(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "The law of contracts"

((onteil Haw $rlpial Htbrarij 



Cornell University Library 
KF 801.P27 1883 
v.1 

The law of contracts. 



3 1924 018 824 353 




The original of this book is in 
the Cornell University Library. 

There are no known copyright restrictions in 
the United States on the use of the text. 



http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924018824353 



THE 



LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



BY 



THEOPHILUS PARSONS, LL.D., 

AUTHOR OP TREATISES ON THE ELEMENTS OP MERCANTILE LAW, ON THE LAW OP SHIPPING AND 
ADMIRALTY, ON MARINE INSURANOE, ON PARTNERSHIP, ON NOTES AND BILLS, 
AND ON THE LAVS OF BUSINESS POE BUSINESS MEN. 



Volume I. 




SEVENTH EDITION. 

WITH ADDITIONS BY 

WILLIAM V. KELLEN. 



BOSTON: 
LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY. 

1883. 




Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1853, by 
Theophilus Parsons, 
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. 
Copyright renewed 1881, by Theophilus Parsons. 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1855, by 

Theophilus Paksons, 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. 

Copyright renewed 1883, by Catharine A. Parsons. 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1857, by 

Theophilus Parsons, 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1860, by 

Theophilus Parsons, 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1864, by 

Theophilus Parsons, 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1873, by 

Theophilus Parsons, 
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1883, by 

David L. Webster, Francis A. Dewson, and Charles M. Keed, Trustees. 

In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 

KF 

University Press: 
John Wilson and Son, Cambridge. 



TO 



WILLIAM H. PRESCOTT, ESQ., 

THE HISTORIAN OF SPAIN, MEXICO, AND PERU. 

I might, perhaps, find some excuse for dedicating this work to 
you, in the natural desire of connecting my own labors with those 
which have won for you and for our country so much renown. 
And even more in the friendship, which began so long ago we can- 
not remember its beginning ; and in the long years, that through 
childhood, youth, and manhood, have brought us upon the con- 
fines of age, if not beyond them, has never for a moment been 
broken. 

But neither of these is my principal motive. That, I must 
confess to be, a strong and irrepressible desire to speak of your 
father ; to express, however imperfectly, my gratitude to him ; and 
to execute, even in this slight degree, the purpose I have long had, 
of putting on record my testimony to the excellence of one who 
stood for many years at the head of his profession, who was my 
master during my apprenticeship to the law, and ever after my 
revered instructor and invaluable friend. 

It was in 1815 that I entered his office as a student. I had been 
accustomed all my life to see him often, and hear him often spoken 
of, for our families were intimate, and he was among my father's 
most valued friends; and I had always heard him mentioned with 
a kind and degree of respect that seemed to be paid to him alone. 
I knew that he had held the highest place in his profession for 
some years ; but the regard and reverence generally accorded to 
him were more than any mere professional success could win. 
When I entered his office, he had already given up a large part of 



IV DEDICATION. 

his business. He did not go often into court ; but I heard him in 
some important cases, and was a constant observer of the relations 
■between him and his numerous clients. And it was not long 
before I learned the grounds of his high social and professional 
position. 

In the first place, let me speak of his judgment and sagacity. 1 
«annot conceive of any person possessing, in greater perfection, 
that admirable thing we call good sense. I doubt whether, in his 
long and active life, he ever made any one mistake of importance. 
Whoever employed him in any business, soon saw that the wisest 
thing that could be done in his case, and at every step of it, was 
always the very thing that was done. Hence a confidence without 
limit was reposed in his opinion ; and his advice was accepted and 
followed by all who received it, as if it made further inquiry or 
consideration wholly unnecessary. 

The next quality I would mention, was a kindred and connected 
one ; I mean his perfect truthfulness. It seemed as if he could 
not deceive ; and if he had the faculty originally he must have lost 
it by non-user. It made no difference on which side of a question 
the party propounding it to him stood ; for his answer was to the 
question, and not to the man. Whether he dealt with a client, an 
adverse party, a witness, the jury, or the court, he dealt with them 
all honestly. He had, what I am sorry to call the rare quality, of 
loving truth so well, that his view of it was not to be distorted or 
obstructed, either by any interest or any feeling of his own or of 
those whom he represented, or by any disturbing influences of cir- 
cumstances or position. 

