received, and a count on the
protest for non-payment was
inserted in the declaration; the
20 per cent. damages were
held recoverable.
ib.
6. The holder of a bill is enti-
tled to recover at the rate of
exchange, at the time of notice
of the protest's being given.
This is the settled law in New-
York. Advantages of the rule
of liquidation at the par of ex-
change.
ib.
7. As the plaintiff in an action
on a bill has a right to recover
gold or silver, the measure of
damages must be the value of
the bill, at the time of notice
of protest, in gold or silver, and
not in a depreciated or fluctu-
ating currency.
ib.

8. The owner of a vessel sent
her from New-York, consign-
ed to his correspondent at Ant-
werp, with directions that they
should despatch her to India,
furnishing the master with a
letter of credit, entitling him
to draw on London for 5,000
pounds. The master was in-
structed if he should not have
funds to purchase a cargo in
India, to "extend his draw-
ing." Being in want of funds,
he drew, not on the house in
London on whom he had
drawn the 5,000 pounds,
but on the consignees at
Antwerp, who had obtained
the letter of credit, and to
whom the vessel and cargo
were to return. Held, that
the bills were drawn without
authority, and should have
been drawn on the house in
London. Executors of Clement
v. Dickey,

377

Vide UNITED STATES, 1, 2, 3.
WAR.

2.

BONDS.

1. Proceedings by libel were in-
stituted upon a seizure of
goods, and a bond given for
their appraised value on the
delivery of the goods to the
claimant. Afterwards the li-
bel was by amendment changed
to an information, and the goods
were condemned. On an ap-
plication for an attachment
against the obligors in the
bond, it was held, that although
the case was not regularly
within the 89th section of the
collection law, yet a compli-
ance with the stipulations
the bond might be enforced by
attachment against the oblig
gors. United States v. 4 part
pieces of Woollen Cloth, 435.
And the Court held, that it
made no difference that the
obligors were only sureties,
and had not themselves re-
ceived the goods.
ib.
3. If the claimant is not a party to
the bond, all the obligors are
to be deemed principals. ib.
4. The bond was taken in the
District Court of New-York,
and under the statute dividing
the District the proceedings
were transferred to the Dis-
trict Court of the Northern
District, and by a subsequent
statute to this Court, where
the condemnation took place.
The condition of the bond was
to pay the appraised value of
the goods into the District
Court, if they should be con-
demned in that Court: Held,

that a condemnation in this
Court had the same effect to
forfeit the bond.
ib.
5. An alteration in the bond,
made by one of the clerks of
the Custom House, after its
execution, for the purpose of
rectifying it, but which did not
affect its construction, was
held to be the act of a stranger,
and immaterial, and not to
avoid the bond. United States
v. Hatch,
336

Vide COVENANTS. DAMAGES.
JAIL BONDS. INTEREST. SHE-
RIFFS. SHIPS, 9-11. SURE.
TIES, 12, 13, 14.

BOTTOMRY.

1. The risk of the lender and
his right to repayment only on
the safe arrival of the vessel,
constitute the essential differ-
ence between a bottomry and
simple loan. The sloop Mary,
671
2. Marine interest is also requi-
site to a bottomry loan, but if
not expressed in the bond, it
will be presumed to have been
included with the principal. ib.
3. The jurisdiction of Courts of
Admiralty over contracts de-
pends principally upon their
subject matter; and in cases
of bottomry, it is not the abso-
lute necessity of the loan that
gives the jurisdiction. ib.
4. And the owner as well as the
master of a vessel may pledge
her by bottomry in a foreign
port.
ib.
5. The master of a vessel in a
foreign port, acting in the cha-
racter of agent, is limited in

his power, and can only pledge
the vessel in case of necessi-
ty; but the owner, having an
absolute control over his pro-
perty, may pledge her for mo-
ney to purchase a cargo, and
thereby create an admiralty
lien.
ib.

6. In November, 1822, the own-
er of a vessel in Connecticut,
gave a bill of sale of her in the
nature of a mortgage, but was
suffered to remain in posses-
sion and act as absolute owner,
and her register and all her
papers remained unaltered.
In July following, he gave a
bottomry bond for money ad-
vanced to purchase a cargo for
the vessel in the West Indies,
without notice to the lender of
the mortgage: Held, that upon
common law principles, the
claim of the lender was to be
preferred to that of the mort-
gagee.
ib.

CHANCERY.

