a settlement on the issue of the marriage, a limitation was made to the children of
the marriage, contingent upon the event that the wife should depart this life in the
lifetime of the husband, leaving issue of the said marriage, one or more children
then living; held that the word issue as explained by the subsequent words, did not
include grandchildren. Ib.
3. Construction of a grant of water of a spring. Irwin v. United States, 16 H. 513....
4. The practical construction put on the grant by the grantees, continued through six-
teen years, held to be evidence of what was intended to be conveyed. Ib.
5. A conveyance of a naked legal title to the equitable owners of the land, under no
other description of the grantees than "the legatees and devisees of the late A. B.”
passes the title to the persons named in the will of A. B. as his legatees and devisees.
Webb v. Den, 17 H. 576....694.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 4; FRAUD.
1. A testator empowered his executors, after the death of his wife, to distribute the
residue of his estate among such charitable institutions of South Carolina and Penn-
sylvania as they might deem most beneficial to mankind; the wife survived the
executors; held, that even if such a power, confided to these particular persons by
the testator, could be executed in England by the chancellor, it could not be by any
court of the United States, and that this court could not take this residue from the
next of kin. Fontain v. Ravenel, 17 H. 369....555.
2. Whether a legacy is chargeable on real estate depends on the will of the testator,
and if he has blended his realty and personalty into one fund, for this purpose, it is
not necessary first to exhaust the personalty before resorting to the realty. Lewis v.
Darling, 16 H. 1....1.
JUDGMENT, &c. 3; PARTIES; WILL.
EJECTMENT.
PUBLIC LANDS, 11.
ELECTION.
GUARDIAN AND WARD.
1. Though a court of equity cannot act directly on land not within its jurisdiction, it
may compel the holder of the title, who is a party before it, to give effect to a lien.
Lewis v. Darling, 16 H. 1..........1.
2. Bill to establish the possession and quiet the title of the complainant to lands in
Kentucky, sustained. Wickliffe v. Owings, 17 H. 47....357.
3. The statute in Kentucky upon the subject of this remedy, is not without influence
upon the question of the propriety of this exertion of an established chancery
power. Ib.
4. A court of equity does not interfere with judgments at law, unless the complainant
had an equitable defence, of which he could not avail himself at law, because it did
not amount to a legal defence, or had a good defence at law, which he was prevent-
ed from availing himself of by fraud, or accident, unmixed with negligence of him-
self or his agents. Hendrickson v. Hinckley, 17 H. 443....601.
5. A court of equity will not interfere to enforce a set-off, if the complainant could
have made it in an action at law, and voluntarily waived it there. Ib.
6. A court of equity cannot make a decree for the penalties incurred for violation of
copyright. Stevens v. Gladding, 17 H. 447....604.
7. But may decree an account of profits under the prayer for general relief. Ib.
8. A vendee of personal property may be relieved in equity from the payment of a
just proportion of the purchase-money, if the vendor, who warranted the title, has
died insolvent, and under a decree of a court of equity the purchaser has been
obliged to pay a sum of money to extinguish a paramount title to a part of the prop-
erty. Wanzer v. Truly, 17 H. 584....701.
9. A judgment against the vendee, for the entire purchase-money, in a suit against him
as the garnishee of the vendor, does not deprive the vendee of his title to such re-
lief; as between him and the judgment creditor, the vendee has the better equity.
Ib.
10. A bill which states that the complainant had an interest in the subject-matter of a
former suit in equity, applied to be admitted a party, was refused, and a decree
made in fraud of his rights, and praying to have that decree set aside, &c., is an
original bill, and not a bill of review, and the complainant must be competent to sue
all the defendants. Wickliffe v. Eve, 17 H. 468....616.
11. Rules respecting the joinder and dispensing with parties to suits in equity in the
courts of the United States. Shields v. Barrow, 17 H. 130....409.
12. A contract cannot be rescinded by a decree, without having before the court all
the parties whose rights will be affected thereby; and an entire contract of compro-
mise cannot be rescinded in part, and left to stand as to the residue. Ib.
