance Department, D. C., appropriation for salaries _________ 647,1265 Insurance, Militar_y _ and Naval (see also World War Veterans' Act, Amendments), appropriation for, accruing during the year_____________________ 588,1247 deficiency appropriation for _ _ _ _______ 1628 loans authorized to veterans from, on adjusted-service certificates_ _ __ 1561 provisions relating to granting 01. _ _ _ 967 Inaured Mail, Postal Service, appropriation for indemnity for lost, domestic__________________ 191,1053 Intangible Property, D. C., remedies for collecting taxes on tangible property available for _ _ _ ______ 1226 persons with place of abede in the Dis- trict July 1, and three months prior, deemed residents for as- Be!!Bmentof.. _______ ~,~ ________ 1227 exceptIOns_ _ _ _ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _ 1227 Cabinet officers and elected persona not included as residents_______ 1227 Inter-American High CommiBsion, appropriation for expenses, United States section ______________ 72,1103 Inter-American Highway, agencies of the Government to co- operate and assist in promotion of___________________________ 490 Inter-American Highway-Continued. ~. sum authorized for cooperation of Sec- retary: of State with Pan Ameri- ican Governments in surveys as to feasibility of possible routes for,etc ______________________ 1697 assignment of personnel of Govern- ment service, etc_____________ '697 I ntariOT Department, appropriation for Secretary, Assistants, and office personneL _______ 200,1562 salaries limited to average rates under Classification Act _____ 200, 1562 if only: one position allocated in a grade ____________________ 200,1562 allowance for unusually meritorious services___________________ 200,1562 restriction not applieable to clerical- mechanical service_ _ _______ 200, 1562 no reduction in fixed salaries_ _ 200, 1562 transfers to another position with- out reduction of salary _____ 200, 1563 payments under higher rates per- mitted ___________________ 200,1563 transfers from bureau, etc., ap- propriations to meet reallocations of positions therein___________ 1563 for personal services, Solicitor's of- fice ______________________ 201,1563 for contingent expenses _________ 201,1563 for private property damages____ 201,1563 for disbarment expenses ________ 201,1563 for stationery, etc______________ 201,1563 additional, from specified app~'o-. priations__________________ 201,1563 for lAw books, etc.; office allotments_ 201, 1564 for printing and bindin~ for _____ 202,1564 for General Land Office ________ 202,1564 acting depositary of publio moneys_ 20~1 15M clerk to sign land patents__ ___ 202, 1564 for publio lands________________ 202,1564 for Indian Affairs Bureau _______ 204,1566 unexpended balances covered into the Treasury ______________ 215,1576 for Pensions Bureau ____________ 226,1588 for Retirement Actexpenses_____ 226,1588 for financ~ liability of United States to retlrement and disability fund _____________________ 22~ 1588 for Bureau of Reclamation ______ 227,1589 for GeologicalSurvey __________ 231,1593 for National Park Service_______ 233, 1596 for Education.Bureau __________ 238,1602 Alaska, expeases, etc _________ 239, 1603 for Government in the Territories_ 239, 1604 for Alaska ____________________ 239,1604 for Alaska Ratlroad____________ 239,1604 for HawaiL ____ :.. ______________ 240,1605 for Saint Elizabeths H08pita1 ____ 240, 1601 allowance, etc., of quarteJ'll for BU- _ perintendent, etc_____________ 1606 for Columbia Institution for the Deaf 242, 1606 for Howard University _________ 242,1606 for Freedmen's Hospital ________ 243,1606 half charged to District revenues_ 243, 1606 deficiency appropriation for damages claims ______________________ 17,898 for Indian Affairs Bureau __ 17,41,46,899, 933, 1610, 1617, 1621, 1638, 1671, 1673 for pensions ____ 19,41,46,1617,1621,1671

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1893

 INDEX. Pap. INerior Depar'mem-Continued. deficiency appropriation for Reclama- tion Bureau ____________ 19,902,1642 for roads and trails, national parks, etc__________________________ 19 for edtion in Alaska; I'8&ppro- pnatloD ______________ .- -- -- _ for inspectors___________________ _ for maps _______________________ _ for national aecurity and defense, 19 41 41 under_______________________ 44 for stationery___________________ 44, 933 for Geologioal Survey__. __________ 46, 903,933, 1617, 1621, 1643 for Navy aviation transfer to Mines Bureau______________________ 46 for national parks__ 46, 904, 933, 1621, 1643 for Education Bureau_______ 46,904,1617 for publio lands_____________ 46, 933, 1637 for Alaska _________ 46,904,933,.937,1617 for Howard Universi~y 904 for judgments, of Court of Claims under____________________ 932,1615 for increase of compensatioo_____ ___ 933 for Solicitor's office_______________ 1610 for judgments, United States courts, under_______________________ 1615 for contingent expenaes____________ 1617 for Saint Elizabeths HOlipitaL______ 1617 for damages, claims.._______________ 1637 for PensioDS Bureau_______________ 1642 for Government in the Territories___ 1644 for Freedmen's HospitaL__________ 1644 for Howard Univereity __ __________ 1671 for salaries, 1929, Secretary's office__ 1681 for General Land Office, salaries, 1929. 1681 for Indian .Affairs Bureau, salaries, . 1929________________________ 1681 for PensioDS Burea'!t ialaries, 1929__ 1683 for Reclamation Jiureau, 1I8laries, 1929________________________ 1683 for Geological Surva)' salaries, 1929__ 1683 for National Park ~"ice, salaries, 1929 ______________ ~_ __ _ __ __ _ 1683 for Education Bureau. aaIaries, 1929_ 1683 for Government in the Territorio, sa1ariesFa--- 1684 for Saint . h8 Hoapital, sal- ~,l92P ______ ~ __ ~_________ 1684 for Freedmen; I Hoepital, aaIaries, 1929________________________ 1684 field work appropriationa under speci- fied offices, eto'f available for hire of work anim.dJB, vehicles, .etc.-_____________'_ ... ______ 243,1606 submission to ~ discontinued, of report d. expenses BUpport of Indian schools _______________ _ school and agency bulldinp_______ _ allotments in severalty ___________ _ indl18trialwork, etc ______________ _ enoourtlPDC Indian indl18try ______ _ specifio employees _______________ _ Indian moneys, pl'OC.'eeds of labor __ _ Northern Cheyennes, cattle_______ _ tribal funda, .Apaches, etc_________ _ Confederated Utes_____________ _ Chippewas of Minnesota________ _ surveyor general's clerks __________ _ support of agricuItui'al colleges, etc~_ Alaska. railroad, land purchases, etc_ salel of ,l!roperty, ete__ ~ __ .. __ __ _ _ Freedmen 8 Hospital, salaries, etc __ _ care of patients~ _______________ _ 990 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 991 992 I merior Department-Continued. , submission to Congress discontinued, Pap. insane institution, .Alaska .. _ ___ _ 992 industrial work, Tongue River Reser- vation, Mont________. _______ _ Indian hostilities _______________ _ Indian hospitals _________________ _ Sioux Indians, destruction of horses_ heirs of deceased Indians__________ _ rent of building, Capitol Grounds, 992 992 992 992 992 enlargeD1ent__________________ 992 BUrveys, etc., allotments, .Arizona and New Mexico reservations______ 992 Indian tribal funds________________ 992 I nterwcking Dirutorates, exemption of mutual savings bank, joint-stock land banks, etc., from antitrust .Act prohibitions of ___ 1536 restrictions of, not applicable to private bs.nkers, officers of member banks, etc., who may serve in not more than two other banks, etc__ 253 issue or revoking permitsJ. authorized by Federal Reserve Hoard __ ___ 253 I ntemol Beven". (tee Gllo . Internal Reve- nue Service, Treasury Depart- ment), appropriation for expenses of Board of Tax .Appeals ______________ 576, 1233 time extended for presenting claims for legacy taxes, erroneously col- lected under Revenue .Act of 1898________________________ 398 payment of allowed claims_________ 398 Internal Revenue Building, D. C., appropriation for construction oL____ 1044 Internal Revenue, CommiMioner oj, appropriation for, assistants, deputies, and office personneL _____ ~ ____ 1034 Internal Revlll'I .ull Bureau (Bee alBo Internal Revenue Service, Treasury De- partment), appropriation for Commissioner, gen- eral counsel, assistants, etc__ 168,1034 Internal RlltIen". Officers, deficiency appropriation for paying judgments against ___________ 48,935 I nter1iGl Revenue Service, TretUv,rl/ Depart- ment, appropriation for Commissioner, gen- eral counsel, and all office and field forces ________________ 168,1034 for rent, outside and in the District__ 1681 103'} 'for supplies, equipment, etc _____ 168, 1034 pe1'8Onaiservicesin the District. 16!}, 1034 for detecting, etc., violationa of in- ternal revenue laws ________ 169, 1034 rental allowance in the District increased_.___ _______________ 169 care, etc.:. of guarters in National PreBS Huildmg, D. C li Illared under Director of Pub 0 Build· ings and Public Parks_________ 169 motor vehicle travel allowance_ 169, 1034 for refunding illegally collected taxes_ 16_9.: 10~ report to Congress of disburse- lOents ____________________ 169, 1035 condition on refund to· manufac- turers, etc., of tax on automobile ~ri es ___ ___ :___ ___ ___ ___ 169 for buUdingfor;contracts______ 182,1044

�


text:
Irvine v. Redfleld

THIS case came up from the Circuit Court of the United States for the southern district of New York, upon a certificate of division in opinion between the judges thereof.

It was an action of assumpsit on the money counts brought by the plaintiffs against the defendant as collector. Upon the trial, the division in opinion between the judges occurred, which is stated in the opinion of the court.

It was submitted on the record, no counsel appearing for either party.