I speak last of his learning, although this was perhaps more 
frequently remarked upon than his moral qualities, however deeply 
they were felt. He had passed many years in laborious and well- 
directed study ; for he was led to this, both by his sense of duty 
to his clients, and by his sagacity, which told him that here he 
must find the means of sound judgment and usefulness and suc- 
cess ; and also by the love of his profession and of the law as a 
science. For many years after he had withdrawn from the pro- 



DEDICATION. V 

fession, both as advocate and chamber-counsel, he still continued 
his legal studies ; and often when I have called upon him and 
stated some difficult question which had occurred in my practice, 
he would — not for a fee — but in his kindness to me, and his love 
of the law, enter upon the investigation with the zeal of earlier 
days, and give me the whole benefit of his vast knowledge and his 
unerring sagacity. 

To these qualities I must add that of universal kindness and 
unfailing courtesy. And certainly I have given good reasons why 
he held so long the headship of a profession in which it is not easy 
to climb to the high places, and very difficult to hold them ; and 
also, why, outside of his profession and by society at large, he was 
venerated during his long life as few men among us have ever 
been. Let me add, that while he manifested, wherever in the con- 
duct of his affairs it was needed, the firmness and fearlessness 
that he inherited from a father who stood like a tower of strength 
in command of the American forces at Bunker Hill, he was ever, 
and remarkably, unassuming, retiring, and modest. It is difficult 
to believe that he could not measure his own success, or that he 
did not know his high position ; but no one ever heard a word or 
a tone from him which indicated such knowledge. 

He was not eloquent, and never, to my knowledge, attempted to 
be ; and yet he was a most successful advocate. It was his pur- 
pose and endeavor to do for every client, and in every case, all 
that could be done by learning, sense, industry, and honesty ; this 
he knew he could do, and did. And more than this he had no 

desire to do. i0 ay 

Such was William Peescott. When he died in 1844, at the 
age of 82, 1 had known him intimately for twenty-nine years, and 
had known of him many more. And I never yet heard a word 
spoken, and I never heard of a word spoken, to his disparagement 
or dispraise, during his long life or since its close, by any person 
whomsoever; nor even have I heard the "but" or "if" with 
which many indulge themselves in qualifying and clouding the 
commendation they cannot but render. He has left behind him 



VI DEDICATION. 

no brilliant speeches to be remembered and quoted ; no books in 
which the fruits of his learning and wisdom were gathered and 
preserved ; and they who knew him are passing away, and already 
his reputation is becoming traditional. And very glad shall I be, 
if, by this slight memorial, I may, for a single moment, arrest the 
waves of time, in their advancing flow over the sands in which are 
written his name, and the names of many others of our best and 
greatest. 

THEOPHILUS PARSONS. 
Cambridge, October, 1853. 



ADVERTISEMENT TO THE SEVENTH EDITION. 



The preparation of this edition of Parsons on Contracts was 
begun by the editor under the supervision of the learned author. 
The intention then was that such new matter as might be prepared 
should be incorporated with the old, both in the text and the 
notes, and that full responsibility for all changes should be borne 
by the editor. After the death of Professor Parsons, however, it 
was deemed advisable to present in this edition the text and notes 
of the last edition, as revised by him, intact and unchanged, save 
where subsequent statutory enactments made such changes im- 
perative. The new matter which has been added appears in the 
form of separate notes, which are indicated by numerals and ex- 
tend across the page at the bottom. An attempt has been made 
to give in the most compact form, consistent with clearness of 
statement, the results of all the important cases decided since the 
last edition was published. More than five thousand of such cases 
have been digested from the original reports, and either cited or 
the exact point decided presented briefly, in this edition. It is 
hoped that the value of this standard work has been in some de- 
gree increased, and that it will continue to give effective aid, as 
the learned author intended it should, both to the student and 

active practitioner. 

W . V. K. 

Boston, December, 1883. 



CONTENTS. 



PART I. 

THE LAW OF CONTRACTS CONSIDERED IN REFERENCE TO THE 
OBLIGATIONS ASSUMED BY THE PARTIES. 



PRELIMINAEY CHAPTER. 

Section I. 

Page 
Of the extent and scope of the law of contracts 3 

Section II. 
Definition of contracts 5 

Section III. 
Classification of contracts 7 



BOOK I. 

OF PARTIES TO A CONTRACT. 
CHAPTER I. 



Classification of Pahties 



X CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER II. 

OF JOINT PARTIES. 

