States for the Eastern District of Louisiana. E. A. O'Sullivan, for plaintiffs in error. J. Ward Gurley, D. C. Mellen, Chas. P. Fenner, and W. W. Howe, for defendants in error. Before PARDEE, MCCORMICK, and SHELBY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM. All the facts in the above-entitled cases are the same as those presented in the case of Dunn v. Insurance Co. (No. 990 of the docket of this court) 44 C. C. A. 682, 105 Fed. 1002, in which case the judgment of the lower court was affirmed. Following that case, the judgments herein are affirmed.

(106 Fed. 986.)

In re ELMORE. (Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit. January 11. 1901.) No. 359. Petition for Revision of Proceedings of the District Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts. Charles H. Dow (Alfred S. Hayes, on the brief), for petitioner. William L. & James L. Putnam, for respondent. Before COLT and PUTNAM, Circuit Judges, and WEBB, District Judge. Petition dismissed, pursuant to stipulation filed, without costs for either party.

(106 Fed. 987.)

ELMORE v. CONTINENTAL NAT. BANK. (Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit. January 10, 1901.) No. 358. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts. Charles H. Dow (Alfred S. Hayes, on the brief), for appellant. William L. & James L. Putnam, for appellee. Before COLT and PUTNAM, Circuit Judges, and WEBB, District Judge. Appeal dismissed, pursuant to stipulation filed, without costs to either party.

(106 Fed. 987.)

GREEN COUNTY, ALA., v. KORTRECHT. (Circuit Court of Appeals. Fifth Circuit. January 29, 1901.) No. 867. In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Alabama. Before PARDEE, MCCORMICK, and SHELBY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM. This is a suit brought to recover principal and interest on certain bonds issued by Green county, Ala., in aid of a railroad. The defense is based upon the want of authority of the proper officers of Green county to issue the bonds in question, and there is also a contention, as to some three of the bonds in suit, that their invalidity is res adjudicata, because of a decision of the circuit court of Green county, Ala., wherein a coupon of each of the three bonds in question was in suit. The judgment of the circuit court of Green county was not final, and was carried by appeal to the supreme court of the state, wherein recently, in Carpenter v. Green Co., 29 South. 194, a decision was rendered reversing the decree of the circuit court and holding that the bonds in question were in all respects valid and binding obligations upon Green county. The opinion of the supreme court of Alabama is full, exhaustive, and passes upon every point properly involved in the present case. As we concur fully in the reasoning and conclusions of the supreme court of Alabama, the judgment herein is affirmed.

(106 Fed. 988.)

JOHN C. SEAGER CO. v. 1.1161⁄2 BAGS OF SUGAR. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. March 7, 1901.) No. 120. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York. Henry A. Forster, for appellant. J. Parker Kirlin, for appellee. Before WALLACE,

LACOMBE, and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges. No opinion. Decree of the district court modified by disallowing interest upon the recovery, and, as modified, affirmed, with costs of appeal to appellant.

(106 Fed. 988.)

METROPOLITAN ST. RY. CO. v. FAIRBANKS.

(Circuit Court of Ap peals, Second Circuit. March 11, 1901.) No. 119. In Error to the Circuit ✨ Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. A. B. Smith, for defendant in error. Before LACOMBE and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges. No opinion. Judgment of circuit court affirmed.

(106 Fed. 988.)

MOOT v. GENERAL ELECTION CO. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. March 7, 1901.) In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of New York. Motion to dismiss writ of error. Clark H. Timerman, for the motion. Before LACOMBE and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges. No opinion. Writ of error dismissed on the ground that the order sought to be reviewed is not final.

(106 Fed. 988.)

NEW ENGLAND MUT. LIFE INS. CO. v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. January 8, 1901.) No. 827. In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio. For former report, see 99 Fed. 846. Before HARLAN, Circuit Justice, SEVERENS, Circuit Judge, and THOMPSON, District Judge.

SEVERENS, Circuit Judge. This case is identical in all respects with No. 826, New York Life Ins. Co. v. Board of Com'rs of Cuyahoga Co. (just decided) 106 Fed. 123,1 except that the plaintiff is a different party and the bonds held by it are another parcel of the same issue. It was argued and submitted with No. 826, and is determined by the conclusion reached in that case. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to overrule the demurrer and take such further proceedings in the case as it may be advised, not inconsistent with this opinion.

(106 Fed. 989.)

In re NEW YORK ECONOMICAL PRINTING CO. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. February 7, 1901.) Motion to Dismiss Petition. George B. MacComber, for the motion. Almet R. Latson, opposed. Before LACOMBE and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM. Neither the statute nor the rules limit the time within which a petition for review in bankruptcy should be filed. We do not think there has been any unreasonable delay in this case, and therefore deny the motion to dismiss. A new rule of this court will control future applications for review.

1 45 C. C. A. 233.

END OF CASES IN VOL. 45.

INDEX.

Of patent right, see "Patents," § 1.