Mr. Justice WAYNE delivered the opinion of the court.

title: Irvine v. Redfleld


text: Talk:Irvine v. Redfleld

title: Talk:Irvine v. Redfleld


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1894

 INDEX. cxliii l~ Revenue Service} Treasury De- Paae. I International Catalogue 01 Scitmtific Liter- P .... part1rnlnt--Contlnued. ature, deficiency :IlproPriation for refunding I appropriation for expenses, preparation illeg y collected taxes_________ 30, of _______________________ 584,1241 42,48,935,1613, 1618 International Commission, Me:rican B1>t£nd- report to Congress of disburse- ary, mentsindetaiL __ - - - _ 30 appropriation for equitable use of wa- reatriction on refunds to manufac- ters of lower Rio Grande, Colu- tUreB, etc., of exceB8 tax on autQ- rado, and Tia Juana. rovers_ ___ 1106 mobile accessories_____________ 30 International Commi8sion on. Annual Ta- bond required to repay amount not distributed to purchasers_______ 31 approp~Z:i:nC~:~:~ntribution for collecting ________ - 42l #, 48, 935,1618 to 71 1120 for enforcing Narcotic ana National --   ---  ---, Prohibition Acts_ 42,A8, 933, 937.1674 International Committee 01 Weights and ffdin11 Measures, orreun gcoections_-- 42, appropriation for attendance of mem- f 1 44,48,935, 1618, 1671, 1674 ber _______________________ 90,1121 or col actors _______________ 48,935,1618 J C-~ for collecting war revenue__________ 48 International v.v erence lor Revision 01 for paying judgments against om- Convtmtion 01 1914 lor Sa/eoy 01 cers _________________________ 48,935 Lile at Sea, for salaries, collecting, 1929__________ 1687 deficiency appropr:.s.tion for partid- 1612 claims for refund of erroneously col- pating tn ___________________ _ lected legacy taxes under Reve- Bum auth~rize!i for expenses of partici- nue Act of 1898, may be pre- Internan!!ztinrc!g;e";;-~r-A~;;i~i;, 1016 sented to CommiB8ioner ___ - -- - 398 rd determination of, without regard to Twenty-thi 7 any statute of limitations______ 398 deficiency appropnation for contribu- 914 payment directed of amounts al- tion ________________________ _ lowed_________________________ 398 apPointment. of ed three delegatesNto, exceB8 taxes paid on distilled spirits in authonz ,to be held in ew tax-paid warehouse to be re- York City___________________ 723 funded to owner ______________ 492 sum authorized as contribution to 723 feld employees may be detailed for expenses____________________ _ service in Bureau or elsewhere_ _ 882 International Congr688 01 E1domology, limitat~l! c=d_r:_01:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC) 1653 forcign dTarmstroBot (talk)::~:~ __TarmstroBot (talk) 01:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)_~_TarmstroBot (talk) 482 storekeeper-gaugers, designation of, to InternationGl Dairy Cr.ngreu, 3ighth, all storekeepers, gaugers, and appropriation for expenses, partici- storekeeper-gaugers_ - - - - -- -- - - 1496 l"nvl'tatlJ>&OntinoK inBrl---tls-h- - -G -ov--er--nm- - -en-t- - -to- 570 to be full time employees__________ 149G .f International Aeronauhcal Conference on partiCipate in, accepted_______ _ Civil Aeronautics, appointment of deJegat€B authorized __ foreign governments invited to attend, sum authorized for expenses, etc___ _ at Washington, D. C ____ ___ ___ 1011 rcporito Congreas _______________ _ 148 148 148 148 sum authorized for expenses of meet- International Ezchangu, ing__________________________ 1011 appropriation for expenses_________ 583,1241 International Arbitration, Interparlia- InternatiO'/fUJl EZP08ition, Seville, Spain, mentary Union lOT Promoting, appropriatiDn for expenses of partici- . appropriation for contribution______ 71,1102 pation, etc.__________________ 75 International AS80ciation oj Road Con- deficiency appropriation for expenses gr68Bes, Permanent, of partICipation_______ ________ 913 deficiency appropriation for expenses, use authorized for personal servicp.,s in r.ixth seBBion ____ _____________ 912 the District, of appropriations invited to hold sixth seB8ion of, in for__________________________ 372 United States________________ 378 International Geographic Union, amount authorized for all expenses__ 378 appropriation for annual contribu- Internalional Boundary Lin8, Canadian, tion~__~ ___________________ 73,1104 appropTarmstroBot (talk)iTarmstroBot (talk) 01:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)r_01:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)~':."_i~:iO, 1101 I nternatio~, Halibut . Fisheriu Commis- International Bureau/or Prulecnon 01 In- appropriation for share of expenses __ 75,1106 dUBtrial Properly, deficiency appropriation for, additionaL 28 appropriation for quota____________ 74,1105 International Hydrographic Bureau, International Bvreov lor Publication 01 appropriation for annual oontribu- Customs Tariff8, tion _______________________ 13,1104 appropriation for share of expenses __ 70, 1100 for expenses of attending delegates. 97, 1127 International Bureov 01 Perm,ment C1>t£rt 01 International Hydrographic Conference, Arbitranon, appropriation for expenses, Navy De- appropriation for annual contribution_ 71, partment delegates to________ _ 624 1102 InternatiOnal Imeitutc lor Protection 01 Childhood, American, International Bureau 01 Weights and Measures, appropriation for contribution ______ 69,1100 deficiencr. appropriation for annual con- trlbl'tion____________________ 1612, appropriation for annual contribution to, at Montevideo, Urugut.y_ 913, 1106 annual contribution for membership in, authrhled_________________ 487

�


text:
Irvine v. Redfleld/Opinion of the Court

This case comes to this court under a certificate of division of opinion from the Circuit Court of the United States for the southern district of the State of New York.

The point made is, 'whether, by the period of exportation of merchandise from a foreign country to the United States, as used in the act of Congress entitled, 'An act to amend the acts regulating the appraisement of imported merchandise, and for other purposes, approved the 3d March, 1851, was to be taken to mean the time when the merchandise had been laden aboard a general ship, and the bill of lading therefor given in the foreign port, or at the time when said ship actually departed from said foreign port, destined to the United States.'

The facts in the record are, that the ship Henry Buck was a general ship at the port of Glasgow, in Scotland, in the month of May, 1855, destined for the port of New York, in the United States. That the plaintiff, on the 9th May, 1855, bought three hundred tons of Coltness pig iron, at the then wholesale market price of sixty-four shillings sterling per ton, and immediately commenced to load the same aboard the ship, and that the iron was all laden and bills of lading given for it on the 22d May, 1855, on which day the market price of such iron had risen to sixty-nine shillings per ton; that the ship remained in port, and sailed from Glasgow on the fourth of June, 1855, on which day the market price of such iron had risen to seventy-four shillings and sixpence sterling per ton; and that, on the arrival of the ship in the United States, the iron was appraised at the custom-house at the market price of twenty-four shillings and sixpence sterling per ton. On that valuation the defendant collected duty, and twenty per cent. on such value, in conformity with the 8th section of the act of Congress entitled, 'An act reducing the duty on imports, and for other purposes,' approved the 30th July, 1846.

This court considered two years since in the case of Sampson v. Peaslee, 20 Howard, 571, the meaning the acts of Congress of the 30th July, 1846, and that of the 3d March, 1851, for the collection of duties upon imported goods, and when and upon what twenty per centum should be charged upon an under-valuation made by an importer in his entry of merchandise. It announced then, that if the appraised value of imports which have actually been purchased shall exceed by ten per centum or more the value of them declared upon the entry, then, in addition to the duties imposed by law upon the value of the same, there shall be levied, collected, and paid, a duty of twenty per centum ad valorem on such appraised value. That the additional value of twenty per centum could only be levied upon the appraised value, and not upon charges and commissions added to it. Also, that the day of the sailing of a vessel from a foreign port is the true period of exportation of the goods; and that the Secretary of the Treasury had given a proper interpretation of the statute, in directing it to be done on the market value of the goods imported on the day of the sailing of the vessel, and that he was authorized by law to give such a direction.

We see no cause now for a different interpretation of the statute, and direct that the question certified to this court be answered, 'that the duties upon foreign merchandise are to be computed on their value on the day of the sailing of the vessel from the foreign port, and that the value for the compution is the wholesale market price there on such day.'