Section I. 
Whether parties are joint or several • 11 

Section II. 
Of some incidents of joinder • ■ 21 

Section III. 
Of contribution . ... 31 

CHAPTER III. 

AGENTS. 

Section I. 
Of agency in general ... . .... 38 

Section II. 
In what manner authority may be given to an agent . . . 46 

Section III. 
Subsequent confirmation . ... 48 

Section IV. 
Signature by an agent . .... 54 

Section V 
Duration and extent of authority . 59 

Section VI. 
The right of action under a contract . . .65 



CONTENTS. x { 

Section VII. 
Liability of an agent 67 

Section VIII. 
Revocation of authority 73 

Section IX. 
How the principal is affected by the misconduct of his agent .... 78 

Section X. 
Of notice to an agent 80 

Section XI. 
Of shipmasters ... 84 

Section XII. 
Of an action against an agent to determine the right of a principal 85 

Section XIII. 
The rights and obligations of principal and agent as to each other . . 87 

Section XIV. 
Of public agents 98 

CHAPTER IV. 

FACTORS AND BROKERS. 

Section I. 

Who is a factor and who a broker 100 

Section II. 
Of factors under a commission ... 100 

Section III. 
Of the duties and the rights of factors and brokers 102 



XU CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER V. 
Servants H2 

CHAPTER VI. 
Attorneys 122 

CHAPTER VII. 

TRUSTEES. 

Section I. 
Origin of trusts 133 

Section II. 
Classification of trusts 134 

Section III. 
Private trustees 135 

Section IV. 
Public trustees 138 

CHAPTER VIII. 

Executors and Administrators 141 

CHAPTER IX. 

GUARDIANS. 

Section I. 

Of the kinds of guardians 148 

Section II. 
Of the duty and power of a guardian 149 



CONTENTS. Xlll 

CHAPTER X. 

Corporations 153 

CHAPTER XI. 
Joint-stock Companies 162 

CHAPTER XII. 

PARTNERSHIP. 

Section I. 
What constitutes a partnership ... . 165 

Section II. 
Of the real estate of a partnership 167 

Section III. 
Of the good-will .... 172 

Section IV. 
Of the delectus personarum 173 

Section V. 
How a partnership may be formed 174 

Section VI. 
Of the right of action between partners 184 

-Section VII. 
Of the sharing of losses 187 

Section VIII. 
Of secret and dormant partners 188 



Xiv CONTENTS. 

Section IX. 
Of retiring partners 



190 



Section X. 

1 Q3 
Of nominal partners . . • • • 

Section XI. 
When a joint liability is incurred .... . 194 

Section XII. 
Of the authority of each partner . . ... ...... 196 

Section XIII. 
Power of a majority ... . . ..... 216 

Section XIV. 
Of dissolution ... . .... 218 

Section XV. 
Of the rights of creditors in respect to partnership funds .... . 231 

Section XVI. 
Limited partnership .... . . 240 

CHAPTER XIII. 

New Parties by Novation . . • 244 

CHAPTER XIV. 

NEW PARTIES BY ASSIGNMENT. 

Section I. 

Of assignments of choses in action 250 

Section II. 
Of the manner of assignment 256 



CONTENTS. 



XT 



Section III. 
Of the equitable defences 257 

Section IV. 
Covenants annexed to land 259 

- CHAPTER XV. 

GIFTS. 

Section I. 

Of gifts inter vivos 262 

Section II. 
Of gifts causa mortis 265 

CHAPTER XVI. 

INDORSEMENT. 

Section I. 

Of the nature and effect of indorsement 268 

Section II. 
Of the essentials of negotiable notes and bills 276 

Section III. 
Who may indorse 283 

Section IV. 
Of indorsement after maturity 288 

Section V. 
Of accommodation paper 293 



XVI CONTENTS. 

Section VI. 
01 notes on demand 294 

Section VII. 
Of the transfer of bills and notes 297 

Section VIII. 
Of presentment for acceptance 302 

Section IX. 
Of presentment for payment 305 

Section X. 
Of whom, when, and where, the demand should be made 311 

Section XI. 
Of notice of non-payment 314 

Section XII. 
Of protest 325 

Section XIII. 
Of damages for non-payment of bills 327 

Section XIV. 
Bills of lading 328 

Section XV. 
Of property passing with possession 329 



CONTENTS. XVii 

CHAPTER XVII. 

INFANTS. 

Section I. 