13. The act of February 28, 1839, (5 Stats. at Large, 321,) relates solely to the non-
joinder of persons out of the reach of process. Ib.
14. The 47th rule for equity practice is only a declaration of the effect of previous
decisions of this court, and does not enable a circuit court to make a decree which.
must affect the rights of absent persons. Ib.
15. A circuit court cannot force defendants in an equity suit to file a cross-bill, and
bring in new parties, whom those defendants are, but the complainants are not, com-
petent to sue in the courts of the United States. Ib.
16. New parties cannot be introduced into a cause by a cross-bill. Ib.
17. Though a bill may be framed with a double aspect, the alternative case must be
the foundation for the same relief. Ib.
18. Under the privilege of amending, the court should not allow a new and wholly
different case to be made. Ib.
ABATEMENT; ACTION, 1; APPEAL, 1; ARBITRATION; DEVISE, &c. 1; METHODIST
EPISCOPAL CHURCH; PARTITION; RECEIVER; SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE; SU-
PERSEDEAS; TRUST.
ESTOPPEL.
BOND, 2; Judgment, 3.
1. In an action of covenant on a warranty of title to land, the record of a recovery
had in ejectment, against the defendant in the action of covenant, is admissible in
evidence in favor of the plaintiff in that action, though he was examined as a wit-
ness for the plaintiff in ejectment. Griffin v. Reynolds, 17 H. 609....725.
2. Contradictory statements by a witness cannot be given in evidence to impeach him,
unless he has been asked whether he made such statements to the persons to whom
it is attempted to be shown he did make them; and this rule applies where the wit-
ness testifies by deposition, and the contradiction was by a letter Conrad v. Grif-
3. Under the act of March 3, 1797, § 2, (1 Stats. at Large, 512,) a treasury transcript
of an account of an Indian agent, adjusted and certified by the proper officers, is
evidence, as against him and his sureties, that he received the several sums of money
therein charged to him as received in the regular and usual course of the business
of the department, without the production of copies of his receipts therefor. Bruce
v. United States, 17 H. 437....596.
4. It is to be presumed that an invoice accompanied a consignment of merchandise to
a foreign country. Turner v. Yates, 16 H. 14....11.
5. A commercial correspondence, though between third persons, is often evidence of
the nature of their transactions, and the relations they sustained to each other. Ib.
ASSIGNMENT, 4; BILL OF REVIEW, 1. 2; BOND, 1; COURTS OF THE UNITED
STATES, 5; DAMAGES, 7; DEED, 4; EXCEPTIONS, 3. 4; JUDGMENT, &c. 4;
MASTER AND SERVANT, 4; PUBLIC LANDS, 7; SEA, 2; WRIT OF ERROR, 3.
1. The record must show that an exception was taken at the stage of the trial when its
cause arose, but the time and manner of placing the exception on the record may be
regulated by the practice of the courts below. Turner v. Yates, 16 H. 14....11.
2. A rule of the circuit court for Maryland, on this subject held unobjectionable. Ib.
3. Though it has been held, (9 Pet. 182,) that the admission of evidence, where the
judge tries both law and fact, is not a subject of a bill of exceptions, this is not true
of the rejection of evidence. Arthurs v. Hart, 17 H. 6....338.
4. In such a mode of trial, the counsel should present the legal propositions on which
he relies, and the court should place on the record its rulings thereon. Ib.
1. Construction of an agreement to accept satisfaction of a judgment, held to be con-
ditional, and as it was not performed, the right to an execution revived. Early v.
Rogers, 16 H. 599....314.
2. Whether a court will quash an execution, on account of proceedings against the
debtor as the garnishee of the creditor, is a question appealing to the discretion of
the court below, and a court of errors cannot revise its decision thereon. Ib.
LIEN; SHERIFF; SUPERSEDEAS.
EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 5; COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 11; TRUST, 1.
FALSE REPRESENTATIONS.
ACTION, 3; DECEIT.