title: Irvine v. Redfleld/Opinion of the Court


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1895

 cxliv INDF~X. International Inatitute of AlP'ic1Uture, p .... appropriation for quota, etc__. __ _ _ _ 72,1102 for additional quota for de!JCnden- cles __________ ________ _____ 72, 11 02 for member of Committee ____ .. __ 72,1102 for translating publications ______ 72,1102 for cleric~.l etc., expenses ________ 72, 1102 International Map of the World, appropriation for share of expenses __ 75, 1105 International Office of Public Health, appropriation for quota___________ 72,1103 International Petroleum E:tpolrition at Tulsa, Okla., President authorized to invite States, a.n~ for~ign countries to par- tIcIpate 10____________________ 788 articles for exhibition to be admitted free of duty__________________ 788 duty on, if sold; allowance for dete- rioration,etc_________________ 788 International Prison Commissian, appropriation for annual contribu- tion_______________________ 71,1101 I nternationtJl Radiotelegraphic Convention appropriation for share of expenses __ 72, 1103 deficiency appropriatien for share of expenses; unexpended balance available_____ ~ _____________ 28,1612 In'ernationtJl Railway Congres8, appropriation for quota, etc________ 72,1103 International Ruearch Council, appropriation for annual contribution to, and Associated "Cnions ____ 73, 1~04 fOT expenses, of attending delegates_ 97, 1127 for expenses, Navy Department dele- gates to______________________ 624 International Road ConlP'e8lJU, appropriation for quota, etc_________ 75, 1107 International Seed Testing Congrus, ·appropriation for share of expenses.. _ 550, 1201 I nternat.onal Society for &ploration 0/ the Arctic Regiona by Airship, deficiency appropriation for contribu- tion to______________________ 1652 annual contributions authorized to, for five years____________________ 1222 I nterr&alional Statistical I flBtitute, appropriation for annual contribution_ 75,1106 Internat.OftGl Sereet, Nogalu, Ariz., deficiency appropriation for grading. paving,etc________________ 925,1663 gradin'M:bo"!d:i__01:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)__ 589 p!l.ving, etc., 01, directed; sums avail- able_________________________ 1408 International Trade E:thibition, deficiency apropriation for expenaes__ _ 1nternationGl Trciila Mark Registration BurMu, 6 appropriation for share of expenses of, at Habana _________________ 73,1104 International Union of Gcoduy and Geo- phYM, app~riation for quota, etc________ 73,1104 InterMhonal Union of Mathematics, appropriation for quota, etc_ _______ 73, 1104 International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistrll, appropriation for quota to _________ 12,1104 International Union of Pure and Applied PhYM, appropriation for quota to _________ 73,1104 International Union of Seientiftc Radio- telegraphll, appropriation for quota, etc________ 73,1104 Interned PerBons, etc., p .... appropriation for expenses of, under Navy Department _________ 624, 1452 Interoceanic Ship Canal, deficiency aprropriation for surveys, etc., 0 Panama Canal, Nica- ragua route, etc., to meet future needs of shipping____ _________ 16137 investigation to be made as to prac- ticabilityof providing for future ship'ping needs by additional faCIlities to Panama CanaL____ 1539 or any route between the Atlantic and Pacifio Oceans____ ________ 1539 Isthmian Canal Commission reports as ta practicability of canal across Nicaragua___ .. ____ ___ _____ ___ 1539 investigation and survey to revise, etc ____________ .. _ ._________ _ _ 1539 to determine most practical routc, etc__________________________ 1539 approxi .cost of construction of mamtaimng________________ 1539 oost of acquiring private righte, fl1UlChiaes, etc., affected by such canal rollte____ ____ ___ ________ 1539 stations directed to ascertain available ",ater supply in Nicaragua, and fo!' op<3ratin$ additional locks at Panama Canal_____________ 1539 sum authorized to be expended_______ 1540 report with recommendations to be made lIot later than in two years_____ 1540 Interparliamentarv Union for Promoting International Arbitration, appropriation for contribution __ 71,976, 1102 deficiency appropriation for American Interstate~rifu~ -CTarmstroBot (talk);,: - 1652 may bridge Mississippi River, at Lan- si~, Iowa__________________ _ Missoun River, at Decatur, Nebr___ _ at Kansas City, Kans __________ - - at Nebraska City, Nebr_________ _ at Union, Nebr ________________ _ 280 392 704 444 1076 time extended for bridging Missouri River, at Decatur, Nebr., by____ 1526 at Kansas City, Kans., by ________ . _ 1530 at Nebraska City, Nebr., by________ 1525 Interstate Commerce, convict-made goods, etc'l shipped into a State, subject to laws thereoL__ 1084 InterBtate Commerce Commission, appropriation for salaries of Commis- sioners and secretary ______ _ 581, 1238 for personnel, and eJq>en8es 01 regu- lating commerce. ___ ___ ___ _ 581,1238 chief counsel, director of finance, director of traflic___________ 581,1238 Apecial counsel, etc___________ 581,1238 rent restriction ______________ 581,1238 for enforcing uniform 81stem of ac- counting, etc., by railroads___ 581, 1239 for enforcing safety appliances reg- ulations___________________ 581, 1239 for securing reporta of accidents, etc_______________________ 581,1239 for testing, etc., block signal and train control systems, etc________ 581,1239 for requiring installing automatic train-controllinll devices, etc_ 581, 1239 for compelling use of safe locomotive boilers, etc ________________ 581,1239 for physical valuation of railroads, etc_______________________ 582, 1240

�


text: Talk:Irvine v. Redfleld/Opinion of the Court


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1896

 INDEX. cxlv lram,tat4 Commerce Commission-Contd. r .ae. 1 appropriation for securing information of issues of stock, bonds, etc_ 582, 1240 rent restriction, D. C ________ _ 582,1240 for printing and binding, Jor; restric- tion _____________________. 582,1240 for e'!tpenses. attending meetings_ 582,1240 deficiency appropriation for printing and binding for______________ d forexra;nses--- 45,932, 937,1616,1670 .. for !Ill. aries, 1929, under __ _________ 1676 action of, relating to inland water trans- portation on the Mississippi and tributaries _________________ 979,981 submission to Congress discontinued, of statement of expenditures for thefiscalyear__. __ ____ _______ 994 physical valuation of carriers_ ____ _ 994 Int£rstate Commerce Laws, appropriation for enforcing _________ _ deficiency appropriation for expenses enforcing ___________________ _ Interatate Quarantine Service, appropriation for cooperation with States, etc., for preventing 78 20 spread of contagious di8ea8es_ 175, 1040 Intozicating Liquma, . appropriation for suppre88ing traffic in, among Indians__________ 204,1566 fOrBuppressingtraffio of, in Alaska_ 24Q, 1604 for expenses of enforcing prohibi- tion, etc., of, by Prohibition Bureau ___________________ 170,1035 deficiency appropriation for suppress- ing, among Indians____________ 1671 for expenses of enforeing prohibition, etc., of, internal revenue_ ___ __ 1671 for enforcing prohibition, etc., of. _ __ 1674 declared nonmailable; punishment for deposit~, in mails, etc_______ · 1072 punishment for illegal sale, transporta- tion, etc., 01._________________ 1446 Inventions, etc., appropriation for investigating prior use 01. ___ ____ ___ ___ ____ ___ 100,1131 Inventi01l3, etc., Poatal Service, appropriation for cash rewards to em- ployees for, increasing efficiency of service, etc _____________ 188,105(J I nV8stigation Bureau, Department 01 J uatice, appropriation for Director __________ _ 78 Investigations, D. C., deficiency appropriation for special fund for the use of District Commissioners conducting, etc_ 1628 Iona llIland Ammunition Depot, N. Y ., deficiency aPl?ropriation lor lightning protectlon ______________ .. _ __ _ 908 Iowa, may acquire, after completion, bridge across Des Moines River, at ~ton _____________________ _ Mississippi River, at Bettendorf___ _ at Cassville, Wis_______________ _ at Lansing ____________________ _ at Prairie du Chien, Wis ________ _ Missouri River, at Decatur, Nebr__ at Nebraska City: Nebr________ _ at Plattsmouth, l\ebr __________ _ at Sioux City__________________ _ at Union, Nebr________________ _ 706 760 294 280 199 392 445 388 1170 1076 time extended for bridging Mississippi River at Savanna, Ill., and Ba- bula, iowa, by Illinois and__ 297, 1158 Iowa City, Iowa, Pap. appro}lriation for publio building_ _____ 1042 deficiency appropriation for public building ..t. ____________ ~_____ 921 IO'1&a- N ebratlka A mortized Free Bridge Company, may bridge Missouri River, at Sioux City, Iowa___________________ 1169 Iowa Southern Judicial District additional judg<'J authorized for _ ______ 52 when vacancy occurs in office of exist- ing judge, not to be filled, unless authorized by Congress_ _ ______ 52 Iowa Tribe oj Indians, time extended for filing claimll of, in Court of Claims______________ 1073 Ireland (llee Irish Fret> State). I mh Free St,.Jte, appropriation for millister to _ ______ 65, 1096 Ironwood, Mich., appropriation for public building_ _ _ _ _ 1042 deficiency appropriation for public building at__ _____ ______ _____ _ 921 I mgation Agriculture, Western, approuriation for investigations in con- - nection with, of reclaimed lD.nds qnder Reclamation Act_____ 551, 1218 I rrigation, India", Reservations, appropriation for expensell; allotments to district project!l _________ 200,1572 for misoe1laneous expen_; super- vising engi.neeril ___________ 209,1572 for cooJil!rative stream gauging with Geolopcal Survey __________ ·2 10, 1572 projects specifically provided for, excluded __________________ 210, 1573 interehangeable amaunie for flood damages____ .. _____________ 210,1573 apportionment of cost, etc_____ 210, 1573 for maintenance, etc., Gila River, Aril______________________ 210,1573 San Carlos projecL ______ 210,212,1573 for designated structures, Oila River, reimbUheDleut_______________ 210 for maintenance, etc., Colorado P.iver, Ariz ______________________ 212,1573 for maintenance, etc., of Ganado proiect, Ariz ______________ 212, 1573 for Inalnterumce, etc., San Xavier, Ariz ______________________ 212,1573 for maintenance, San Carlos, Ariz __________________ 210,212, 1573 for maintenance, etc., charges, YUDla, ~ _____________________ 212, 1574 for Dlaintenance, Fort Hall, Idaho ____________________ 212, 157' for drainage, etc., Kootenai allot- ments, ldaho_. ____ .. __________ 157' for Fort Han project, reimbursement of R. E. Hansen______________ 1574 for Sac and Fox Indians of Iowa, drainage of lands_ _ ___________ 15n for maintenance, Fort Belknap Mont ____________________ 212,157' for Ilontinuing construction, Flat- head, Mont _______________ 212, 1574 for continuing _construction, etc., Flathead, Mont_ .. __ _ _ __ _ _ _ 212,1574 for maintenace, F('rt Peck, Mont ____________________ 213,1574 for maintenan~e, Bl ackfeet, Mont ____________________ 213,1575 for maintenance, Crow, Mom; ___ 213, 1575 for maintenance, Pyramid Lake, Nev. _____________________ 213,1575

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1897

 INDEX. 1~,., IndiGn Rumoatiom-Contd. ~, '.~proP.riMiOn fot oPe....tion, ete., New· ')eds jlrojeot.. Ne.... _~_~ __ _ .. _. _ 1676
 * for DABee/ ete.} for LMoIIDII. and

