Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (C. C. A.) 721; § 2. Privileges or immunities, and class The rights, privileges, and immunities which the fourteenth constitutional amendment and Rev. St. § 1979 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1262], for its enforcement, were designed to protect, are such as belong to citizens of the United States as such, and not as citizens of a state. -Wadleigh v. Newhall (C. C.) 941. Particular classes of express contracts. Affreightment, see "Shipping," § 4. Particular modes of discharging contracts. Construction and operation. The construction of a contract which was reduced to writing, but where the writing did not show on its face to what conditions it applied, held properly submitted to the jury, as a question of fact to be determined on the extrinsic evidence.-Donner v. Alford (C. C. A.) 750. 2. Performance or breach. Code Civ. Proc. Cal. § 1747, which authorizes proceedings for the appointment of guard-1. ians for minors having no guardian appointed by will or deed, is a lawful exercise of the state's power, and proceedings based thereon, by which parents are deprived of the custody of their children, do not give them a right of action against the persons instituting the proceedings, under Rev. St. § 1979 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1262], for depriving them of rights, privileges, or immunities secured to them by the Constitution or laws of the United States. Wadleigh v. Newhall (C. C.) 941. § 3. Due process of law. Where two of the alleged bankrupts had absconded and the third was incarcerated, the appointment of a receiver before adjudication without notice to the incarcerated defendant, under Bankr. Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, § 2, subd. 3, 30 Stat. 545 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3421], held not objectionable as a taking of property without due process of law.-In re Francis (D. C.) 912. CONTEMPT. Violation of injunction, see "Injunction," § 2. Violation of injunction in patent infringement suit, see "Patents," § 7. CONTRACT LABOR. Exclusion, see "Aliens," § 2. CONTRACTS. Parol or extrinsic evidence, see "Evidence," Reformation, see "Reformation of Instruments." Contracts of particular classes of parties. See "Master and Servant"; "States," § 1; "Warehousemen." Contracts relating to particular subjects. Public water supply, see "Waters and Water Plaintiff's inability to furnish granite from one of two quarries, according to a statement of intention in plaintiff's proposal, whch was accepted, held not a breach of plaintiff's contract.-United Engineering & Contracting Co. v. Broadnax (C. C. A.) 351. Plaintiff, having failed to comply with a contract for the quarrying of marble, held not entitled to damages for defendant's refusal to permit him to quarry marble stripped within the contract period, after it had expired.-Freedley v. Wilson (C. C. A.) 586. § 3. Actions for breach. In an action for breach of a contract, a question, asked of defendant's president, as to whether a phrase in the contract was inserted by reason of any suggestion made to him, held tracting Co. v. Broadnax (C. C. A.) 351. properly excluded.-United Engineering & Con CONTRIBUTORY INFRINGEMENT. Of patent, see "Patents," § 7. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE. See "Negligence," § 1. Conformity of federal courts to state practice in suits in admiralty involving contributory negligence, see "Courts," § 4. Of person injured by collision, see "Collision," § 6. Of person injured by operation of street railroad, see "Street Railroads," § 2. Of servant, see "Master and Servant," § 2. State laws as rules of decision in federal courts, see "Courts," § 5. CONVEYANCES. See "Mortgages." By or to municipal corporations, see "Municipal Of mining property, see "Mines and Minerals," COPYRIGHTS. Unfair competition in publishing books after expiration of copyright, see "Trade-Marks and Trade-Names," § 2. 1. Nature and acquisition. Pictures printed in successive colors from metal plates are entitled to copyright, under Rev. St. § 4956 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3407], as "prints," and are not within the proviso relating to chromos and lithographs.-Hills & Co. v. Hoover (C. C.) 701. 3. Corporate powers and liabilities. A corporation held not liable for a slander uttered by one of its agents, neither within the express nor implied scope of his authority.