A stipulation, by the legislature, that no court shall authorize another ferry, does not
prevent the power to license another from being conferred on the government of a
city, by a subsequent act of the legislature. Fanning v. Gregoire, 16 H. 524....
284.
The 7th section of the act of July 29, 1813, (3 Stats. at Large, 49,) requires an oath to
the verity of the fishing agreement, as well as to the truth of the certificate of the times
of sailing and returning. United States v. Nickerson, 17 H. 204....458.
FOREIGN ATTACHMENT.
EQUITY, 8. 9; EXECUTION, 2.
A question upon the evidence, whether certain deeds were obtained by fraud. Barri.
beau v. Brant, 17 H. 43....354.
DEED, 3. 4; PUBLIC LANDS, 9-12. 15-18; STATUTES.
A guardian, for the purpose of paying a debt due to his ward, agreed with a third
person to exchange certain property of his own for other property of that person,
and to take the title to his ward, and died before the contract was executed; the
ward cannot recover back what had been delivered. He must either look to the
estate of his guardian, or complete the contract and take the property. Yerger v.
Jones, 16 H. 30....20.
A married woman is not liable to an action of covenant, though she join with her hus-
band in warranting the land as to which she releases her claim to dower. Griffin v.
Reynolds, 17 H. 609....725.
INDICTMENT.
CRIMINAL LAW; PERJURY.
A statute of Louisiana having provided that all the property of an insolvent debtor
shall be deemed vested in his creditors from and after the acceptance of a cession
thereof, a judgment recovered in the circuit court of the United States, after that
day, gave no lien on land of the debtor, even though it was misdescribed in the
schedule of his effects. Bank of Tennessee v. Horn, 17 H. 157....427.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 12-14; TRUST, 2-4.
INTERPLEADER.
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, 19
1. A decree in chancery, for the distribution of a common fund among those interested,
does not conclude one who was not a party to the decree, and who was guilty of no
laches. It protects the trustee who makes distribution pursuant to it; but the fund
may still be followed, and his just portion reclaimed, by one not a party, nor negli-
gent. Williams v. Gibbes, 17 H. 239....479. Gooding v. Oliver, 17 H. 274 · · · ·504.
2. The effect of a decree of the court of appeals of Maryland, concerning the fund
here in controversy, examined, and declared. lb. lb.
3. The parties to a real action in the supreme judicial court of Massachusetts, agreed
on a statement of facts, and that the court might order a nonsuit or default and enter
judgment thereon; Held, 1. That a nonsuit was not a bar; 2. That the agreement
was not an estoppel to sue again. 3. That, upon the construction of a will on which
the title depended, the demandant was entitled to recover. Homer v. Brown, 16 H.
354....182.
4. Every reasonable presumption is to be made in favor of a judgment or decree of a
court of general jurisdiction. Pennington v. Gibson, 16 H. 65....30.
5. When a cause comes on for a hearing, on exceptions to a master's report, and for
directions for a final decree, it is not irregular for the judge to reverse his decision,
under which the reference was made, and dismiss the bill, if he thinks it ought to be
dismissed. He is not obliged to enter a final decree which he believes erroneous.
Fourniquet v. Perkins, 16 H. 82....38.
6. Where an agreement to confess judgment to foreclose a mortgage appeared on file,
and a state court, at a subsequent term, granted leave to enter a judgment nunc pro
tunc, no other court can revise this exercise of discretion. Slicer v. Bank of Pitts-
burg, 16 H. 571....301.
ACTION, 1; APPEAL; ASSIGNMENT, 1. 5; COSTS, 3; EQUITY, 4. 5. 8-10. 14; EvI-
DENCE, 1; EXECUTION, 1; INSOLVENT; LIEN; MANDAMUS, 3.4; MEXICAN
CLAIMS; PLEADING; PUBLIC LANDS, 13; Revenue Laws, 10; Supersedeas.
DAMAGES, 7; DECEIT; LAW AND FACT; PLEADING; Way.
ASSIGNMENT, 2; SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.
Though it may be necessary to leave the meaning and effect of a commercial corre
|