Incapacity of infants to contract 333 

Section II. 
Of the obligations of parents in respect to infant children 338 

Section III. 
Voidable contracts for necessaries 352 

Section IV. 
Of the torts of an infant 356 

Section V. 
Of the effect of an infant's avoidance of his contract 360 

Section VI. 
Of ratification 363 

Section VII. 
Who may take advantage of an infant's liability 369 

Section VIII. 33- 
Of the marriage settlements of an infant 371 

Section IX. 
Infant's liability with respect to fixed property acquired by his contract . 372 

Section X. 

Of illegitimate children 376 

vol. 1. b 



XV111 CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER XVIII. 

OF THE CONTRACTS OF MARRIED WOMEN. 

Section I. 

Of the general effect of marriage ... 378 

Section II. 
Of the contracts of a married woman made before marriage .... 380 

Section III. 
Of the contracts of a married woman made during her marriage . . 384 

Section IV. 
Of the disability of a wife to act as a single woman 405 

Section V. 
Of the separate estate of a married woman 408 

CHAPTER XIX. 

PERSONS OF INSUFFICIENT MIND TO CONTRACT. 

Section I. 

Non compotes mentis .... . 433 

Section II. 
Spendthrifts 439 

Section III. 
Seamen 440 

Section IV. 
Persons under duress 443 



CONTENTS. XIX 

CHAPTER XX. 
Aliens 447 

CHAPTER XXI. 

Of Outlaws, Peesons attainted, and Persons excommunicated . 451 

BOOK II. 

CONSIDERATION AND ASSENT. 

CHAPTER I. 

CONSIDERATION. 

Section I. 
The necessity of a consideration 455 

Section II. 
Kinds of consideration 458 

Section III. 
Adequacy of consideration 465 

Section IV. 
Prevention of litigation 467 

Section V. 
Forbearance *7" 

Section VI. 
Assignment of debt *' 4 



XX CONTENTS. 

Section VII. 

475 
Work and service 

Section VIII. 
Trust and confidence .... 476 

Section IX. 
A promise for a promise 477 

Section X. 
Subscription and contribution 482 

Section XI. 
Of consideration void in part 485 

Section XII. 
Illegality of consideration 486 

Section XIII. 
Impossible considerations .... 489 

Section XIV. 
Failure of consideration 492 

Section XV. 
Mights of a stranger to the consideration 496 

Section XVI. 
The time of the consideration 498 



CONTENTS. XXi 

CHAPTER II. 

ASSENT OF THE PARTIES. 

Section I. 
What the assent must be ^9° - . 505 

Section II. 
Contracts on time 510 



BOOK III 

THE SUBJECT-MATTER OF CONTRACTS. 

CHAPTER I. 
Preliminary Remarks 519 

CHAPTER II. 
Purchase and Sale op Real Property 522 

CHAPTER III. 

' e 
HIEING OF REAL PROPERTY. 

Section I. 
Of the lease ^. . 530 

Section II. 
Of the general liabilities of the lessor 531 

Section III. 
Of the general liability and obligation of the tenant 533 



XX11 CONTENTS. 

Section IV. 
Of surrender of leases by operation of law 543 

Section V. 
Of away-going crops 544 

Section VI. 
Of fixtures 545 

Section VII. 
Of notice to quit 547 

Section VIII. 
Of apportionment of rent . . . . 550 

Section IX. 
Of remedy for non-payment of rent 552 

CHAPTER IV. 

PURCHASE AND SALE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY. 

Section I. 
Essentials of a sale 555 

Section II. 
Absolute sale of chattels 557 

Section III. 
Price, and agreement of parties 561 

Section IV. 
The effect of a sale 562 



CONTENTS. XXlii 

Section V. 
Of possession and delivery 568 

Section VI. 

Conditional sales 577 

safoj 

Section VII. 
Bought and sold notes 583 

Section VIII. 
Of sales to arrive 594 

Section IX. 
Mortgages of chattels 611 

CHAPTER V. 
Warranty 614 

CHAPTER VI. 
STOPPAGE IN TRANSITU. 

Section I. 

What the right of stoppage is, and who has it 639 

■-'.sit:: . 

Section II. 
When and how the right may be exercised 645 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



[The references are to the bottom paging.] 



A. 