· Aodma IndialLllD N. ),fex_____ 1671 for m,.intenan~" etc., Ravelo, N. for =~;e,./iQ;;;;ib,-~: !; g for mainteDtnt', 16Ilda·(iI Uneom- ~; etic!,tJ_ tn Utah_____ 1676 fOT Yakima, WMh_ 214, 1676 for iDIIIn~ lnnd '.her Wyo;. _~.;,,~_;.._. __ -- ___ .. ______ 2i4, 1676 deiioi~oy appropriati.on ~01" Flathead; Im,o,;;".l\Ip;t~-(~;:-.n 1689 Bureau, De~' of the 111- terior),, . apptapria~ion for exiuDin4Uoa, ot ~roJ eote, operated. by irrigaUMl dilt- triett__ .;;__L .. __ .. ;...:. __ ~_ ..~_ S28, llMlO forepeatie!f ofreile"M worb, on wbieh share ~ CCl8t. baa not been paid___ ..... _.... ___ .. ~ ___~ ___ ..___ 228 defioienoy appJ'Gpatationfor refunding ~ Oft ~ftIlIIft8Dtlt tinpro- due"vellmds iil ... __ _ _ __ .:_' -___ _ 19 oontracts am",ded, for 1*1i!l1 tim oon- . at'tUttd&ft ~ on RIo Grimde, N. Mex.-Tn~ ...... _.. ____________ 785 . QispoM,l' aethol'bled (#. UDPla'&tI$d Gov.. el'DDl4lB~ town.tes uder______ 1522 water ',PIW iD~relJDqnl8bed to 1410 · 4qowroek dWUfoIr Of"" ___ _ Imfl{l~" 11.;8, (J~ '," ., ' appropriation fer pa•.1ng, ~.,Ninth to . Tenth ~tiI; Iriml p!IOIfne talC lund ________ .. .. -- ---_ -- -- .. -- 1271 1.",. IftdiG__, N.~ /4e.. " , defloieJ,ley', applbprWiton lor pa)'fng •~ Cl&UIIed by oan&l oon- 86ruetion_ .. _.. _.;.'-_ .... __ .:_______ 901 Isolated 'TrGtuo/ Ftlb'iO I:.oM, eale a~ auetion authorised of, not ex- "~a hall eeetioD ___ .. ___ __ 253 Italy,' '. .. approtniatftm for ambasaador to. _ __ 6f i, 1096 ltosco~<roumll Minn., Jpay bride:~..aippl RiYer, between ' ,,,.Co arufDeer River______ 473 I'Ilka KlI.,', brldg&6Uthorized across Cumbedand Biverj&t ___ .. _______ . . __ _ _ __ 140,756 time extended for bridging Cumberland Ri'\ter, at.. ~ __ .. _. _. _ __ _ ~.______ 1523 If1#18, GN, B., defioiency appropriatiou lor 88I'VieeI_ __ 1623 8. J~kRooMU; " appropriation for devising metboda for destroying ___ •• ___ _ .... _. ___ 559,1209 Jackaon, AIG., ' , , bridge Authorized ACl'08I Tombigbee IUver, ..t _________ .. __ _ _ _ ~_~___ 754 Jocbtm, AmlrevJL/ormer PrtMitUnl of the UniUld ~CGtet, , memOrial plaia to be Mtab1l8hed in NMhville, Tena.! to the memory , ,, 01 former PrIllliQenta Jame. K. 'POlk,':Ancil'ew JohDBon, and_ _ _ _ 1020 Jack/Joi!. .. Barracka, La., Army, time extended foroptioll. to purohale, by ~ ~__ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 397 Jtit:liaOfl, M*., p .... defioienoy appropriatloD for pubUo buUdln, at_ _____________ ____ 1658 JlJCIcaouUlt Ferril, Ga.~ bridge authonled aero.. Ocmulpe River, at____ ... ____ ___ ___. . ____ 446 J_, D. C., appropriation lot persoDal I8rvfoes_ 672, 1289 for 8Upport of prisoners__ • ______ 672,1289 defieiency appropriation lor IUpport of priIIonera, etc___ .. _. __ _ _ __ • __ 10, 1630 for equipment, etc________________ 10 Jamu RiNr, Ya., preliaUnary examination, for tlood con- trolol_____ • ______ .. ___ __ ___ __ 1164 J t1mutotll14, N. Dale., deficiency appropriation for publio bUDding______________. . __ _ _ __ 33 J amutoum, Va., deficiency appropriation for wharf and walk, approaoh to monument at_ 39, 1655 JanuvillB, Wit., bridgeauthoriledaorou Rock River, at. 1162 Japan, appropriation lor ambassador \0.. ___ 65, 1096 for ground rent, emb&88Y at Tokyo_ 66, 1097 for diplomatio aDd ooDBular eatab- liahments, Tokyo_..: ..... _______ 66 for additional land. aDd conatruction, of buildinp for Foreign Service estabUehments at Tokyo_______ 66 living quarters, etc., lurnished to For- eign Servioe personnel etc., in GOvernment bulldiDp In. _ ... __ 67 J apanae arid AMic B __, appropriation for preventinS spread of_ 1216 J t1pGnWl B..u, appropriationlorre&earoh on______ 558, 1203 for preventing st»~ 0'- ____ .. __ 665,1216 defioieDcy ap prUnion lor preventiny s of__________________ 3, 1635 JeJJer/JOfl trut NW., D. C., appropriation for paving, etc., Filth to Seventh Streets; from pealine tax fund ______ ~_·_____________ 653 Jemez GOO, Tu~ue Pweblot, N. }lIZ., defioienoy appropriatioll for compensa- tion for loBS 01 lap,ds and water rights _____ ,__ ___ __ ___ ___ ___ _ 17 J.mu RillBT, defiolenoy appropriation for oonstruot-, ing bridge acroBS, Sia Indian puebl0tl'l'. Mex _________ • ____ _ 902 Jenijer SlretJt N w., D. C., appropriation for paving, ete., Fortv- second Street to Wisconsin Ave.. nue;lrom.:gaaoHne tax fund~___ 1269 JfIf'1Ie{Jan, Warren G., . name placed on yellow fever honor roll and ~ted IJOld medaL __ ~_ 1409 Jtwett, Charla G., .. patent granted for desert land entry of. 1156 Jiear£lla Agenty, N. ,MIlZ., appropriation lor support, etc., of In- . dians at_ .. __ _ __ __ _ .. __ 223, 1671,1584 JUarilla IndiGn Htllpital, N. MIlZ., approprla.tlon for support, etc.. of__ 221, 1581 Jicarilla Indian ~ N. Ma., appropriation for purchase aUand,'etc., wi~hin, from tribal fuML_~____ 2rt1 Jicarilla Indian 8a~oriu"" ,N. Ma., appropriation lor maintenance, ete., of· . X-rayequipmem; __ .. . __ ,,- _,- .. __ 2:h,I581

