Court : US Supreme Court
BUSSY v. DONALDSON - 4 U.S. 206 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court BUSSY v. DONALDSON, 4 U.S. 206 (1800) 4 U.S. 206 (Dall.) Bussy v. Donaldson. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. March Term, 1800 THIS was an action on the case, against the owner of the ship Edward, for running foul of, and sinking, the brig Katy, at the piers in the river Delaware, by negligence, and improvident and unskilful management, &c.; The defence was made on three grounds: 1st. That the injury was occasioned by an unavoidable accident, for which no reparation ought to be exacted. 2d. That as the ship Edward was in the charge of a public pilot of the port, ( a person not the choice, nor the voluntary agent, of the owner) when the injury was committed, the owner was not legally responsible. And, on this point, the following authorities were cited: 3 Bac. Abr. 591, 2. 7 Geo. 2. c. 15. 3 State Laws, 422. s. 8. 10. 15. Wesc. 395. Beawes, 122. 1 Emirig. 402, 3. 1 Bl. Com. 431, 2. 1 Dom. 241. Tit. 16. s. 3. Salk. 442...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
BEISSELL v. SHOLL - 4 U.S. 211 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court BEISSELL v. SHOLL, 4 U.S. 211 (1800) 4 U.S. 211 (Dall.) Beissell v. Sholl. [ Footnote 1 ] Wagoner v. Same. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. March Term, 1800 CASE, for diverting a water course. The COURT left the facts to the jury, under this general statement of the law: 'That every man, in this country, has an unquestionable right, to erect a mill upon his own land; and to use the water, passing through his land, as he pleases: subject only to this limitation, that his mill must not be so constructed and employed, as to injure his neighbour's mill; and that, after using the water, he returns the stream to its ancient channel.' Footnotes Footnote 1 Tried in the Circuit Court, Northampton county, June 1800, before SHIPPEN, C. J. and YEATES, J.[ Beissell v. Sholl Footnote 4 U.S. 211 (1800) ] ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
WATERS' EX'RS v. MCCLELLAN - 4 U.S. 208 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court WATERS' EX'RS v. MCCLELLAN, 4 U.S. 208 (1800) 4 U.S. 208 (Dall.) Water's Executors v. McClellan et al.1. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. March Term, 1800 TRESPASS for goods of the testator, taken and sold by the sheriff, on an execution issued against Dewees. The principal part of the goods were claimed by the testator, under a distress and sale, which he had, also, executed against Dewees; but he had left the goods in Dewees's possession for four or five-years. The charge contained the following points: SHIPPEN, Chief Justice. 1st. It is incumbent on the plaintiff, to prove his property in the goods, which were taken by the sheriff; and to do this, he has produced evidence of a former distress and sale, of the same goods, for rent due from Dewees to him. But the defendants answer, that the distrees was fraudulent; because (among other reasons) the goods were left in the possession of the debtor. In the case o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
MORRIS' LESSEE v. NEIGHMAN - 4 U.S. 209 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court MORRIS' LESSEE v. NEIGHMAN, 4 U.S. 209 (1800) 4 U.S. 209 (Dall.) Morris's Lessee v. Neighman. [ Footnote 1 ] Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. March Term, 1800 EJECTMENT for land, on the north-west of the rivers Ohio and Alleghany, and Conewango creek. The plaintiff claimed under a warrant, dated the 4th of March 1793, on which a survey was executed, of the 12th of November 1794; but he had made no endeavour to settle the land, till July 1796. The defendant claimed as an actual settler, under a settlement commenced in the year 1796, prior to any attempt by the plaintiff; and upon a presumption, that the plaintiff had incurred an absolute forfeiture of his rights, by not making a settlement within two years, from the date of his warrant, according to the terms of the act of the 3d of April 1792. 3 State Laws, 209. Dall. edit. But by the COURT, in the charge to the jury, two points were, expressly decided: 1st...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
MCLAUGHLIN'S LESSEE v. DAWSON - 4 U.S. 221 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court MCLAUGHLIN'S LESSEE v. DAWSON, 4 U.S. 221 (1800) 4 U.S. 221 (Dall.) M'Laughlin's Lessee v. Dawson. [ Footnote 1 ] Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. December Term, 1800 EJECTMENT for 400 acres of land, lying north-west of the river Ohio. Both parties claimed under settlement rights. The defendant's improvement commenced one day earlier than the plaintiff's; but the plaintiff had the first warrant; and he had been constantly resident on the land, except when he left it, through imminent danger from the Indians. The defendant's improvements were greater than those of the plaintiff, (for, he was a richer man) but he was often absent from the premises, sometimes as a volunteer in the public service, and sometimes living, at a distance, with his father, or brothers. THE COURT. The COURT, in the charge to the jury, strongly preferred the claim of the plaintiff, on account of his constant residence on the premises;...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