Page 

Aaron v. Second Avenue R. R. Co. iii. 199 

A. B.'s Estate i. 127 

Abat v. Penny i. 224 

Abbey v. Chase i. 65, 72 

v. Dewey ii. 713 

v. Devo i. 387 

Abbot v. Bayley i. 372 

v. Hermon i. 600 

v. Massie ii. 680 

Abbott v. Alsdorf i. 623 

v. Broome ii. 513 

v. Burbage iii. 442 

v. Fisher i. 469 

v. Goodwin i. 012 

v. Hendricks i- 290 

v. Hicks iii. 439, 462, 469 

v. Keith ii. 848 ; iii. 79 

v. Parfitt i. 143 

v. Rogers i. 489 

v. Rose ii. 861 

v. Sebor ii. 511 

v. Shawmut Ins. Co. ii. 557 

v. Shepard i. 515 

v. Stratten iii. 374 

Abeel v. Radcliff i. 532 ; iii. 14, 19 

Abell, Ex parte i- 238 

o. Warren i. 337 

Aberfoyle, The ii- 454 

Abernethy v. Hutchinson ii. 332 

Abington v. North Bridgewater ii. 708 

Abitbol v. Bristow ii- 528 

Abnev v. Kingsland i- 570 

Abo, The ii- 519 

Aborn v. Bosworth i. 332 

Abraliam v. Plestoro iii- 409, 436 

v. Reynolds Ji- 46 

Abrahams v. Bunn iii. 125, 135 

Abrahat v. Brandon ii- 837 

Abrams a. Pomeroy ii- 685 

Absolon v. Marks }■ 278 

Acatos v. Burns ii- 456 

Acebal v. Levy i. 562 ; iii. 14, 51, 53 

Acey v. Fernie i- 42, 59 ; ii. 617 

Acherley v. Vernon ii- 659, 660 

Acheson v. Chase iii- 144 

Acker v. Ledyard ii. 860; iii. 314 

o. Phoenix i. 562 



Acker v. Withrill i. 654 

Ackerman v. Emott i. 137 

Ackermann v. Ehrensperger iii. Ill 

Ackerson v. Erie R. R. Co. iii. 186 

Ackland v. Pearce iii. 127 

Ackley v. Kellogg ii. 150, 151, 227, 230 

v. Hoskins i. 56 

Acome v. The Am. Itinera! Co. i. 504 

Acorn, The ii. 437 

A'Court v. Cross iii. 71, 76 

Acraman v. Morrice iii. 434 

Ada, The ii. 637 

Adair v. Brimmer i. 146 

v. Winchester i. 251 

Adam, Ex parte iii. 414 

Adams v. Adams i. 351 ; ii. 93 

v. Blanhenstein ii. 196 

v. Blethen i. 271 

v. Blodgett iii. 402 

u. Burks " ii. 321 

v. Carroll i. 183 

v. Claxton iii. 300, 421 

v. Clem ii. 158 

v. Coulliard ii. 894 

v. Curtis i. 399 

e. Edwards ii. 306 

v. Frye ii- 857 

v. Gay ii. 900, 905, 906 

v. Hackett iii- 502 

v. Hamell ii- 900 

v. Hardy i. 274, 283 

v. Haught ii- 418 

v. Hayes i- 263 

v. Hill ii- 635 

v. Johnson i- 622 

v. Jones ii- 4, 14 

v. Kerr ii- 719 

v. Lambert i. 524, 682 

a. Lindsell i- 514 

v. London & Blackwall Railway 

Co. iii- 307 

v. Mackay i- 409 

v. Malkin iii- 416 

v. M'Millan iii- 12, 14 
v. New OrleanB Steam Tow-Boat 

Co. ii- 182 

v. O'Conner i- 580 

*. O'Connor i- 578 



XXVI 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Adams v. Otterbank i. 321, 669 

v. Palmer iii. 499 

v. Robinson i. 246 

v. Rockingham Ins. Co. ii. 476, 576 

v. •Saundars ii- 5.36 

v. Scales iii- 11 

v. Shelby ii. 923 

v. Smith i. 292 

v. Statliam ii. 826 

v. Steer ii- 636 

v. Storey iii- 385 

v. Tapling ii. 823 

v. The Sophia ii- 461 

;;. Torbert i. 315 

v. Townsend iii. 66 

v. Warner ii. 639 

v. Warren Ins. Co. ii- 483 

v. Way iii- 113 

v. Wlieeler i. 569 

v. Williams ii. 6d3 

v. Woonsocket Co. ii. 45 

Adams Express Co. v. Darnell ii. 203 

v. Egbert iii. 207 

!■. Nock ii. 200 

v. Reagan ii- 271 

o. Wilson ii- 227 
Adamson v. Jarvis i. 36, 87 ; ii. 927 ; 