Of right to divert stream, see "Waters and Water Courses," § 1.

ABANDONMENT.

§ 1. Death of party and revival of action.

A suit for collision, brought on behalf of the owners of vessel and
cargo by the master, is one in which the cause of action survives the death
of the libelant; and where he has given bond binding himself and his
heirs and legal representatives to abide the judgment of the court, and
pay the costs adjudged against him, on his death pending an appeal his
administrator may be substituted in his stead.

-The Margaret B. Roper, 106 Fed. 741...

ABATEMENT AND REVIVAL.

Against carrier, see "Carriers," §§ 1, 2.

corporate officers, see "Corporations," § 3.
Allowance of injunction, see "Injunction."
Appointment of receiver, see "Receivers."
By bankrupt, see "Bankruptcy," § 4.

By servant for injuries, see "Master and Servant," § 1.

ACTION.

By stockholder, see "Corporations," § 2.

By trustees in bankruptcy, see "Bankruptcy," § 2.

For breach of contract, see "Contracts," § 3; "Sales," § 2.

For injunction, see "Injunction."

For price of goods, see "Sales," § 2.

Infringement of copyright, see "Copyrights," § 1.

of patent, see "Patents," § 5.

of trade-mark or trade-name, see "Trade-Marks and Trade-Names," § 1.
Jurisdiction of courts, see "Courts."

.45 C. C. A. 578

...

On insurance policy, see "Insurance," § 5.

Particular forms of action, see "Ejectment"; "Replevin."

Particular proceedings in action, see "Damages"; "Evidence": "Judgment";

in equity, see "Equity."

Survival, see "Abatement and Revival," § 1.

"Judicial Sales"; "Jury"; "Parties"; "Trial."

revival, see "Abatement and Revival," § 1.

Personal injuries, see "Master and Servant," § 1; "Railroads," § 1.

Review of proceedings, see "Appeal and Error"; "Exceptions, Bill of"; "Judg-
ment," § 1.

Stay of proceedings, see “Appeal and Error,” § 6.

Suits in admiralty, see "Admiralty"; "Shipping," § 4.

To recover attorney's fees, see "Attorney and Client," § 1.

To restrain collection of tax, see "Taxation," § 2.

To try tax title, see "Taxation," § 3.

Unfair competition in trade, see "Trade-Marks and Trade-Names," § 1.

45 C.C.A.

(693)

1

ADJUDICATION.

Operation and effect of former adjudication, see “Judgment," § 2.

ADMINISTRATION.

Of estate of bankrupt, see "Bankruptcy," § 2.

of decedent, see "Executors and Administrators."
Of trust property, see "Trusts," § 1.

ADMIRALTY.

See "Collision"; "Salvage"; "Shipping"; "Towage."
Survival of cause of action, see "Abatement and Revival," § 1.

§ 1. Jurisdiction.

A contract by which a steamship company agreed to reserve space for
certain cargo for foreign shipment, and the other party bound itself to
furnish such cargo at a specified rate of freight, is maritime in its nature,
and an action to recover damages for its breach is within the jurisdiction
of a court of admiralty.

-Baltimore Steam-Packet Co. v. Patterson, 106 Fed. 736....

45 C. C. A. 575

§ 2. Pleading, petitions, and motions.

A libel which alleges that libelant hired a lighter to persons engaged
in furnishing a cargo of lumber to be loaded on a vessel, and that
lighter was detained by the master of the vessel, not on account of the
hirers, but for the benefit of the vessel, for 14 days after the expiration
of the time allowed by the custom of the port for unloading it, but which
contains no averment as to whose duty it was to unload it, and avers
no contract with the vessel or her master, is insufficient to state a cause
of action in rem against the vessel for the demurrage.

-Dunwody v. The Campbell, 106 Fed. 542.

.45 C. C. A. 464

3. Appeal.

In a suit to charge a tug with liability for the loss of a tow, the evidence
was such as to establish gross fault on the part of the tug, and to create
a strong presumption against her; but upon the issue whether the loss
was due to such fault neither party produced evidence which it was
apparently within its power to produce, and without which the court on
appeal was left to mere conjecture as to material facts, and unable to
reach a satisfactory decision. Held, that the case would be remanded to
the district court for further proofs, and if none were offered the libel
should be dismissed.

-The Carbonero, 106 Fed. 329....

.45 C. C. A. 314

A party to an appeal in admiralty is entitled to a writ of certiorari to
require the clerk of the district court to include in the record, and properly
certify, documents which were used in evidence, but have been omitted
from the record.

-The Margaret B. Roper, 106 Fed. 740..... ......45 C. C. A. 577
Findings of fact by a court of admiralty are presumptively correct,
and, while reviewable on appeal, where they are made on conflicting testi-
mony given in the presence of the judge his conclusion will be treated with
great respect.

-The Anaces, 106 Fed. 742....

.45 C. C. A. 596

ADMISSIONS.

As evidence, see "Evidence," § 1.