�


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1898

 INDEX. cxlvii Jic4rita I.land, Panamc, 1'1.,18. aid to navigation authorlJed onp,!!!,!:; . aifio ne.n appr:oach to CanaJ~.~ _______________ ~____ 1262 Jimenez, JO~l oj Venezeula,· may be tted for instruatlon at Military Academy____________ 1011 "Jo1&anM" Vu,e! determinatioJl by War ClaiInsArbiter, of claiIns for, taken and ,.wd by United States during World ~ar ____ ____ ____ ___ _ ~__ ___ __ 277 JohnsDfI, Andrftl.t./ormer P,HideRt til tM PfIIit«i 1SIGtu, memorial plasa to be estabUahed in NaahvilleJ..Tenn., to the memory offormer l"NtidenwAndNwJack- IODo Jamee K. Polk, ao.d ___ . __ _ 1020 Johnaon City, Tenn., appropriation for Volunteer Boldien' Home______ __ • ___• _____ .362. 13&4 deficiency approj>riation for Volunteer SOldiers' Home. __ _ _ -- ~ 1667,1668 Joint Committee on Internal Rellen1Ul :.rCIII:G- non, no refwad of income tax, etc., in exctl88 of $75,000, until after 8ubmission to,eto! _________________ ~____ 882 Joint Committee on PritMi"V. . appropriation for oler.k8, ~r, etc_ ~1i, 13114 for compiling CODgreIIional Direo- . .' tory_._________________ ~ ___ 626,1394 defi,*,ncy ~mpriat1on for. · Biograph- ical DflIeotory of Coogreq__ ___ 885 for compiling, etc., C&npeNiooalDi- 1'eetory...__ .. _______ --... __ •. _____ 1624 printing, binding_ aad diIItribu*ion of .t\le Code8aqd 8UP~nte to ., be done under.tbe1iiroctlon of__ 1M2 J oint C~ on u.. LibrOl'1l, plana, etc., of Peter .MuhlenberK DIOnu- menteubjectto ap~vaIof____ 483. site and design ofmemotial DIOnUDleDt to Samuel Gompera on public grounds in Waahi~n, D. c., 8ubjo}Ct to approvalof. _ _ __ _ _ _ _ 193 site for erecting monumeotal urn, the gift from Cub&, subject to ap- proval oL________________ .--. 713 Joint ConqreuiortGl C~ _ Air- establJ::~t; andoompoeition of_____ 1698 to investigate need for airporiII ,0( De- " 'mente and DJltrjot of Co- !urnbia______________________ · 1699 report and recommendatioDS to be made Dot later than J)eecmber 12, 1929 ________ ~---~ 1699 powers CIOnferred; .espeJl8Cll from eon- tingentfunds_______ .~.______ 1699 to cease on 8ubmitting report_______ 1699 Joint Congreaaio~ C~iaaionon Inaular Reorl1amzatwn, estabUahment ftnd1XllDP08ition of_____ 1700 authorized to ~"etc., of Govern- ment Agencies. in ad- !Ilinistration, -:tc., ·of IIBairs of InsularJIOIIIIeIIlODS____________ 1700 to determine advisability of adminis- tration. .te.,·bein« placed under one ·bureauor .depBl'tment_ _ _ _ _ 1100 transfer of aeoutive function8 thereto_ _____________________ 1700 plan for organisation thereQf _ _ _ __ 1700 JoinWDnf!ellaionalCommiaaion onI,...aar 1'aPo · ~niaI qt~Ua ufd. ' details from departments, etc., to aam,t- 1700 complete statement of resul~, ~nd.reo-. ommel1datio~ to be 'reJldrted to 'CorigreBs on or befo~ :December to ceaa!\:=iQi;iDi~PQ~:::= }~gg Joint CongTu3ionGl CommiNiOn em LibraNi oj 'COJIIr~ l1uiJdinga, . creation and eoJJiPoeltfon 0'-. - - -- - - - - 622 continuation c4 service of reelected . MeDiQera'of'theHClUII8____ _____ 622 nocompeneiLtion for service, but n~ flII8&T1 expenses to be rebn. - btJrsed_________ .: __________ .-- $ix lJlpntl\8 after acquisition of property, .' 'to terminate..___________ ;. ____ .;. authorized to .~ Bite for addl.;. ,tional bull~n~bY .purchase, C08t ~t TarmstroBot (talk) 01:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)_ ~."::::: condeJbDAtioD "~Qg$ ___ :': ____ _ 622 623 623 623 &23 property' when ~tifred 'to '1Jeunder eontrol Qf Al'ehltect of the Ce.pi-. . tol.:::..:-'___________ ;.; __ ~.;. __ :,;.. 623 l~ pending demolitioa of <baIld- in8B---~.;--',,:. 623 =~cn~- 623 • .;.._~_:______ ... __ J~ __;. ___...--- 623 ptceeda of Jeuee to be co.vered into the·'Jmwl1lry_~ .. ~_..:.;..;;.;.:._.;... __ . ; G23 buildinp,· ~.• to:. be removed: ·When · D~'or~ 01 addt.. · t~to theLibraty;J~ __ _'_ i .. . . ___ 623 street U4. euey. 'to be v.oated. UPOD' ' demolitioll of uq\dled· bUIld- inp~ __ ;.._~ __. _.1.... ""~..;._ .. _;.;_"'i..;; 623 to become part of Library 1PDIUidI-- 623 apptOpr!at1ona to be diabur8eil itt·Infie.. · ·rIor ~dilblJl'I!iDI.C)m- . eer_____ • ..' ___ ~'_·~_i;:_:;"________ 623 J{iint Conqralional Com.utteiJ .. ' I"JIg- 1tl'ol car-ia,.f .9I9.: .- deficiency appropriation fou~of_ '1608 Joint CongreuiottalOmnmu.u tD l",*~ 6GU Northern ~"bciji,c lAnd (kG"",, .., deficienoy appropriation !far eqalD8llSi balance reappropriated_ ..... _ _ _ _ 886 balaDceavailablefor.eontinuinc'iavCIIU- ptioaa of. ____ .. .;~_·__ .;.-'~'" .. ___ _ existenee.eoatbuteci to Juna'30..l929~_ may report at any time~. __ .. ___ ·.. __ _ membersof, to 7~_Co~. to eontinue,to Berva UDtil~.•nd of first eesaloa of 7l&t Conpess whenthe~:will~to 3 789 789 exist_____________________.___. 1221 filling v8e&DCies_- .... __ • __ _ _ _ --~-__ 1221 bal&nc6 d. expeDi181S for, awailable to pay ~!ete.• toMareh', 1929. 1608 Joint S~ PaflAct, 1911 (.u Pay Read- juetment",A.rmy, etc.), Joint8k1ck Lond l1anka, exempted from interlocking direcW,ra,tes prohibitions; condi~D'_______ 1536 JOMB, A~ .t:., ~. Sanator, deficien;rdo:.PEr..TarmstroBot (talk) 01:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)o_~ _TarmstroBot (talk) _~:.. _~ 883 for mileage______ .. ___ ___ __ _. __ _ _ _ __ 883 Jonu Male Academy appropriation for bnprovementB, Choc- taw Nation~ Okla_____________ 1577

�


text: Castle v. Bullard

title: Castle v. Bullard


text: Talk:Castle v. Bullard

title: Talk:Castle v. Bullard


text:
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 45 Part 1.djvu/1899

 cxlviii INDEX. J~LG.. . time extended tor bridging Black River. at_. ___ ~ __________________ _ .p.... 75 JOaepMOr,a'"c.~ .. . may b~ . ., " pi RiVel', atBett4p1- . doff, owa___________________ 7159 time exten4ed torbrfdalna MfaUdppl , JiUver ~t ~ttenaorl, Iowa, by _ 1512 Judge .A'~'a.iliCe, NGt1fl.' 8PPropriatioJi tQi' ciVUTao pe1'8OnneI,
 * Navy Department.:..:. •• __ __ __ __

'642 ,deficienoy app'ro.p..tio~ 1 for eivillan ,',TarmstroBot (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC),--.:': 1648 ,fudgfJ AdvocatfJ GtmfJf'til'a OJ/ia. Wor ~,.,~.' .... ,8PPropriatlonfor ciVilian ~_ a26, 1349 fou..rl!s,patent.~e~t ~uitt... 326, . ;"'"",', .. ,.' ,"" 1349, for eTarmstroBot (talk)tin•. pt!(ndilo.. of , settlement' of War 'Cl&iu:uJAct-_ 13152 . ' 'deficiency: appro.p~. tor ael~nt ,of,:w.... \Cli.I~,Mt.19~ UP. __ , Q25 Judgu, U.W8taH1tC".,.,.,;, " ' ,::..ppropii.ationJor 8upre~e COurt Jus- -: tiIM..:;,;-" ..... ;.-.,-....- ..... _- .. _... ,--7~, 1109 . : foreirouit. __________________ ..... 79,1110 for,diatrlct __ .:_.;-'__ ... _.... __ .. __ ~ __ • 79,1110 for_ind.;,;;:...... ....: . __ ...... _: ._ H . .. . . . 7~ 1110 .' fo~.~_01:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC)01:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC)t~81, 1112 , :'defic1enc1 appropriation,foe. iItIlreMed 20 '., «Rn~fion,·SnpreDl8 Couzi_" for~eo~Dof.uit, >.1 . . diatrict, ~.retilW":.;. • .l _"j,, ___ _ for ",eM.il oompfInaatiQaJ;ec.n of " ,CuitdlDa'4pPeaJa.. ___ w,;.; ... ... _.. __ 20 20 . for lnCreued compensatiODt Covt of ~......:J~._~""'...;. .....~ .........._ .. _._:.. 20 for_~.;._.;_.;. .. ~ __ • .; ___ ~_ 1610, 16415 resiping.ol; permitted alw.lP9Ciled - . ye&nI of service. to have: .pay . aontilluecLi:..:. ·....._J _. _ ~ ... ;,;_.·_ .. _ 1423 retiring from:'ft~ Mtive .moo ',wi.,...,;.'..;·... ,~ .: __'_______ .______ 1423 =,:l!01:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC)_~ 1423 addition&l judge authorised when·inca- , .JlMlltated.JudIe, ·entitled. to ft- ','.' tire dOlB·n01; cfo.a __ '-' - __ -' __ __ _ 1423 retirin«, Or~W,:to be held .. J.· unior to remain1na fudpa_____ 1423 ienior to &ppOiDt oburt olIe.ia1a in cue it oen~aPP;,b;ied:.. ;;; Ij23 , ,~Oawi8d by death, etc., of ,reUred, Ol" l'esipe«L ____ .;_ ___ __ 1423 sixth clroultto bav&lour__________ ~__ 492 J1MW1rlfJflIa, •t' f 1 .: deficien!'Y appropna Ion or pay ng, DIstrIct 01 Columbia_ ___ 11, 893, 1632, for paying, United Statee courts_____ 39, , 931, 1615, 1669 for paying, Court 01 Claims ___ ~ __ ._ _ _ 4~ . 932, 16115, 167u Judit:iol CtHU, . ' amended;eeCtfon L_________________ 52, 1081, 1317, 1317, 1319, 1344, 1409, 1422 sectioaV!L;-~_____ ________ _______ 1424 section 80________________________ 427 section 98.; _____________ .---.·- 495 section 101._ __________ __________ _ lIS18 ~ion 108.___ ________ _________ __ 747 section 110_______________________ 1345 JudiCUU Ccdt-Continued. Pap• amended, aection 116________________ 134& seeticm,118__________ 492,1081,1347,1414 section 1'16_______________________ 1347 section 128__ '- ______________ ______ 422 section 177_______________________ 877 section 224_______________________ 424 sectioI). 260_______________________ 1423 ~Qn 279 _______ . . ; _______________ 1145 Judicia'E, appropriatiollll tor_______________, - 79,1109 JtJlicial Ojfiura, appropriation for books, etc., for____ 81, 1112 deficiency appropriation for law books for__ ~ _______________ 21,21,006,934 Judicial OflicU, etc., , aI?propriatlon tor 8Xpe1lll8S of fnveeti- gating by Department of Justice_ 78, nOD Jundioft 'Citt/, KG"'., 'appropriation for public building____ _ defi<;iency appropriation for publio . ." butldlDg. _______ ..; ______ ~ ___ _ _ J'II.1U(IU, Aldak, appropriation for Federal and Terri- 'torial buildiDsi. GOIt lncreued_ 1042 921 177, 1042 a8lary' of rt!ldster 01 land office at_____ 684 Jurora, UnitecI Sl.tJtu Coun., appropriation tor mileage, and per diems _____________________ 81,1111 deficiency 'approprtatlonfor .....; ._ .. _ __ _ _ _ 4~ 934,1617, 16b service and .Jieturn of write of venire faQiaa to, by' JDa1'fJhal; .to_ _____ 1145 by r$gi.tere«i mail to party__ _______ 1145 receipt of pel'lJOD addre8led re- 'garded .....vi... ___ ___ ____ __ 11415 tranatel"of ~ teee, 1928, to appro- · priation fOr feea4lt, 1928_~_____ 1610 Jury CommiaaiontJra, UTlited 8I.tJtfJa COUf'e., appropriation for COInpenll&tion____ 81,1112 ./t'atu:u 01 Uae Peooe, . deficielic;yappro~lon for fees, acting . .·'COiimiIaionerl __________ 21,1610 JUllmilfl Coun, ·D. C ., . appropriation lor'8a1ariea.; __ ___ __ _ 669,1286 for niiaoellaneoua ______________ 669, 1286 for contingent expenses_________ 669, 128& · advances for returning, etc., at>- lIOOndinIProbatione1il ______ 669,1289 J'UlJenile Frmemal :Act, D. C., fraternal benefit lIOOieiiee may provide for fniunmoe or annuities upon Dvee ofolill<il-en at any age_____ 953 · branchee authorized, etc_______ :._ __ 953 basis ot contributlons____________ . :___ 953 standard reaerverequtred____________ 953 powers to enlorctl payments ot Con- · ¥butlons, designate beneficia- nea, ·etc__________________ ____ 953 K. K Street SB., D. C ., ' appropriation for ~viD«, etc., Twelfth to Fourteenth8treetsj from gas- ollne tax fund___ .: ___________ _ Kaibab AgSftC#~, Art.., '. appropriation for npport, etc., of In- dians at_,;.,__________________ _ Kaibab badiafJ ~ Ariz., appropriation tOft maintenance of road =::l_01:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC)~: immediately avallable____ • __ _ __ _ 1272 222 225 401

�


text:
Castle v. Bullard/Opinion of the Court

THIS case was brought up by writ of error from the Circuit Court of the United States for the northern district of Illinois.