— International Text-Book Co. v. Heartt (C. C. A.) 129. Where two defendants were joined in an action, service on an individual as agent of one of them, which he did not represent, held insufficient to confer jurisdiction of such corporation or the other corporate defendant, which he did represent.-International Text-Book Co. v. Heartt (C. C. A.) 129. A notice of copyright on a picture, reading: CORPORATIONS. Citizenship of affecting jurisdiction of federal court, see "Courts," § 3. Insolvency in general, see "Insolvency." Involuntary bankruptcy, see "Bankruptcy," § 2. Liability of corporation owning vessel for wrongful imprisonment of seaman by master, see "Seamen." Preliminary injunction in suit to recover stock, see "Injunction," § 1. Taxation of corporations and corporate property, see "Taxation," § 2. Particular classes of corporations. See "Municipal Corporations"; "Railroads." 1. Incorporation and organization. Where, at the time a corporation purchased certain mining claims in return for stock at a fraudulent overvaluation, the sellers of the claims were the only stockholders, the corporation was not thereafter entitled to rescind the purchase.-Old Dominion Copper Min. Co. v. Lewisohn (C. C.) 915. 2. Members and stockholders. title of borrowers to land mortgaged to the association held notice to the association.-Dennis v. Atlanta Nat. Building & Loan Ass'n (C. C. A.) 539. § 4. Insolvency and receivers. Where the majority stockholders are clearly violating the charter rights of the minority by diverting the earnings of the corporation to themselves, a court of equity has jurisdiction to appoint a receiver, although the corporation is solvent.-Columbia Nat. Sand Dredging Co. v. Washed Bar Sand Dredging Co. (C. C.) 710. 5. Consolidation. Facts held to constitute a combination of manufacturers engaged in making wire glass, within a contract transferring a license to defendant to operate under plaintiff's patents. Brownsville Glass Co. v. Appert Glass Co. (C. C.) 240. § 6. Foreign corporations. Service of process on a general officer of a foreign corporation, while voluntarily within the state for the purpose of adjusting a cou troversy which was the subject of the suit, held sufficient.-Brush Creek Coal & Mining Co. v. Morgan-Gardner Electric Co. (C. C.) 505. CORRECTION. A demand on the directors of a corporation, as required by equity rule 94, need not be made to entitle a stockholder to maintain a suit for relief, where the bill alleges that the directors Of judgment, see "Judgment," § 2. own a majority of the stock and are diverting the income of the corporation to themselves.Columbia Nat. Sand Dredging Co. v. Washed Bar Sand Dredging Co. (C. C.) 710. Under Rev. St. Me. c. 47, § 85, where a corporate stock ledger contained a notation, after an entry of claimant's holding of stock, reciting, "Note 5 years given, stock as collateral, due 1907," such entry was sufficient to show that claimant was not the owner of the stock, and was not, therefore, individually liable for corporate debts as a stockholder.-In re Noyes Bros. (D. C.) 977; Ex parte Dillingham, Id.; Ex parte Clark, Id.; Ex parte Eastman, Id. COSTS. In patent infringement suit, see "Patents," § 7. In proceeding for limitation of liability of owner of vessel, see "Shipping," § 6. § 1. On appeal or error, and on new trial or motion therefor. A writ of error will not be held to have been sued out for delay, so as to authorize the imposition of the penalty of 10 per cent. on affirmance of a judgment, provided for by rule 30 of the Circuit Court of Appeals (90 Fed. elxviii, 31 C. C. A. clxviii), where the question presented is one of statutory construction, which has not been passed on by the state court and is fairly in doubt under the authorities.-TimesDemocrat Pub. Co. v. Mozee (C. C. A.) 761. CO-TENANCY. Under Rev. St. Me. c. 47, § 85, recitals attached to entries of the ownership of stock of pledgees in a corporation stock ledger held sufficient to show that they held the stock as pledgees only, and were not individually liable for corporate debts as stockholders. In re Noyes Bros. (D. C.) 977; Ex parte Dillingham, Id.; Ex parte Clark, Id.; Ex parte Eastman, Id. See "Tenancy in Common." COUNCIL. See "Municipal Corporations," § 1 COUPONS. Rulings on motions for new trial are not reviewable in the federal courts, because addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court. On municipal bonds, see "Municipal Corpora- Southern Pac. Co. v. Maloney (C. C. A.) 171. tions," § 4. COURTS. Court-martial, see "Army and Navy." Employment of stenographer in court of admiralty, see "Admiralty," § 1. Equity pleading in federal courts, see "Equity," $ 2. Jurisdiction of actions by or against trustee in bankruptcy, see "Bankruptcy," § 6. Pendency of action in other court ground for abatement, see "Abatement and Revival," § 1. Removal of action from state court to United States court, see "Removal of Causes." Review of decisions, see "Appeal and Error." Special jurisdiction, see "Bankruptcy," § 6. § 1. United States courts-Jurisdiction and powers in general. Wherever, under the state Code, a reference of complicated accounts to a referee should be made, a suit in equity will lie in the federal courts to enable the chancellor to refer such matters to a master in chancery.