« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
received, and a count on the Vide UNITED STATES, 1, 2, 3.
protest for non-payment was
inserted in the declaration ; the
20 per cent. damages were
6. The holder of a bill is enti- 1. Proceedings by libel were io-
tled to recover at the rate of stituted upon a seizure of
exchange, at the time of notice goods, and a bond giren for
of the protest's being given. their appraised value on the
This is the settled law in New- delivery of the goods to the
York. Advantages of the rule claimant. Afterwards the li-
of liquidation at the par of ex- bel was by amendment changed
ib. to an information, and the goods
7. As the plaintiff in an action were condemned. On an ap-
on a hill has a right to recover plication for an attachment
gold or silver, the measure of against the obligors in the
damages must be the value of bond, it was held, that although
the bill, at the time of notice the case was not regularly
of protest, in gold or silver, and within the 89th section of the
not in a depreciated or fluctu- collection law, yet a compli-
ib. ance with the stipulations
8. The owner of a vessel sent the bood might be enforced by
her from New York, consign- attachment against the oblig
ed to bis correspondent at Ant- gors. United States v. 4 part
werp, with directions that they pieces of Woollen Cloth, 435.
should despatch her to India, 2. And the Court held, that it
furnishing the master with a made no difference that the
letter of credit, entitling him obligors were only sureties,
to draw on London for 5,000 and had not themselves re-
pounds. The master was in- ceived the goods. ib.
structed if he should not have 3. If the claimant is not a party to
funds to purchase a cargo in the bond, all the obligors are
India, to “extend his draw. to be deemed principals. ib.
ing.” Being in want of funds, 4. The bond was taken in the
he drew, not on the house in District Court of New York,
London on whom he had and under the statute dividing
drawn the 5,000 pounds, the District the proceedings
but on the consignees at were transferred to the Dis.
Antwerp, who had obtained trict Court of the Northern
the letter of credit, and to District, and by a suhsequent
whom the vessel and cargo statute to this Court, where
were to return. Held, that the condemnation took place.
the bills were drawn without The condition of the bond was
authority, and should have
to pay the appraised value of
been drawn on the house in the goods into the District
London. Executors of Clernent Court, if they should be con-
377 demned in that Court: Held,
that a condemnation in this his power, and can only pledge
Court had the same effect to the vessel in case of necessi-
forfeit the bond.
ty; but the owner, having an
5. An alteration in the bond, absolute control over his pro-
made by one of the clerks of perty, may pledge her for mo.
the Custom House, after its ney to purchase a cargo, and
execution, for the purpose of thereby create an admiralty
rectifying it, but which did not lien.
affect its construction, was 6. Io November, 1822, the own-
held to be the act of a stranger, er of a vessel in Connecticut,
and immaterial, and not to gave a bill of sale of her in the
avoid the bond. United States nature of a mortgage, but was
336 suffered to remain in posses-
sion and act as absolute owner,
Vide COVENANTS. DAMAGES. and her register and all her
Jail Bonds. Interest. She-
papers remained unaltered.
RIFFS. SAIPS, 9-11. Sure- in July following, he gave a
TIES, 12, 13, 14.
bottomry bond for money ad-
vanced to purchase a cargo for
the vessel in the West Indies,
without notice to the lender of
1. The risk of the lender and the mortgage: Held, that upon
his right to repayment only on common law principles, the
the safe arrival of the vessel, claim of the lender was to be
constitute the essential differ. preferred to that of the mort-
ence between a bottomry and gagee.
simple loan. The sloop Mary,
2. Marine interest is also requi-
site to a bottomry loan, but if 1. The Court, having full power
not expressed in the bond, it to issue commissions to take
will be presumed to have been testimony abroad, when sitting
included with the principal. ib. as a Court of Common Law,
3. The jurisdiction of Courts of
will not entertain any pro-
Admiralty over contracts de.
ceedings for such a purpose,
pends principally upon their on its equity side. Peters v.
subject matter ; and in cases
of bottomry, it is not the abso- 2. On exceptions to an answer
lute necessity of the loan that for impertinence and scandal,
gives the jurisdiction. ib. Courts of Equity give the an-
4. And the owner as well as the swer a liberal consideration,
master of a vessel may pledge having regard to the nature of
her by bottomry in a foreign the case as made by the bill.
Griswold v. Hill,
5. "The master of a vessel in a 3. Where a mortgage is given
foreign port, acting in the cha- by a debtor to his co-debtor to
racter of agent, is limited in secure the latter against the
debt of their creditor, Equity 9. And the rule that it is only an
considers the mortgagee as a equity residing in the original
trustee for the creditor ; and debtor, and not the equities of
where a judgment has been third persons against the as-
recovered, will apply the mort- signor that have this effect,
gaged property in satisfaction does not exclude a judgment
of the judgment, or remove creditor, claiming to redeem :
the incumbrance, so that it He stands in the place of the
may be subjected to execution. debtor, and has his equity. ib.