The plaintiffs in error were auctioneers and commission merchants in Chicago, Illinois, the firm being composed of Joseph Filkins, J. P. Phillips, Elihu Granger, and Edward H. Castle. An action on the case was brought against them by Bullard, a citizen of the State of New York. The declaration contained five counts, viz:

1. That these four defendants were partners, doing business in Chicago, as auctioneers and commission merchants, under the firm and name of Filkins, Phillips, & Co.; and

2. That certain goods of plaintiff were in the custody of defendants, as such partners, for sale on commission.

3. That, as such partners, defendants sold them to Edmund S.C.astle.

4. That E. S.C.astle, at the time of the purchase, was insolvent, and not fit to be trusted.

5. That defendants knew at the time that E. S.C.astle was insolvent, and effected the sale fraudulently.

The plea of not guilty denied each of these allegations.

The verdict was for the plaintiff, in the sum of $2,983.32 and costs.

The bill of exceptions taken upon the trial occupied sixty pages of the printed record, and recited substantially the evidence given to the jury.

In the course of the trial, the following proceedings took place:After the evidence for the plaintiff had closed, and he had rested his case, there appeared to be no evidence connecting Granger with the transaction, other than what might exist from the fact of his being one of the partners.

And thereupon defendant, Elihu Granger, moved the court as follows: The defendant, Elihu Granger, moved the court to direct the jury to render a verdict of nonsuit, or that the court would order a nonsuit to be entered as to defendant, Granger, upon the ground that the evidence given to the jury by plaintiff did not tend to charge this defendant. This motion the court overruled, and said defendant, Granger, then and there excepted to the decision of the court. And thereupon all the defendants moved the court for a nonsuit as to Granger, upon the ground that the evidence in the case did not tend to charge him. This motion was overruled by the court, to which decision of the court said defendants, and each of them, then and there excepted; and thereupon said defendants asked the court that said jury might be permitted to retire and consider whether they found the evidence in the case sufficient to charge said defendant, Granger; and if not, that the jury might find said Granger not guilty. And the defendants, Castle, Filkins, and Phillips, each urged upon the court, as a reason for this course, that they desired to use said Granger as a witness for their defence if he should be acquitted; but the court overruled this application and motion, to which decision the defendants excepted. Other exceptions were taken as to matters of evidence which need not be here recited.

After the evidence was finished, the court gave the following instructions to the jury, which are inserted in order to show the view of the court below, although the defendants excepted only to the two first:

The court, after saying to the jury that the original and amended declaration alleged in substance that the defendants fraudulently sold the goods for plaintiff to an irresponsible person, and also that, in consequence of false and fraudulent representations made by them, the plaintiff consented to the negotiation and sale by them of the goods to an insolvent person, by which plaintiff sustained loss, and that one of these allegations must be proved, among various other instructions, gave the following to the jury:

1. If the goods were in the custody of the defendants for sale on commission, and one or more of the partners made false and fraudulent representations as to the party to whom they were to be sold by the defendants, then the partnership would be liable, if in consequence of such representations the plaintiff consented to the sale to that party, and the sale was actually made by the firm to the party.

2. If, however, these goods were not in the possession of the defendants for sale, but were there merely for safe keeping, and one or more of the partners made false and fraudulent representations as to the solvency of a person to whom it was proposed to sell the goods, and in consequence of such representations the goods were sold and delivered to that person by the plaintiff, or he consented to their sale, then the firm is not liable for such false and fraudulent representations, unless the firm, as a firm, were party to such representations. That the false or fraudulent representations made by one of several partners, in order to bind the firm, must be made in the course of and in relation to the business of the firm.

3. If the sale was made by the plaintiff alone, or by the plaintiff through E. H. Castle as his agent, (acting in that behalf, and not for the firm,) then, no matter what were the representations by E. H. Castle, the jury must find for the defendants.

4. Unless the sale was made or negotiated by the firm, the jury should find for the defendants.

5. That the fact of a guaranty of the payment of a debt by Filkins is not evidence of fraud, nor of want of solvency at that time. There is no presumption that the return of the officer is untrue.

6. That, so far as the motives of the defendants are concerned, no fact proved is to be considered, unless the knowledge of such fact is brought home to such defendants.

7. That all the subsequent transactions mentioned by the witnesses have nothing to do with the main fact of the case, further than this: they are only circumstances to be considered, which may throw light upon the motives of the parties; that if the subsequent acts and declarations can be accounted for reasonably without assuming a fraudulent motive in the transaction of the 8th November, such circumstances are not to be considered or regarded by the jury as entitled to any weight. And they are to have no influence until the jury are satisfied, from the evidence, that the sale was made by or through the defendants, as commission merchants; that E. S.C.astle was not responsible as a purchaser, on the 8th of November, the time of sale, and that the defendants knew him to be irresponsible.

8. That, unless the jury believe that defendants acted fraudulently, as charged in this declaration, it is entirely immaterial whether they, or any of them, acted fraudulently or otherwise in after transactions, or other transactions.

9. That fraud could never be presumed, but must be clearly proved, but it may be established circumstantially as well as by direct proof.

To the first and second instructions, as above stated, the defendants then and there excepted, but to none others; the other instructions above set forth being given to the jury at the request of the counsel for the defendants.

The court also said to the jury, that all the instructions given by the court were to be taken and considered together.

The case was argued by Mr. Dickey for the plaintiffs in error, and by Mr. Gillet for the defendant.

Mr. Dickey thus noticed the points in the case:

At the close of the plaintiff's evidence in chief, defendants each claimed that a separate verdict be allowed as to Granger, against whom there was no proof, in order that the other defendants might use him as a witness. This the court refused, and defendants excepted.

This was erroneous. There was once some difference of opinion as to this right, but in Phillips's Evidence, 8th edition, 59, it is said: 'It is now well settled, by the unanimous opinion of all the judges, that a defendant, (in torts,) against whom plaintiff adduces no proof, is entitled to a separate verdict at once, on the close of the plaintiff's case.'

See, also, 2 Starkie's Ev., 11, 798, 799.

Whether there be any evidence, is a question of law.

1 Greenleaf, sec. 49; Phillips's Ev., 513.

And while it is true, this court will not review a question of fact, yet no court can review the law of a case without looking to the facts to which it is to be applied.

All the extraneous evidence, in any event, was irrelevant until plaintiff had laid a foundation for such proof, by giving evidence of the contract set up in the declaration between plaintiff and defendants as partners; and to do this, the partnership, embracing Granger, had to be proved.

In an action of tort, where a contract is alleged, as ground of the supposed duty violated, such contract must be proved as laid.

Phillips's Ev., 856; 2 Saunders's Pl. and Ev., part first, 582.

The court below therefore erred in allowing plaintiff to go into proof of outside matters, until this vital preliminary proof was forthcoming; and this rule is the more necessary to be observed in a court where an involuntary nonsuit cannot be ordered.

(Then comments on the questions of evidence.)

The charge of the court was erroneous. The court said:

1. 'If the goods were in the custody of the defendants for sale on commission, and one or more of the partners made false and fraudulent representations as to the party to whom they were to be sold by the defendants, then the partnership would be liable; if, in consequence of such representations, the plaintiff consented to the sale to that party, and the sale was actually made by the firm to the party.'

This clearly is not a sound proposition, unless you add to it, that the party to whom the sale was made was actually unworthy of the credit, and by reason thereof the debt was likely to be lost. The fact is, the whole record shows that the plaintiff and the court assumed, without proof, that E. S.C.astle at the time of the sale was unfit to be trusted, and that E. H. Castle and Filkins knew this to be so, and by the bearing, and finally the charge of the court, the jury were taught to assume the same thing. It is only on this assumption that proof of mere purchases of goods by E. S.C.astle were treated as so many frauds actually perpetrated, and every favorable word about E S.C.astle, spoken by E. H. Castle and by Filkins, were assumed on the trial by the plaintiff as so many wilful lies for some dishonest purpose; and the court, by its general course of ruling, gave sanction to the assumption, and led the jury to do so.

The error in the second article of the charge consists in a false and erroneous idea expressed in the exception. The court says, that, upon a certain hypothesis, defendants are not liable, 'unless the firm, as a firm, were party to such representations.'

