Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : May-01-1899
Morris v. United States - 174 U.S. 196 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Morris v. United States, 174 U.S. 196 (1899) Morris v. United States No. 49 Argued October 26, 27, 28, 31, November 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 1898 Decided May 1, 1899 174 U.S. 196 APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus The grant by Charles I to Lord Baltimore on the 20th of June, 1632, included in unmistakable terms the Potomac River, and the premises in question in thus suit, and declared that thereafter, the Province of Maryland, its freeholders and inhabitants, should not be held or reputed a member or part of the land of Virginia, and the territory and title thus granted were never divested, and upon the Revolution, the State of Maryland became possessed of the navigable waters of the state, including the Potomac River, and of the soils thereunder, and, by the act of cession to the United States, that portion of the Potomac River with the subjacent soil which was appurtenant to and part of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Apr-24-1899
White v. Leovy - 174 U.S. 91 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court White v. Leovy, 174 U.S. 91 (1899) White v. Leovy No. 232 Submitted April 8, 1899 Decided April 24, 1899 174 U.S. 91 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA Syllabus From the statement of this case made by the Supreme Court of Louisiana in its opinion, quoted in the opinion of this Court, it is manifest that no federal question was passed upon by that court, but that its decision was put upon an independent ground, involving no federal question, and of itself sufficient to support the judgment below, and this Court therefore dismisses the writ of error. The case is stated in the opinion. MR. JUSTICE McKENNA delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an action of jactitation or slander of title, and is here on error from the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana. A motion is made to dismiss for want of jurisdiction in this Court, on the ground that no federal question was decided. We think the motion s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Apr-08-1899
Allen v. Southern Pacific R. Co. - 173 U.S. 479 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Allen v. Southern Pacific R. Co., 173 U.S. 479 (1899) Allen v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company No. 144 Argued January 17, 1899 Decided April 8, 1899 173 U.S. 479 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus The sixth section of the Act of March 3, 1891, c. 517, did not change the limit of two years as regards cases which could be taken from circuit and district courts of the United States to this Court, and that act did not operate to reduce the time in which writs of error could issue from this Court to state courts. As a reference to the opinion of the Supreme Court of California makes patent the fact that that court rested its decision solely upon the construction of the contract between the parties to this action which forms its subject, and decided the case wholly independent of the federal questions now set up, and as the decree of the court below was adequately sustained by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-23-1899
Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. Myers - 172 U.S. 589 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. Myers, 172 U.S. 589 (1899) Northern Pacific Railway Company v. Myers No. 214 Argued October 21, 1898 Decided January 23, 1899 172 U.S. 589 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus This bill was filed to enjoin the enforcement of a tax, imposed under the laws of Montana, upon lands granted by Congress by the Act of July 2, 1864, c. 217, to the Northern Pacific Railroad Company, and acquired by the appellant on the reorganization of the company. There was a controversy as to the character of the lands taxed -- whether mineral or nonmineral. The lands have never been patented or certified to the company; the company claimed that it had only a potential interest therein, and the relief sought was that the lands be adjudged not subject to such assessment and taxation until the issue of patents therefor by the United States. It was stipulated in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Dec-04-1899
Niles v. Cedar Point Club - 175 U.S. 300 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Niles v. Cedar Point Club, 175 U.S. 300 (1899) Niles v. Cedar Point Club No. 80 Argued November 16-17, 1899 Decided December 4, 1899 175 U.S. 300 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Generally, in public surveys, a meander line is a line which courses the banks of navigable streams or other navigable waters; but in this case, it distinctly appears from the field notes and the plat, that the deputy surveyor by whom it was surveyed in 1834 and 1835, and whose acts were approved by the surveyor general, stopped his surveys at what he called a marsh, which intervened between the point where he stopped and the waters of Lake Erie, and thus limited the land which the United States in 1844, following that survey, patented to the person under whom the appellant claims, and thus excluded the marsh, leaving to subsequent measurements the actual determination of the line of separation...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Oct-30-1899