64

1. The Court, having full power
to issue commissions to take
testimony abroad, when sitting
as a Court of Common Law,
will not entertain any pro-
ceedings for such a purpose,
on its equity side.
Peters v.
Prevost,
2. On exceptions to an answer
for impertinence and scandal,
Courts of Equity give the an-
swer a liberal consideration,
having regard to the nature of
the case as made by the bill.
Griswold v. Hill,

390
3. Where a mortgage is given
by a debtor to his co-debtor to
secure the latter against the

debt of their creditor, Equity
considers the mortgagee as a
trustee for the creditor; and
where a judgment has been
recovered, will apply the mort-
gaged property in satisfaction
of the judgment, or remove
the incumbrance, so that it
may be subjected to execution.
United States v. Sturges, 525
4. The principle which governs
such cases is, that the collate-
ral security is a trust created
for the protection of the debt,
and that it is the duty of a
Court of Equity to see that it
fulfils the purpose for which
it was intended.
ib.
5. A judgment creditor who ap-
plies to a Court of Equity for
its aid to enforce a judgment
at law, if he asks its aid to
reach a chattel, must show
that he has taken out execu-
tion at law, and pursued it to
every available extent, in or-
der to show a lien upon the
chattel: but if the aid is sought
as to land, it is enough to show
a judgment creating a lien.
upon the land.
6. Although a mortgage be abso-
lute upon the face of it, a
Court of Equity will inquire
into the real purpose for which
it was given, and apply it to
that use.
ib.
7. It is a rule of Equity that a
judgment creditor at law is en-
titled to redeem an incum-
brance upon land, and there-
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

ib.

ib.

9. And the rule that it is only an
equity residing in the original
debtor, and not the equities of
third persons against the as-
signor that have this effect,
does not exclude a judgment
creditor, claiming to redeem :
He stands in the place of the
debtor, and has his equity. ib.
10. An assignee who might have
obtained notice, and ought to
have sought it, stands in no
better situation than if he had
actually obtained it.
11. A mortgage was given in
reality to indemnify the mort-
gagee, but purporting to se-
cure a sum of money payable
in one year, and five years af-
terwards it was assigned, the
whole sum appearing from the
instrument to be unpaid: Held,
that the circumstances of the
case should have put the as-
signee upon an inquiry, from
which he would have learnt
the true consideration of the
mortgage.

ib.
12. An objection to the equity

of the bill, which might have
been taken advantage of on
demurrer, is not favourably
received at the hearing of the
cause after answer.

Vide INJUNCTIONS.

ib.

JURISDIC-

TION, 2-6. 15, 16. PATENTS,
14-17. PRACTICE, 3, 4, 5.
PRIORITY OF UNITED STATES.

CHARTER PARTY.

Vide FREIGHT.

CIRCUIT COURTS.

RISDICTION, 2-6. 11-22.
MANDAMUS. PRACTICE, 1-7.
REMOVAL OF CAUSES.

CITIZEN.

Vide JURISDICTION, 15, 16. 19-
22.

COLLECTION DISTRICTS.

Vide EMBARGO, 2.

COLLECTION OF DUTIES.

Vide DUTIES. FORFEITURES, 14,
15. 17, 18, 19. 24-40. IN-

FORMER.

COLLECTOR.

Vide FORFEITURES, 1, 2. 21-
23.

COMMISSION TO EXAMINE
WITNESSES.

Vide EVIDENce.

CONDITION.

1. The King of Great Britain
granted a charter of a town in
that part of the province of
New-Hampshire, which is now
Vermont, to be divided among
the grantees, and to be held
on certain conditions mention-
ed in the charter. The de-
fendants, who were one of the
grantees, were a Society in
England incorporated by a
charter from the King. A
scire facias was issued on be-
half of the plaintiffs, requiring
the defendants to show cause
why a forfeiture of their right

to the lands had not been in-
curred,and assigning as grounds
of forfeiture a non-perform-
ance of the conditions on which
the lands were held, and viola-
tions of their charter of incor-
poration. On demurrer to the
scire facias, held, that such vio-
lations of their charter of in-
corporation could not be thus
collaterally drawn in question,
but that it should be vacated
by some direct proceeding for
the purpose. People of Ver-
mont v. Society for Propagat-
ing the Gospel,
2. Among the conditions of the
grant were, that the grantees,
their heirs and assigns, should
pay rent and cultivate a cer-
tain portion of the land: Held,
that no reasons of public poli-
cy exempted the defendants
from the performance of these
conditions, and that they were
within their letter and spirit.
ib.

652