If the goods were not in defendants' possession for sale, but were there merely for safe keeping, and one of the partners made false representations touching the solvency of a proposed purchaser, and thus plaintiff was induced to sell, and did make the sale himself, it is not perceived how it is possible that the firm, as a firm, could be 'a party to the representations.' I don't know what that does mean, but I know it suggests to the jury that the firm may be held liable in this case for representations touching a sale, made by the plaintiff himself, when they were in no way parties to the sale by being parties to representations made by one of their number touching a matter not within the line of the business of the firm. It is true, the court, in a later part of the charge, says, that unless the firm made or negotiated the sale, they are not liable. But this is no relief, because the court said to the jury, at the last of the charge, that all the instructions given by the court were to be considered together. Now, here are two, which are repugnant; which did the jury take?

The counsel for the defendant in error made the following points:

I. The plaintiff may prove subsequent acts of fraud and collusion, to obtain goods from other persons, in order to show the previous intent of the defendants, and which the jury might infer from circumstances.

Allison v. Matthiew, 3 John. N. Y. R., 235.

2 Hen. Black, 288.

Van Kirk v. Wilds, 11 Barb. Rep., 526.

Such acts, prior or subsequent, about the same time, are admissible with a view to the quo animo.

Carey v. Hoatling, 1 Hill R., 316.

See English cases cited by Cowen, J. Same principle approved by the Court of Appeals of New York.

Hall v. Taylor, 18 N. Y., 589.

II. It was competent to prove the amount of goods on hand in store of E. S.C.astle, the amount of his debts, his general embarrassment, and all acts to show his pecuniary condition, with a view to show the defendants' statements to be false and fraudulent.

III. The defendants being partners, and, as such, having sold the goods and received the $135 commission and freight, were jointly liable.

Story on Part., sec. 131.

The act was within their regular business, as commission merchants.

'If one of a firm of commission merchants should sell goods, consigned to the partnership, fraudulently, or in violation of instructions, all the partners would be liable for the conversion, in an action of trover.'

Story on Part., sec. 166.

Collier on Part., sec. 6, pages, 304, 306, 2d ed.

Nicol v. Glemie, 1 Maul. and Selw., 588.

Olmstead v. Hoatling, 1 Hill N. Y., 317.

IV. Upon the merits, the defendants were clearly liable, and the first instruction is correct.

3 John. R., 235; 7 Wend., 9.

Bean v. Renway, 17 Howard N. Y. Rep., 90.

Labriskie v. Smith, 3 Kernan, 322.

The above are the only points made by the bill of exceptions which are important.

Mr. Justice CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the northern district of Illinois.

Edward F. Bullard, a citizen of the State of New York, complained in the court below of Joseph Filkins, J. P. Phillips, Elihu Granger, and Edward H. Castle, in a plea of trespass on the case, alleging, at the same time, that they were partners, doing business as commission merchants at Chicago, in the State of Illinois, under the style and firm of Filkins, Phillips, & Company.

According to the transcript, the declaration was filed on the seventh day of July, 1856. As amended, it contained five counts, setting forth, in various forms, two distinct grounds of complaint against the defendants, which may be briefly stated as follows:

In the first place, it is alleged that the defendants, on the eighth day of November, 1855, fraudulently sold on credit, at Chicago, to one Edward S.C.astle, certain goods belonging to the plaintiff, and which he had previously intrusted to them, as commission merchants, for sale; and that the purchaser, at the time of the sale, was in failing circumstances and irresponsible; charging, in the same connection, that the defendants, at the time of the transaction, well knew that the purchaser was insolvent, and wholly unfit to be trusted; and that they negotiated the sale with intent to deceive and defraud the plaintiff, whereby he suffered loss to an amount equal to the value of the goods so sold and delivered.

He also alleged, in other counts, that the defendants, prior to the sale of the goods, and at the time when it was made, represented to him that the said Edward H. Castle was worth at least eight thousand dollars above all his liabilities; that he was not embarrassed in his business affairs, or much indebted, and that he was a safe, cautious business man, and every way worthy of credit. Those representations, the plaintiff alleged, were false, and that the defendants well knew they were so at the time of the negotiation, and when the goods were delivered; and that they were so made by the defendants with intent to deceive and defraud him in the premises, and had the effect to induce him to consent to the sale, and to deliver the goods, whereby he suffered loss, as is alleged in the other counts.

To those charges, as more formally set forth in the several counts of the declaration, the defendants jointly pleaded that they were not guilty; and on the third day of January, 1857, the parties went to trial on that issue.

Testimony was introduced by the plaintiff in the opening, showing that Filkins, Phillips, & Company, were commission merchants at the time of this transaction, doing business at Chicago, in the State of Illinois, and that they received the goods in question a short time prior to the sale, from one William H. Adams, of that city, to whom the goods had previously been sent by the plaintiff to be sold on commission. He also proved the sale of the goods by one of the firm of Filkins, Phillips, & Company, to Edward H. Castle, on credit, substantially as alleged in the declaration, and that two of the partners and the clerk of the firm were present at the time the sale took place.

Facts and circumstances were also adduced by the plaintiff, tending strongly to show that the purchaser was largely indebted and in failing circumstances at the time of the negotiation, and that two or more of the members of the firm must have known that he was insolvent and utterly unworthy of credit.

Five per cent. was charged as commissions on the sale of the goods, amounting to the sum of one hundred and thirty-five dollars; and the plaintiff introduced testimony tending to show that the purchaser, as a part of the transaction, gave his promissory note to the firm, payable in forty-five days, to secure that amount.

Evidence was also introduced by the plaintiff, showing that representations as to the business circumstances and pecuniary responsibility of the purchaser were made to him at the time of the sale, by one or more of the defendants, substantially in the manner as alleged in the declaration. And it was clearly shown that two or more of the firm well knew that those representations were false, and that the subject of them was wholly unfit to be trusted for that amount.

Proof was also introduced by the plaintiff, showing that the purchaser was a relative of one of the firm, and that he had repeatedly been assisted by others in obtaining credit. And many of the circumstances were of a character to afford a ground of presumption that all of the defendants must have known the true state of his affairs, and that he was insolvent.

When the plaintiff rested his case, in the opening, the counsel of the defendants moved the court to order a nonsuit as to the defendant, Granger, upon the ground that the evidence offered by the plaintiff did not tend to charge him with a participation in the fraud alleged in the declaration. At that stage of the cause, there was no evidence immediately connecting him with the transaction, except what might properly arise from the fact of his being one of the partners. But the court overruled the motion for a nonsuit, and the defendants excepted.

They then requested the court, that the jury might be permitted to retire, and consider whether the evidence introduced was sufficient to charge this defendant; and if not, that the jury might be directed to find him not guilty; urging, as a reason for the motion, that they desired to examine him as a witness for the other defendants; but the court overruled the application, and the defendants excepted.

After these motions were overruled, evidence was introduced by the defendants, and further evidence was given by the plaintiff; all of which was submitted to the jury, who returned their verdict in favor of the plaintiff.

Numerous exceptions were taken by the defendants in the progress of this trial to the rulings of the court, in admitting and rejecting evidence, and they also excepted to two of the instructions given by the court to the jury.

1. As the facts have been found by the jury, the questions to be determined are those that arise upon the exceptions. Of these, the first in the order of the argument at the bar is the one founded upon the refusal of the court to order a nonsuit as to the defendant, Granger, as requested by the counsel at the close of the plaintiff's testimony.

Several answers may be given to this complaint, each of which is sufficient to show that the exception cannot be sustained. In the first place, Circuit Courts have no power to grant a peremptory nonsuit against the will of the plaintiff. It was expressly so held by this court in Elmore v. Grymes and al., 1 Pet., 471, and the same rule was also affirmed in De Wolf v. Rabaud and al., 1 Pet., 497. In the case last named, the defendants at the trial, after the evidence for the plaintiff was closed, moved the court for a nonsuit; which was denied, and the defendant excepted, and sued out a writ of error; but this court held that the refusal to grant the motion constituted no ground for the reversal of the judgment, remarking, at the same time, that a nonsuit cannot be ordered in any case without the consent and acquiescence of the plaintiff.

Repeated decisions have been made to the same effect; and as long ago as 1832 it was declared, as the opinion of this court, in Crane v. the Lessees of Morris, 6 Pet., 609, that this point was no longer open for controversy. See also Silsby v. Foote and al., 14 How., 222.

Another answer to this complaint arises from the fact that the motion for nonsuit is inappropriate in a case like the present, where there are other defendants to whom it cannot be applied. In actions of this description, where there is more than one defendant, the charge, beyond question, as a general rule, is joint and several, and, consequently, one may be found guilty and another not guilty; but at common law there cannot regularly be a nonsuit as to one and a verdict as to others; and for that reason, whenever it appears that there is evidence in the case to charge one or more of the defendants, a nonsuit is never granted at common law, even in jurisdictions where the authority to grant the motion in a proper case is acknowledged to exist. Revett v. Brown, 2 M. and P., 18; Collier on Part., (Am. ed., 1848,) sec. 809, p. 698.

But a more decisive answer to this ground of complaint arises from the fact that there was evidence in the case tending to charge this defendant which rendered it proper that the question of his guilt or innocence should be submitted to the jury. He was a member of the firm of Filkins, Phillips, & Company, as appears by the bill of exceptions. All of the goods in question were deposited in their warehouse, and the jury have found that the goods were sold by the firm. Two of the partners and the clerk of the firm were present at the sale, and the commissions earned in transacting the business went to the benefit of all the partners of which the firm was composed.

In view of all the circumstances as disclosed in the evidence, it would be impossible to say, as matter of law, that it was error in the court to overrule the motion, even if the authority to grant in were conceded.

2. We come now to examine the second exception, which arises out of the refusal of the court to permit the jury to retire at the close of the plaintiff's case, and consider whether the evidence offered in the opening was sufficient to charge this defendant with a participation in the alleged fraud.

Upon this subject the general rule is, that if a defendant who is a material witness for the other defendants has been improperly joined in the suit, for the purpose of excluding his testimony, the jury will be directed to find a separate verdict in his favor; in which case, the cause being at an end with respect to him, he may be admitted as a witness for the other defendants. This course, however, can be allowed only where there is no evidence whatever against him, for the reason that then only does it appear that he was improperly joined in the suit, through the artifice and fraud of the plaintiff. If there be any evidence against him, then he is not entitled to a separate verdict, because, under such circumstances, it does not appear that he was improperly joined, and his guilt or innocence must wait the general verdict of the jury, who are the sole judges of the fact. 1 Greenl. Ev., sec. 358; Brown v. Howard, 14 John., 122.