MATHER v. PRATT - 4 U.S. 224 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court MATHER v. PRATT, 4 U.S. 224 (1800) 4 U.S. 224 (Dall.) Mather v. Pratt et al. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. December Term, 1800 THIS was an action brought by the plaintiff, as indorsee and holder of several promissory notes, drawn by Dorey and Bayhir, in favour of Joseph Mussi, against the defendants, to whom Dorey and Bayhir had assigned all their estate, in trust for the payment, pro rata, of such of their creditors, as should, within a certain period, execute a general release; and the dividend of the non-assenting creditors was to be paid to them. The plaintiff had not executed the release; and, it was objected, that he could not sue the trustees, even for a dividend, in his own name, without performing the condition precedent. THE COURT. The COURT were unanimously, and clearly, of this opinion; and the plaintiff suffered a non-suit. [ Footnote 1 ] M. Levy, for the plaintiff. Dallas, for the defendant. Footnote...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
BELL'S LESSEE v. LEVERS - 4 U.S. 210 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court BELL'S LESSEE v. LEVERS, 4 U.S. 210 (1800) 4 U.S. 210 (Dall.) Bell's Lessee v. Levers. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. March Term, 1800 EJECTMENT, for land in Northampton county. The charge contained the following points: By the COURT: 1st. A warrant, which loses its descriptive location, by a prior warrant, may be laid on any vacant land. It has been the uniform practice of the surveyors so to do; and the practice has long received the sanction of the land office. 2d. A deputy surveyor gave an order to his assistant, to execute a survey; and, before it was actually executed, he died; but it was alleged, that neither the assistant, nor the party, knew of his death, till after the execution of the survey. The truth of the allegation should be examined; but, in an old transaction, if the title depends upon it, the examination should not be very strict; and every doubt should operate in favour of the validity of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
WEITZELL'S LESSEE v. FRY - 4 U.S. 218 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court WEITZELL'S LESSEE v. FRY, 4 U.S. 218 (1800) 4 U.S. 218 (Dall.) The Lessee of Weitzell et al. v. Fry. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. December Term, 1800 EJECTMENT for 306 acres of land in Northumberland county. The case was this: On the 13th of September 1774, John Read, being seised in fee, mortgaged the premises, mentioned in the declaration, to 'The trustees of the general loan office of the province of Pennsylvania,' incorporated under the act of the 26th of February 1773. 1 State Laws, 644. Dall. Page 4 U.S. 218, 219 edit. After various successive modifications of this trust,1 the powers and duties of the trustees were transferred to, and vested in, the treasurer of the state, by an act of the 1st of April 1790. 2 State Laws, 792. s. [ Footnote 2 ] The sheriff of the county, in his evidence on the trial, stated, 'that he had received a precept, dated in September 1792, for selling the lands, under Reed's ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
U S v. COOPER - 4 U.S. 341 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court U S v. COOPER, 4 U.S. 341 (1800) 4 U.S. 341 (Dall.) The United States v. Cooper. Circuit Court, Pennsylvania District. April Term, 1800 THE defendant, being indicted for a libel on the President, applied to the Court, for a letter to be addressed by them, to several members of congress (congress being in session) requesting their attendance as witnesses, on his behalf. In support of the application, a variety of similar cases arising under the government of Pennsylvania, were referred to. CHASE, Justice. The constitution gives to every man, charged with an offence, the benefit, of compulsory process, to secure the attendance of his witnesses. I do not know of any privilege to exempt members of congress from the service, or the obligations, of a subpoena, in such cases. I will not sign any letter of the kind proposed. It, upon service of a subpoena, the members of congress do not attend, a different question may arise; and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Mossman v. Higginson - 4 U.S. 12 (1800) U.S. Supreme Court Mossman v. Higginson, 4 U.S. 4 Dall. 12 12 (1800) Mossman v. Higginson 4 U.S. (4 Dall.) 12 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA Syllabus Neither the Constitution or the act of Congress regards the subject of the suit, but the parties. A description of the parties is therefore indispensable to the exercise of jurisdiction, which is limited by the law to suits between citizens and foreigners. This was a writ of error to remove the proceedings on a bill in equity from the Circuit Court for the District of Georgia, tested 27 November, 1798, returnable on the next. The case, on the bill and pleadings, was briefly this: Alexander Willy, an inhabitant of Georgia, being indebted to Higginson & Greenwood, British merchants, gave them a bond and mortgage, payable 1 January, 1773. In the year 1778, Willy was banished from the State of Georgia and his estate confiscated by law. The mortgaged premises were s...
Tag this Judgment!