4. Officers were appointed by a State to refund taxes which had been illegally imposed on those United States securities which were exempt from State taxation. The officers declined to do so, on the ground that some of the Government securities alleged to be exempt were not exempt. On mandamus, judgment was given in the State court for the officers, on the ground that their opinion was correct. Held, that this was a decision against a right, privilege, or immunity claimed under the Constitution or a statute of the United States within the Judiciary Act, § 25, and the Act of Feb. 5, 1867, and the Supreme Court had jurisdiction of a writ of error to the State court. The Banks v. The Mayor, 7 Wallace, 16.

-

5. The Act of June 3, 1864, § 41, provides that shares in national banks may be included in the assessment of taxes imposed by a State at the place where such bank is located, and not elsewhere." A State statute provided that such shares should be included in the assessment of taxes at the place where the shareholder resided. A., living in B., owned a share in the national bank located in B. The State court decided that A. was liable to be taxed on these shares in B. Held, that this was not a decision where the validity of a State statute had been drawn in question as being repugnant to a law of the United States, and the decision had been in favor of such validity within the Judiciary Act, § 25. Austin v. The Aldermen, 7 Wallace, 694.

6. The decision of a State court that a State statute requires State taxes to be collected and paid over in gold and silver coin will be followed by the Supreme Court. Lane County v. Oregon, 7 Wallace, 71.

7. A decision by the highest State court that the construction of a State statute authorizes a certain officer to levy a tax will be followed by the Supreme Court. - Morgan v. Town Clerk, 7 Wallace, 610.

8. A mandamus directed a city to levy a specific tax on the taxable property of the city, for the year 1865, sufficient to pay a specified judgment, interest, and costs; to collect the tax and pay the same, or show cause to the contrary by the next term. The return was, that, in obedience to the order, the city "did proceed to levy a tax of one per cent on the taxable property of the said city for the purpose of paying the judgment named and other claims, and that the said tax is sufficient in amount to pay the said judgment and other claims." On demurrer, held insufficient. Benbow v. Iowa City, 7 Wallace, 313.

See INCOME TAX; INFORMER, 2; LEGAL TENDER, 3.

TENDER. See EQUITY PLEADING AND PRACTICE, 1.

Objection cannot be taken on a writ of error that the verdict, in a trial where there were several issues, was that the jury found the "issue" for the plaintiff. — Laber v. Cooper, 7 Wallace, 565.

WAIVER. See ILLEGAL CONTRACT, 2; PLEADING AND PRACTICE.

WAR. See GOVERNMENT CONTRACT, 1; ILLEGAL CONTRACT, 1; INFORMATION; INTEREST, 1; LICENSE; STATE, 2.

WATERCOURSE. - See LANDLORD AND TENANT; PUBLIC LAND.

Whenever a cross-libel is filed upon any counter claim arising out of the same cause of action for which the original libel was filed, the respondents in the crosslibel shall give security in the usual amount and form, to respond in damages as claimed in said cross-libel, unless the court, on cause shown, shall otherwise direct; and all proceedings upon the original libel shall be stayed until such security shall be given.

SELECTED DIGEST OF STATE REPORTS.

[FOR the present number of the Digest selections have been made from the following volumes of State Reports: 41 Alabama; 53 Barbour (New York); 35 California; 44 Illinois; 29 Indiana; 43 Missouri; 4 Nevada; 25, 26, 27 Texas; 22 Wisconsin.]

ACCEPTANCE. See BILLS AND NOTES, 2; PLEADING, 2.

A claim against an estate, upon which no administration has been taken out, cannot be prosecuted against the heirs without allegation that estate has descended. - The State v. Lewellyn, 25 Texas, 797.

See DEED; GAMING; JUDGMENT, 2; LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF, 1; SCIENTER; STAMP, 4; TROVER; VARIANCE.

ACT OF GOD.-See LANDLORD AND TENANT, 2.

ADMINISTRATION.-See EXECUTOR AND ADMINISTRATOR.

ADMIRALTY.

A demand for supplies, furnished in the port of Mobile to a steamboat regularly licensed under the laws of the United States, enrolled at the Mobile customhouse, and plying between that city and Columbus, Mississippi, and which belongs to a resident citizen of Mississippi, is a maritime contract, and can only be enforced by admiralty process against the boat, in the Federal courts. Steamboat Mist v. Martin, 41 Ala. 712.

See LIEN, 2.

ADMISSION.

Action by husband and wife for injuries to the wife resulting from an accident caused by defects in highway. Held, that an admission by the husband of carelessness on the part of the driver of the wagon, in which the plaintiff was at the time of the accident, should have been allowed to go to the jury, although he was not present at the time of the accident. - Shaddock v. Clifton, 22 Wis. 114. AGENT. See PRINCIPAL AND AGENT.

ARREST. See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, STATE, 9. ASSAULT AND BATTERY, See EVIDENCE, 3.