Courts of justice are not quite agreed as to what stage of the trial the party thus improperly joined in the suit may insist upon a verdict in his favor-whether at the close of the evidence offered by the plaintiff in the opening, or whether he must wait until the case is closed for the defendants. Mr. Greenleaf regards it as the settled practice, that if, at the close of the plaintiff's case, there is one defendant against whom no evidence is given, he is entitled instantly to be acquitted; and it must be admitted that the decision of the court in Childs v. Chamberlain, 6 C. and P., 213, favors that view of the law. But Lord Denman held, in Sowell v. Champion, 6 Ad. and Ellis, 415, that the application to a judge in the course of a cause, to direct a verdict for one or more defendants in trespass is addressed to his discretion, and that the discretion was to be regulated, not merely by the fact that, at the close of the plaintiff's case, no evidence appears to affect them, but by the probabilities whether any such will arise before the whole evidence in the cause closes. There is, says the learned judge, so palpable a failure of justice, where the evidence for the defence discloses a case against a defendant already prematurely acquitted, that such acquittal ought never to take place until there is the strongest reason to believe that such a consequence cannot follow.

Some courts hold that the application, in all cases, is addressed to the discretion of the court. Brotherton v. Livingston, 3 Watts, 334; 1 Holt., 275. Other courts have held, that where there is no evidence to affect a particular defendant in actions ex delicto against several, a separate verdict is demandable as a matter of right, and that a refusal to grant the application is the proper subject of exceptions. Van Dusen v. Van Slyck, 15 Johns., 223; Bates v. Conklin, 10 Wen., 389.

Whatever diversities of decision there may be upon this point, all agree that the application ought not to be granted, unless it appear that there is no evidence to affect the party in whose favor it is made. Brown v. Howard, 14 John., 122. Now, it has already appeared that there was evidence in this case affecting this defendant; and, upon that ground, we hold that the Circuit Court was fully warranted in refusing to grant the application.

3. After a careful consideration of the several exceptions to the rulings of the court in admitting and rejecting evidence, we are of the opinion that none of them can be sustained. Considering the great number of the exceptions, their separate examination at this time will not be attempted, as it would extend this investigation beyond reasonable limits. One class of them arises out of objections to the admissibility of evidence offered by the plaintiff, tending to show that the defendants, or some of them, had aided the purchaser in this case in committing similar acts of fraud in the purchase of other goods, about the same time, from other persons. According to the evidence, some of those purchases were prior and others subsequent to the period of the sale of the goods in this case. All of this class of exceptions may well be considered together, as they involve the same general principles in the law of evidence. Decided cases have established the doctrine that cases of fraud like the present are among the well-recognised exceptions to the general rule, that other wrongful acts of the defendant are not admissible in evidence on the trial of the particular charge immediately involved in the issue. Similar fraudulent acts are admissible in cases of this description, if committed at or about the same time, and when the same motive may reasonably be supposed to exist, with a view to establish the intent of the defendant in respect to the matters charged against him in the declaration. Assuming the proposition as stated to be correct, of which there can be no doubt, it necessarily follows, that no one of this class of the exceptions is well taken. Some of the decided cases go farther, and hold that such evidence is admissible, as affording a ground of presumption to prove the main charge; but, whether so or not, it is clearly competent, as tending to show the intent of the actor in respect to the matters immediately involved in the issue on trial. Cary v. Hoatling, 1 Hill, 316; Irving v. Motly, 7 Bing., 543; Rowley v. Bigelow, 12 Pick., 307. Another class of the exceptions arises out of objections made by the defendants to the admissibility of evidence introduced by the plaintiff, which, it is insisted, was irrelevant and immaterial. Some twelve exceptions are embraced in this class, and they are addressed to a large portion of the testimony introduced by the plaintiff.

In the course of the trial, the plaintiff offered evidence tending to show the pecuniary circumstances of the purchaser of these goods, his acts and conduct in respect to the goods after the purchase, and that he was largely in debt and insolvent.

He also introduced evidence tending to show that two or more of the defendants had represented to other persons, about the same time, that the purchaser of the goods in question was in good standing, and that they had likewise assisted him in obtaining credit with other dealers in merchandise.

To all or nearly all of this evidence, as more fully detailed in the transcript, the defendants objected, and those objections constitute the foundation of the several exceptions included in this class. Much of the evidence was of a circumstantial character; and it is not going too far to say, that some of the circumstances adduced, if taken separately, might well have been excluded. Actions of this description, however, where fraud is of the essence of the charge, necessarily give rise to a wide range of investigation, for the reason that the intent of the defendant is, more or less, involved in the issue. Experience shows that positive proof of fraudulent acts is not generally to be expected, and for that reason, among others, the law allows a resort to circumstances, as the means of ascertaining the truth. Great latitude, says Mr. Starkie, is justly allowed by the law to the reception of indirect or circumstantial evidence, the aid of which is constantly required, not merely for the purpose of remedying the want of direct evidence, but of supplying an invaluable protection against imposition. 1 Stark. Ev., p. 58.

Whenever the necessity arises for a resort to circumstantial evidence, either from the nature of the inquiry or the failure of direct proof, objections to testimony on the ground of irrelevancy are not favored, for the reason that the force and effect of circumstantial facts usually and almost necessarily depend upon their connection with each other. Circumstances altogether inconclusive, if separately considered, may, by their number and joint operation, especially when corroborated by moral coincidences, be sufficient to constitute conclusive proof. Applying these principles to the several exceptions under consideration, and it is clear that no one of them can be sustained.

Other exceptions to the rulings of court were taken during the progress of the trial; but it is so obvious that they are without merit, that we think it unnecessary to give them a separate examination at the present time, and they are accordingly overruled.

At the argument, it was supposed by the counsel of the original defendants that the circuit judge had allowed the plaintiff to introduce parol proof of the contents of a writ of attachment, referred to by one of the witnesses; but, on examination of the transcript, we find that no such evidence was admitted.

4. Exceptions were also taken to certain portions of the charge of the court. On this branch of the case, most reliance was placed upon certain objections to the first instruction given to the jury, which is as follows:

'If the goods were in the custody of the defendants, for sale on commission, and one or more of the partners made false and fraudulent representations as to the party to whom they were to be sold by the defendants, then the partnership would be liable, if, in consequence of such representations, the plaintiff consented to the sale to that party, and the sale was actually made by the firm to the party.'

Some criticisms were also made in the printed argument for the defendants upon the second instruction, which, like the former, was duly excepted to; but, inasmuch as it is not essentially different in principle from the other, and as the questions presented in each depend upon the same general considerations, it will not be reproduced.

Both instructions were framed upon the theory that the defendants were not liable, unless the jury found from the evidence that the goods were actually sold by the firm; which, to say the least of it, was a theory sufficiently favorable to the defendants. Judge Story says, in his valuable work on partnerships, that torts may arise in the course of the business of the partnership, for which all the members of the firm will be liable, although the act may not in fact have been assented to by all the partners. Thus, for example, if one of the partners should commit a fraud in the course of the partnership business, all the partners may be liable therefor, although they may not all have concurred in the act. So, if one of a firm of commission merchants should be sell goods consigned to the firm, fraudulently, or should sell goods so consigned in violation of instructions, all the partners would be liable. Story on Part., sec. 166; Collier on Part., (Am. ed., 1848,) secs. 445 and 457; Nicoll v. Glennie, 1 Maule and Selw., 568.

In precise accordance with this view of the law, it was said, and well said, by the court, in Olmsted v. Hoatling, 1 Hill, 318, that it does not lie with one to claim property through the fraudulent act of another, whether partner or agent, without being affected by that act the same as if it were his own; and we think the same principle must apply in a case like the present, where a firm doing business as commission merchants have received the fruits of the fraud in the commissions earned for transacting the business.

Where one assuming to be an agent had committed a fraud in a sale, it was held, in Taylor v. Green, 8 Car. and P., 316, that the mere adoption of the sale and the receipt of the money, by the person for whom the sale was made, rendered him liable for the fraud.

Suffice it to say, without any further reference to authorities, that the theory of the instructions was sufficiently favorable to the defendants.

5. Complaint is also made that the instructions excepted to were not sufficiently comprehensive; that they did not embrace all the elements which constituted the charge, as laid in the declaration. Strong doubts are entertained whether this point is properly raised by the bill of exceptions; but whether so or not, we are satisfied that the exception cannot be sustained.

Instructions given by the court at the trial are entitled to a reasonable interpretation; and if the proposition as stated is correct, they are not as a general rule to be regarded as the subject of error, on account of omissions not pointed out by the excepting party. Seven requests for instructions to the jury were presented by the counsel of the defendants, every one of which was given by the court, without any qualification. If the defendants had supposed that the instructions given were either indefinite or not sufficiently comprehensive, they might well have asked that further and more explicit instructions should be given; and if they had done so, and the prayer had been refused, this objection would be entitled to more weight.

But another answer may be giviven to this objection, which is entirely conclusive against it. On recurring to the transcript, we find that the court, before the instructions excepted to were given, explained to the jury the nature and character of the charge, describing substantially the two forms i which it was presented in the several counts of the declaration; and in effect instructed them that it must be proved in the one or the other of those forms, in order to entitle the plaintiff to a verdict in his favor. Those explanations immediately preceded the instructions embraced in the exceptions, and, in fact, may be regarded as a part of the same. Beyond question, the instructions excepted to must be considered in connection with those explanations; and when so considered, it is obvious that this objection cannot be sustained.

In view of the whole case, we think the defendants have no just cause of complaint, and that there is no error in the record. The judgment of the Circuit Court therefore is affirmed, with costs.

title: Castle v. Bullard/Opinion of the Court