Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-09-1888
Whitney v. Robertson - 124 U.S. 190 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court Whitney v. Robertson, 124 U.S. 190 (1888) Whitney v. Robertson Argued December 13-14, 1887 Decided January 9, 1888 124 U.S. 190 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus The Treaty of February 8, 1861, with the Dominican Republic (art. 9) provides that "No higher or other duty shall be imposed on the importation into the United states of any article the growth, produce, or manufacture of the Dominican Republic, or of her fisheries, than are or shall be payable on the like articles the growth, produce, or manufacture of any other foreign country or of its fisheries." The Convention of January 30, 1575, with the King of the Hawaiian Islands provides for the importation into the United States, free of duty, of various articles, the produce and manufacture of those islands (among which were sugars), in consideration of certain concessions made by the King of the H...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Nov-12-1888
Jaehne v. New York - 128 U.S. 189 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court Jaehne v. New York, 128 U.S. 189 (1888) Jaehne v. New York No. 1409 Argued October 29, 1888 Decided November 12, 1888 128 U.S. 189 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus A general law for the punishment of offenses which endeavors by retroactive operation to reach acts before committed, and also provides a like punishment for the same acts in future, is void so far as it is retrospective, and valid as to future cases within the legislative control. This was a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and for a writ of certiorari. The alleged grounds for the issue of the writ are stated in the opinion of the Court. The writ was denied, and the petitioner took this appeal. Page 128 U. S. 190 MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from an order of the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New Yor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : May-14-1888
Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. United States - 127 U.S. 406 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. United States, 127 U.S. 406 (1888) Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Company v. United States No. 238 Argued April 19, 1888 Decided May 14, 1888 127 U.S. 406 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus Section 5 of the Act of March 3, 1879, 20 Stat. c. 180, 355, 358, did not operate to repeal 3962 Rev.Stat., and when it was itself repealed by the Act of June 11, 1880, 21 Stat. c. 206, 177, 178, 3962 of the Revised Statutes remained in force against railroad companies contracting to carry the mails. When there are two provisions of law in the Statutes relating to the same subject, effect is to be given to both, if practicable. A statute will not operate to repeal a prior statute merely because it repeats some of the provisions of the prior act and omits others, or adds new provisions, but in such cases, the later act operates as a repeal of the former ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Mar-19-1888
United States v. San Jacinto Tin Co. - 125 U.S. 273 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. San Jacinto Tin Co., 125 U.S. 273 (1888) United States v. San Jacinto Tin Company No. 887 Argued January 26-27, 30, 1888 Decided March 19, 1888 125 U.S. 273 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus A suit may be brought by the United States in any court of competent jurisdiction to set aside, cancel, or annul a patent for land issued in its name on the ground that it was obtained by fraud or mistake. The initiation and control of such a suit lies with the Attorney General as the head of one of the Executive Departments. But the right to bring such a suit exists only when the government has an interest in the remedy sought by reason of its interest in the land, or the fraud has been practiced on the government and operates to its prejudice, or it is under obligation to some individual to make his title good by setting aside the fr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-23-1888
United States v. Mouat - 124 U.S. 303 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Mouat, 124 U.S. 303 (1888) United States v. Mouat Submitted December 14, 1887 Decided January 23, 1888 124 U.S. 303 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus A paymaster's clerk, appointed by a paymaster in the navy with the approval of the Secretary of the Navy, is not an officer of the navy within the meaning of the Act of June 30, 1876, 19 Stat. 65, c. 159, so as to be entitled to the benefit of the mileage allowed by that act. The petition of the defendant in error in the Court of Claims was as follows: "The claimant, David Mouat, respectfully showeth as follows:" "I. That on the 16th day of November, 1885, he was appointed a paymaster's clerk in the United States Navy, on board the United States receiving ship Vermont, subject to the laws and regulations governing the United States Navy. That the said appointment was approved by Capt. A. P. Cooke, commanding the Vermont, and by D. B. H...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Dec-17-1888