--

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, STATE, 2; LEGAL TENDER, 4.

ASSIGNMENT.

An instrument of assignment recited that the assignor was indebted “to sundry persons," without naming them, or specifying the amount of the assignor's indebtedness, and provided that the assignee should "hold said property, and dispose of the same, as soon as he can possibly do so to the best advantage, for the benefit of my creditors." Held void as to non-assenting creditors. Caton v. Mosely, 25 Texas, 374.

See BILLS AND NOTES, 3; DELIVERY, 1; MORTGAGE, 1; PARTNERSHIP, 1.

ATTACHMENT.

An officer attached property claimed by A. under a sale from the defendant in the attachment suit; judgment was recovered by plaintiff in the attachment suit, and A. sued the officer. Held, that the officer might show that the sale to A. was in fraud of creditors. - Pease v. Anderson, 44 Ill. 218.

See SURETY, 2.

ATTORNEY.

1. Under the Missouri statute an attorney at law cannot be called upon to testify respecting the condition and appearance of a deed of trust and the trust notes at the time when they were committed to him to bring suit of foreclosure. Gray v. Fox, 43 Mo. 570.

2. An attorney contracted with his client for a contingent fee, to depend upon the result of the suit. The client compromised without consulting his attorney. Held, that the attorney was entitled to recover the whole amount of his fee. Hill v. Cunningham, 25 Texas, 25.

See CONFEDERATE MONEY, 2.

AUTHORITY.—See PARTNERSHIP, 1, 2.

AVERMENT. See STAMP, 1.

BAGGAGE. See CARRIER, 3.

BAILMENT.

H. placed land-scrip, owned by himself together with K. and L., in the hands of N. for safe keeping. K. died, and his widow demanded the scrip of N., who delivered it to her. H.'s administrator sued N. for the value of H.'s interest in the scrip. Held, that he was entitled to recover. - Nelson v.

655.

See CARRIER, 3; PUBLIC POLICY; VARIANCE.

--

BALANCE. See LIMITATIONS, STATUTE of, 2.
BANK.

See BILLS AND NOTES, 1; LIEN, 1.

BILL. See ILLEGAL CONTRACT, 3.

King, 25 Texas,

BILL OF RIGHTS. See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, STATE, 7; PARTNERSHIP, 2.

--

BILLS AND NOTES.

1. Plaintiff sued as indorsee upon the following instrument: "No. 28,850. $750. Bank of D. O. Mills & Co., Sacramento, Oct. 18, 1866. George Rosenbaum has deposited in this bank fifteen hundred dollars, payable to himself or order, in United States gold coin, on return of this certificate properly indorsed. D. O. Mills & Co." The execution of the contract and the fact of indorsement were admitted. Held, that plaintiff could recover without proof of consideration. - Poorman v. Mills, 35 Cal. 118.

2. Across the face of a bill of exchange the drawer wrote "acceptance waived." Held, that he was liable on the bill, without any presentment for acceptance or for payment to the drawee. - Carson's Adm'rs v. Russell, 26 Texas, 452.

3. "Four months after date we, or either of us, promise to pay W. T. Gibbons or Wm. Bell the sum of twelve hundred dollars, with twelve per cent interest per annum till paid, this the tenth day of May, 1857." Indorsement, "For value received I assign this to James Chisum, this 12th April, 1858." (Signed) "W. Bell." Held, that the assignee might maintain an action on the note. Record v. Chisum, 25 Texas, 348.

4. A garnishee gave his note to the defendant in the garnishee suit, for the whole claim of the defendant against him, with an oral agreement that if judgment should be recovered against him as garnishee, the amount of the judgment should be deducted from the note. Such judgment was afterwards rendered against him, and was paid by him. Held, that these facts might be shown, by parol evidence, in an action on the note to prove a partial failure of consideration. Peterson v. Johnson, 22 Wis. 21.

See CONFEDERATE MONEY, 6, 7; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 8; EVIDENCE, 1; GAMING; ILLEGAL CONTRACT, 3; LEGAL TENDER, 1; PAYMENT; STAMP, 6. BONA FIDES.-See CORPORATION; MORTGAGE, 2.

BOND. See CONFEDERATE BOND; EXECUTOR AND ADMINISTRATOR, 2;
SURETY, 2, 3.
BOUNTY.

In 1864, the town of W. passed a resolution to pay $300 to each man drafted into the service of the United States, and "not exempted." The resolution was amended so as to include those “drafted last year, and paid $300." The relator was subsequently drafted, and on payment of $300, discharged. In 1865, the legislature passed an act legalizing all the proceedings of town meetings in the county in which W. was situated, relating to the payment of "bounties to volunteers, substitutes, and drafted men." Held, that the relator was "not exempted" within the meaning of the resolution, and that the resolution related to the payment of "bounties" within the meaning of the act. The People v. Auditors of Westford, 53 Barb. 555.