-McMullen Lumber Co. v. Strother (C. C. A.) 295. § 2. Jurisdiction dependent on nature of subject-matter. Where a river was actually navigated by small steamboats and other craft for the carriage of freight, a bill held maintainable in federal courts to prevent a boom company from maintaining an obstruction to navigation in the river, without proof of the actual carriage of the goods on the river in interstate commerce. United States v. Wishkah Boom Co. (C. C. A.) 42. $ 3. Jurisdiction dependent on citizenship, residence, or character of parties. A suit for partition of realty held a local action, within the provision of Act March 3, 1875, c. 137, § 8, 18 Stat. 472 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 513], and within the jurisdiction of a Circuit Court of the United States.-German Savings & Loan Soc. v. Tull (C. C. A.) 1. For the purpose of giving a federal Circuit Court jurisdiction on the ground of diverse citizenship, held, that it should be shown by the laws of what state a defendant corporation was created. Knight v. Lutcher & Moore Lumber Co. (C. C. A.) 404. § 4. Procedure, and adoption of practice of state courts. Where a complaint contains any allegation of a ground of recovery, although only inferential, it is within the discretion of the court to permit the defect to be cured by amendment.Great Northern Ry. Co. v. Herron (C. C. A.) 49. In the federal appellate courts, where no error of law appears upon the record, a verdict Under the provisions of Act June 6, 1900, c. 803, 7, 31 Stat. 660 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 550], on an appeal from an interlocutory order granting an injunction, the order of the court below fixing the appeal bond is not reviewable, nor does the appeal affect proceedings in that court, except as to the injunction, unless it grants a stay.-Crown Cork & Seal Co. of Baltimore City v. Standard Stopper Co. (C. C. A.) 184. Code provisions in the several states, authorizing the examination of defendants and the compulsory production of books and papers, are not entire substitutes for bills of discovery and relief in equity in federal practice.-McMullen Lumber Co. v. Strother (C. C. A.) 295. A decision on a motion for a new trial is not the subject of review in a federal appellate court.-United Engineering & Contracting Co. v. Broadnax (C. C. A.) 351. An action in admiralty for wrongful death, based on Civ. Code La. art. 2315, is governed by the local law with respect to the defense of contributory negligence.-Quinette v. Bisso (C. C. A.) 825. lish a claim by a nonresident creditor against In proceedings in the federal courts to estabhis debtor's estate, the law of the state of the debtor's residence will be applied.-Alice E. Mining Co. v. Blanden (C. C.) 252. Rev. St. § 914 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 684], requiring conformity to the state practice, applies only to matters of practice and procedure, and does not appertain to jurisdiction, or the mode of obtaining jurisdiction, of the person in actions brought in the federal courts.-Wells v. Clark (C. C.) 462. In a suit in a federal court, brought under Rev. St. § 738, to establish a lien on the interest of defendants in property in the hands of an ancillary administrator in the state in which the suit is brought, the decree is necessarily confined to the property localized within the jurisdiction, although personal judgments may be entered against the defendants to which the liens are incidental.-Ingersoll v. Coram (C. C.) 689. Under Rev. St. §§ 722, 800 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, pp. 582, 623], and B. & C. Comp. §§ 1268, 1269, 1349, an indictment in the federal court sitting in Oregon could not be set aside, tion 1349, except in the discretion of the court. on grounds other than those specified in sec-United States v. Mitchell (C. C.) 896. tion and statutes.