Cragin v. Powell - 128 U.S. 691 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court Cragin v. Powell, 128 U.S. 691 (1888) Cragin v. Powell No. 41 Argued and submitted October 26, 1888 Decided December 17, 1888 128 U.S. 691 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA Syllabus When lands are granted according to an official plat of their survey, the plat, with its notes, lines, descriptions and landmarks becomes as much a part of the grant or deed by which they are conveyed, and, so far as limits are concerned, controls as much as if such descriptive features were written out on the face of the deed or grant. It is not within the province of a circuit court of the United States or of this Court to consider and determine whether an official survey duly made, with a plat thereof flied in the district land office, is erroneous, but with an exception referred to in the opinion, the correction of errors in such surveys has devolved from the earliest days upon t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Mar-19-1888
Origet v. United States - 125 U.S. 240 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court Origet v. United States, 125 U.S. 240 (1888) Origet v. United States No. 188 Argued February 18, 1888 Decided March 19, 1888 125 U.S. 240 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus A paper headed "Bill of Exceptions" not bearing the signature of the judge, but containing at its foot these words, "Allowed and ordered on file November 22, '83, A. B.," the trial having taken place in June, 1883, cannot be regarded as a bill of exceptions, because not signed by the judge, as required by 953 of the Revised Statutes. An information in a suit in rem against certain imported goods seized as forfeited for a violation of the customs revenue laws, alleged an entry of the goods, which were subject to duties, with intent to defraud the revenue by false and fraudulent invoices, by means whereof the United States were deprived of the lawful duties accruing upon the good...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Mar-19-1888
Bucher v. Cheshire R. Co. - 125 U.S. 555 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court Bucher v. Cheshire R. Co., 125 U.S. 555 (1888) Bucher v. Cheshire Railroad Company No. 132 Argued January 11, 1888 Decided March 19, 1888 125 U.S. 555 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus The plaintiff sued the defendants in a state court and recovered judgment. The highest appellate court of the state, reviewing the case decided the points of law involved in it against the plaintiff, set aside the judgment for error in the ruling of the court below and sent the case back for a new trial. The plaintiff then became nonsuit, and brought the present suit in the circuit court of the United States on the same cause of action. Held that he was not estopped. The provision in Rev.Stat. 721 that "The laws of the several states, except where the Constitution, treaties, or statutes of the United States otherwise require or provide, shall be regarded as rules of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Mar-19-1888
United States v. American Bell Telephone Co. - 128 U.S. 315 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. American Bell Telephone Co., 128 U.S. 315 (1888) United States v. American Bell Telephone Company No. 846 Argued October 9-10, 1888 Decided November l2, 1885 128 U.S. 315 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus A bill in equity which assails two patents, issued nearly a year apart, but to the same party and relating to the same subject, both held by the same corporation defendant and used by it in the same operations, is not multifarious. Where a patent for a grant of any kind, issued by the United States, has been obtained by fraud, by mistake, or by accident, or where there is any error in the patent itself capable of correction, a suit by the United States against the patentee is the appropriate remedy for relief. This proposition is supported by precedents in the High Court of Chancery of England, and in other cour...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Mar-19-1888
Bowman v. Chicago & Northwestern Ry. Co. - 125 U.S. 465 (1888) U.S. Supreme Court Bowman v. Chicago & Northwestern Ry. Co., 125 U.S. 465 (1888) Bowman v. Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company No. 798 Submitted January l0, 1887 Decided March 19, 1888 125 U.S. 465 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Syllabus The question whether, when Congress fails to provide a regulation by law as to any particular subject of commerce among the states, it is conclusive of its intention that that subject shall be free from positive regulation, or that, until Congress intervenes, it shall be left to be dealt with by the states, is one to be determined from the circumstances of each case as it arises. So far as the will of Congress respecting commerce among the states by means of railroads can be determined from its enactment of the provisions of law found in Rev.Stat. 5258, and Rev.Stat. c. 6, Title 4S, 4252-4289, they are indications of...
Tag this Judgment!