United States v. Sturges, 525 10. An assignee who might have
4. The principle which governs obtained notice, and ought to
such cases is, that the collate- have sought it, stands in po
ral security is a trust created better situation than if he had
for the protection of the debt, actually obtained it. ib.
and that it is the duty of a 11. A mortgage was given in
Court of Equity to see that it reality to indemnify the mort-
fulfils the purpose for which
gagee, but porporting to se-
it was intended.
cure a sum of money payable
5. A judgment creditor who ap- in one year, and five years af-
plies to a Court of Equity for terwards it was assigned, the
its aid to enforce a judgment whole sum appearing from the
at law, if he asks its aid to instrument to be unpaid : Held,
reach a chattel, must show that the circumstances of the
that he has taken out execu- case should have put the as-
tion at law, and pursued it to signee upon an inquiry, from
every available extent, in or- which he would have learot
der to show a lien upon the the true consideration of the
· chattelbut if the aid is sought mortgage.
as to land, it is enough to show 12. An objection to the equity
a judgment creating a lien of the bill, which might have
upon the land.
ib. been taken advantage of on
6. Although a mortgage be abso- demurrer, is not favourably
lute upon the face of it, a received at the hearing of the
Court of Equity will inquire cause after answer.
into the real purpose for which
it was given, and apply it to Vide INJUNCTIONS. JURISDIC-
ib. TION, 246.15, 16. PATENTS,
7. It is a rule of Equity that a 14—17. PRACTICE, 3, 4, 5.
judgment creditor at law is en- PRIORITY OF UNITED STATES.
titled to redeem an incum-
brance upon land, and there- CHARTER PARTY.
by secure his legal priority. ib.
8. The assignee of a mortgage
or other chose in action, takes
it subject to the same equity
that it was subject to in the
hands of the assignor. ib. Vide AMENDMENTS, 1-9. Ju-
2-6. 11-22. to the lands had not been in-
MANDAMUS. PRACTICE, 1–7.
curred, and assigning as grounds
REMOVAL OF Causes.
of forfeiture a non-perform-
ance of the conditions on which
the lands were held, and viola-
tions of their charter of incor-
Vide JURISDICTION, 15, 16. 19- poration. On demurrer to the
scire facias, held, that such vio-
lations of their charter of in-
COLLECTION DISTRICTS. corporation could not be thus
collaterally drawn in question,
Vide EMBARGO, 2.
but that it should be vacated
by some direct proceeding for
COLLECTION OF DUTIES. the purpose. People of Ver.
mont v. Society for Propagat-
Vide DUTIES. FORFEITURES, 14, ing the Gospel,
15. 17, 18, 19. 24–40. In. 2. Among the conditions of the
grant were, that the grantees,
their heirs and assigns, should
pay rent and cultivate a cer-
taip portion of the land : Held,
Vide FORFEITURES, 1, 2. 21- that no reasons of public poli-
cy exempted the defendants
from the performance of these
COMMISSION TO EXAMINE conditions, and that they were
within their letter and spirit.
3. Each grantee was to pay an-
nually for the first ten years,
an ear of corn, rent, for his
share of the land, if lawfully
1. The King of Great Britain demanded : Held, that this was
granted a charter of a town in a mere nominal rent, and its
that part of the province of non-payment not a ground of
New Hampshire, which is now forfeiture, and that the breach
Vermont, to be divided among of the condition was ill assign-
the grantees, and to be held ed, as there was no averment
on certain conditions mention- that it had been lawfully de-
ed in the charter. The de- manded.
fendants, who were one of the 4. After the first ten years a rent
grantees, were a Society in of one shilling for every hun-
England incorporated by a dred acres was to be paid an-
charter from the King. A nually to the grantor, in his
scire facias was issued on be. council chamber in Ports-
half of the plaintiffs, requiring mouth, or to such officer as
the defendants to show cause should be appointed to receive
why a forfeiture of their right the same : Held, that payment
at the place appointed had CONSTRUCTION OF WRI-
been rendered impossible by
the separation of the countries,
and that the plaintiffs should Vide Bonds, 1-5. EVIDENCE,
have averred that they had ap- 5, 6, 7. UNITED STATES, 8, 9.
pointed another place of pay-
ment or an officer to receive
the payment, and that notice
thereof bad been given to the 1. One proposed to the plain-
tiffs, in the presence of the
defendant, to ship them a
quantity of sugars belonging to
him, in the defendant's hands,
on receiving an authority to
Vide Action, 1.
draw on the plaintiffs for the
amount. It was thereupon
agreed, that the shipment
should be made, and the au-
thority given, on the defend-
ant's engaging by letter to ship
the sugars. The owner of the
sugars accordingly wrote a let-
ter, addressed to the defend.
ant, desiring him to ship the
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF sugars on board such ressel as
the owner might direct, con-
signed to the plaintiffs, and
Vide Insolvent Laws. STA- next day handed it to him.
TUTES OF New-York, 1—4. The defendant wrote "agreed
to,” under the letter, and
CONSTRUCTION OF STA- signed his name beneath ;
upon which the authority to
draw was given : Held, that
In doubtful cases a court should the defendant's undertaking
compare all the parts of a sta- was an original part of the en-
tute and different statutes in tire transaction, and that the
pari materia to ascertain the consideration, moving from
intention of the Legislature. the plaintiffs to the owner of
The sloop Elizabeth, 11 the sugars, which was not ex-
pressed in the letter, might be
Vide Anne, 1, 2. Duties. FOR- proved by parol, as it did not
FEITURES, 1, 2. 4, 5. 7, 8, 9, contradict the written agree-
17-19. 23. 24–40. SHIPS, ment; and that the underta-
9-11. STATUTES OF NEW. king of the defendant required
STATUTES OF no consideration moving from
U.S. UNITED STATES, 4,5,6.
the plaintiffs to him to support
it. "Rabaud v. D'Wolf, 580