-Kibbe v. Stevenson Iron | regularly designated by particular assignments Min. Co. (C. C. A.) 147. to attend as members for the term.-Peters v. Hanger (C. C. A.) 181. A ruling of the Supreme Court of North Dakota that its state board of equalization was The Circuit Court of Appeals will not set entitled to levy taxes by percentages would be aside the conclusions of a trial judge, based on followed by the federal courts with reference to disputed oral testimony, except for the most real estate assessed for taxes in that state.- cogent reasons, such as palpable mistake or Paine v. Germantown Trust Co. (C. C. A.) 527. misconception of the decided weight of eviFailure of a railroad to comply with Shan-dence. Barton Bros. v. Texas Produce Co. (C. non's Code Tenn. §8 1574, 1575, having been C. A.) 355. held by the Tennessee Supreme Court to author-7. ize a recovery notwithstanding contributory negligence, such construction will be followed in the federal courts.-Rogers v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. (C. C. A.) 573. A decision construing the Constitution and laws of a state with reference to the powers of a city to build a waterworks should be held binding on the federal court, though filed pending a trial of the case in the federal court.City of Sioux Falls v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (C. C. A.) 721; Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. City of Sioux Falls, Id. Where a decision of the highest state court construing the state Constitution and laws as to a city's power to issue water bonds was claimed as conclusive on the federal courts, the latter would not review an objection that the decision did not involve a genuine controversy.-City of Sioux Falls v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (C. C. A.) 721; Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. City of Sioux Falls, Id. Circuit courts. Where suit does not involve controversy within jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, it should, on motion, dismiss the same.-Kinney v. Mitchell (C. C. A.) 773. 8. Concurrent and conflicting jurisdiction, and comity. A nonresident creditor held entitled to establish his claim against the estate of his deceased debtor in the federal courts, though the laws of the state of the debtor's residence require such claims to be proved in the probate courts. -Alice E. Mining Co. v. Blanden (C. C.) 252. COURTS-MARTIAL. As to sale of patented articles, see "Patents," § 6. COVERTURE. Where an objection that the question whether a city should construct or purchase a system of waterworks was submitted in the alternative was an issue in an action in the state courts, a decision of the highest state court overruling such objection was conclusive against a similar See "Husband and Wife." objection in the federal courts.-City of Sioux Falls v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (C. C. A.) 721; Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. City of Sioux Falls, Id. The construction of the New York mechanic's lien law (Laws 1897, p. 514, c. 418) by the New York Court of Appeals, to the effect that a laborer, etc., has a preferential statutory equitable lien while he is entitled to file a lien, which cannot be affected by a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, will be followed in the federal courts.-In re Grissler (C. C. A.) 754. A federal court, in administering a state statute giving a right of recovery for wrongful death, will follow the decisions of the highest court of the state with respect to the measure of damages. Quinette v. Bisso (C. C. A.) 825. On an issue as to whether a contract for the sale of a machine was a lease or a contract of conditional sale, a court of bankruptcy will follow the state law. In re Sheets Printing & Mfg. Co. (D. C.) 989. CREDITORS. See "Bankruptcy"; "Insolvency." CRIMINAL LAW. Conformity of federal courts to state practice, see "Courts," § 4. Evidence as to acknowledgment of deed in prosecution for forgery, see "Acknowledgment," § 1. Extradition of persons accused, see "Extradi tion." Grand jury, see "Grand Jury." Offenses by particular classes of parties. See "Bribery"; "Conspiracy," § 1. 1. Venue. Under Rev. St. § 730 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 585], one who commits an offense on the high seas is to be tried in the district where he is apprehended, unless he is taken into custody on the sea, in which case he shall be tried in the district into which he is first brought.Kerr v. Shine (C. C. A.) 61. 