Jones v. Meehan - 175 U.S. 1 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Jones v. Meehan, 175 U.S. 1 (1899) Jones v. Meehan No. 7 Argued April 27-28, 1898 Decided October 30, 1899 175 U.S. 1 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Syllabus A good title to parts of the lands of an Indian tribe may be granted to individuals by a treaty between the United States and the tribe, without any act of Congress, or any patent from the Executive authority of the United States. The question in every case is whether the terms of the treaty are such as to manifest the intention of the parties to make a present grant to the persons named. A treaty between the United States and an Indian tribe must be construed not according to the technical meaning of its words to learned lawyers, but in the sense in which they would naturally be understood by the Indians. When the United States, in a treaty with an Indian tribe, and as part of the consideration for the cession by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Dec-04-1899
Bradfield v. Roberts - 175 U.S. 291 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Bradfield v. Roberts, 175 U.S. 291 (1899) Bradfield v. Roberts No. 76 Argued October 27, 1899 Decided December 4, 1899 175 U.S. 291 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Syllabus The Providence Hospital of the City of Washington was incorporated by the Act of Congress of August 7, 1864, c. 50, 13 Stat. 43, which gave to it "full power and all the rights of opening and keeping a hospital in the City of Washington for the care of such sick and invalid persons as may place themselves under the treatment and care of the said corporation." By the Act of March 3, 1897, c. 387, 29 Stat. 665, making appropriations for the District of Columbia, an appropriation of $30,000 was made for two isolating buildings, to be constructed in the discretion of the Commissioners of the District on the grounds of two hospitals, and to be operated as a part of such hospitals. Under that authority, the Commissione...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Oct-30-1899
Anglo-Californian Bank v. United States - 175 U.S. 37 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Anglo-Californian Bank v. United States, 175 U.S. 37 (1899) Anglo-Californian Bank v. United States No. 31 Submitted October 11, 1899 Decided October 30, 1899 175 U.S. 37 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus This Court has no jurisdiction to review, on appeal, a judgment of a circuit court of appeals affirming a decree of the circuit court below which overrules the decision of a Board of General Appraisers in a port of entry, appointed under the Act of June 10, 1890, c. 407, and which sustains as valid duties levied and collected by the collector of the port into which the goods were imported. The United States was properly made a party defendant in this suit, in this Court, in the place of the Secretary of the Treasury. The case is stated in the opinion. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER delivered the opinion of the Court. This was a petition filed in the Circuit C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Nov-20-1899
Brady v. Daly - 175 U.S. 148 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Brady v. Daly, 175 U.S. 148 (1899) Brady v. Daly No. 52 Argued October 18, 1899 Decided November 20, 1899 175 U.S. 148 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus Section 4966 of the Revised Statutes, enacting that "any person publicly performing or representing any dramatic composition for which a copyright has been obtained, without the consent of the proprietor thereof, or his heirs or assigns, shall be liable for damages, therefor, such damages in all cases to be assessed at such sum, not less than one hundred dollars for the first, and fifty dollars for every subsequent performance, as to the court shall appear to be just," is not a penal statute and neither provides for the recovery of a penalty nor a forfeiture. This action, being brought to recover damages for the violation of a dramatic copyright, and not being one to recover either a penalty or a forfeiture, the circuit court had j...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-20-1899
Lomax v. Pickering - 173 U.S. 26 (1899) U.S. Supreme Court Lomax v. Pickering, 173 U.S. 26 (1899) Lomax v. Pickering No. 128 Submitted January 12, 1899 Decided February 20, 1899 173 U.S. 26 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS Syllabus A record in the Department at Washington of the approval by the President of a deed made by an Indian to convey lands held by him subject to the provision in the Treaty of Prairie du Chien that it was never to be leased or conveyed without the permission of the President is notice to all concerned from the time it was made, and is similar in effect, to a patent issued by the President for lands that belong to the government which is not required to be recorded in the county where the land is located. The recording of a deed of such land, made without previous approval of the President, is notice of the grantee's title to subsequent purchasers; and, when approved, operates to divest the title of the grantor as against a subsequ...
Tag this Judgment!