2. Preliminary complaint, affidavit, warrant, examination, commitment, and summary trial. A complaint for the removal of a defendant from one federal district to another for trial on an indictment under Rev. St. § 5440, as amended by Act May 17, 1879, c. 8, 21 Stat. 4 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3676], which has the indictment attached as a part thereof, is sufficient, if the indictment charges an offense.United States v. Green (D. C.) 618. A warrant issued by a commissioner for the arrest of a person for removal to another federal district for trial is sufficient, if it sets forth the offense charged in the complaint in general terms, and need not recite all the acts alleged to have been done by defendant to constitute the offense.--United States v. Green (D. C.) 618. Where it is sought to remove a defendant from one federal district to another for trial on an indictment, the question of the validity of such indictment in matters of substance may properly be raised and determined in the district of the arrest in habeas corpus proceedings.— United States v. Green (D. C.) 618. § 3. Arraignment and pleas, and nolle Under B. & C. Comp. § 1269, an objection to a grand juror on the ground of alienage, as provided by section 965, cannot be made by objection an indictment.-United States v. Mitchell (C. C.) 896. to CUBA. Treaty relating to customs duties, see "Customs Duties," § 1. CUSTODY. Evidence introduced in proceedings for the removal of a defendant to another federal district for trial on an indictment charging bribery, under Rev. St. § 5451 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3680], considered, and held insufficient, aside from the indictment itself, to establish probable Of child, see "Parent and Child." cause.-United States v. Green (D. C.) 618. Probable cause to believe a defendant has committed a crime, such as will warrant his removal to another district to be tried therefor, is not established by evidence which is as consistent with his innocence as with his guilt, although it may afford ground for a suspicion or conjecture that the offense was committed.United States v. Green (D. C.) 618. Under the law, as determined by the Supreme Court, that an indictment is prima facie evidence of probable cause in a proceeding for the removal of a defendant to another federal district for trial thereon, the effect of the indictment, if introduced in evidence in such proceeding, is not weakened by the fact that the government introduced additional evidence, which is in itself insufficient to establish probable cause, provided such evidence does not contradict the facts alleged in the indictment.-United States v. Green (D. C.) 618. An indictment for bribery of an officer of the United States, under Rev. St. § 5451 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3680], held insufficient to charge an offense or to sustain proceedings for the removal of the defendant from another district for trial thereon.-United States v. Green (D. C.) 618. CUSTOMS AND USAGES. Effect on instruction as to collection by bank, see "Banks and Banking," § 1. CUSTOMS DUTIES. § 1. Validity, construction, and operation of customs laws in general. received a statutory construction, or a long and Where an expression in the customs laws has uniform use by Congress or by the departments, that construction controls.-Brennan v. United States (C. C. A.) 743. The treaty with Cuba, approved by Act Cong. Dec. 17, 1903 (33 Stat. 3, c. 1), was intended to be retroactive in operation, and to apply to importations made 10 days or more after the exchange of ratifications March 31, 1903.-American Sugar Refining Co. v. United States (C. C.) 508. Tariff Act July 27, 1897, c. 11, § 33, 30 Stat. 213 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1701], making that act applicable to "merchandise previously imported," applies to merchandise imported on that day.-John B. Ellison & Sons v. United States (C. C.) 969. Indictment for conspiracy to defraud the Unit- The importer of merchandise entered for imed States, under Rev. St. § 5440 [U. S. Comp. St. mediate transportation to the port of Phila1901, p. 3676], considered, and held sufficient for delphia sought to enter it for consumption bethe purposes of a proceeding for the removal of fore its arrival within the limits of the port. the defendant from another district for trial, and Held, that the collector was justified in refusto establish probable cause in such proceeding.ing the entry.-John B. Ellison & Sons v. United United States v. Green (D. C.) 618. 136 F.-66 States (C. C.) 969. |