iii. 206 

Aday v. Echols iii. 358 

Adderley v. Dixon iii. 324 

Addington v. Allen ii. 915 

Addis v. Knight iii. 469 

Addison v. Gandassequi i- 105 

v. Gray ii. 827, 835 

v. Kentucky Ins. Co. ii. 555 

Adeline, The ' ii. 441 

Adkins v. Baker ii. 392 

v. Watson iii. 17 

Adlard v. Booth i. 494 

Admiral, The ii. 434 

A. D. Patchin, The i. 442 

Adventure, The ii. 440 

iEtna Bank v. Winchester ii. 853 

iEtna Ins. Co. u. Prance ii. 556, 598, 

606 

v. Olmstead ii. 543 

v. Resh ii. 557 

v. Tyler ii. 564, 574,583, 587; iii. 295 

Aflalo v. Fourdrinier iii. 463 

African Steamship Co. u. Swanzy ii. 454 

Agar v. Biden iii. 366 

v. Macklew ii. 845 ; iii. 332 

Agawam Bank v. Strever ii. 24 

Agawam Co. v. Jordan ii. 304 

Agnew v. Bank of Gettysburg i. 321 

v. Ins. Co. ii. 571 

v. McElroy ii. 868, 871 

v. Piatt ' iii. 392, 394, 437, 508 

Agra, &c. Bank v. Leighton iii. 224 

Agricola, The i. 117 ; ii. 469 

Agricultural Bank u. Bissell iii. 139 

v. Commercial Bank i. 326 

v. The Jane ii. 404 

Aguilar v. Rodgers ii. 478, 480 

Aguire v. Parmelee i. 650 



Ahearn v. Ayres ?' 5o2 

Ahern v. Easterby .}.■ "' 

Ah Thaie v. Quan Wan *}■ y.° 

Aid, The '!• ?4° 

Aigen v. Boston, &c. R. Co. '• ™» 

Aiken v. Barkley };. ^ Ji 

v. Benton ln - 69 

v. Dolan »■ 314 

v . Manchester Print Works ii. 317, 

320, 321 

u. Sanford ii- 790, 875 

v. Short i- 496 

Ainslie v. Boynton i- 248, 258 

v. Goff ii- 842 

v. Medlycott i. 481 ; ii. 927 

Ainsworth v. Partillo iii- 204 

v. Walmsley ii. 367, 373, 375 

Akerblom v. Price, &c. Co. ii. 440 

Akerman v. Humphery i. 652 ; iii. 444, 

445 
Akhurst v. Jackson iii. 429, 435 

Albany Exchange Bank v. Johnson 

iii. 472 

Albatross, The, n Wayne ii. 392 

Albert v. Lindau i. 558 ; ii. 764 

v. Winn i. 410 

Albertson v. Halloway i. 495 

Albin v. Presby ii. 166 

Albion Bank ;;. Burns ii. 28 

Albro v. Agawam Canal Co. ii. 46 

Alchorne v. Gomme i- 540 

Alcott v. Avery iii. 477 

Alden v. Blague ii- 824 

v. Clark ii. 6 

v. Dewey ii. 305, 327 

<■. Goddard ii. 810 ; iii. 102 

t-. New York, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 236 

i'. Pearson ii. 414 

Alder v. Keighley iii. 187, 435 

v. Saville ii. 832, 836 

Alderman v. Eastern R. Co. i. 570, 579 

Alderson v. Pope i. 188, 211 

<■. Temple i. 654 

Aldis v. Chapman i. 393 

Aldrich v. Albee ii. 783, 784, 785 

v. Chubb ii. 3 

v. Grimes i. 368 

v. Kinney ii. 740 

v. Reynolds iii. 129 

v. Simmons ii. 468 

v. Warren i. 273 

Aldridge v. Johnson i. 565 

v. Turner ii. 6 

Ale wy n, Ex parte iii. 464 

v. Pryor i. 604, 606 

Alexander, Ex parte iii. 420 

u. Alexander i. 88, 89 

v. Burnet iii. 103, 104 

v. Comber iii. 59 

v. Deneale i. 569 

v. Dowie ii. 387 

v. Dutton i. 635 

v, Gardner i. 566, 574, 594 

v. Germania Ins. Co. ii. 543, 546 

v. Ghiselin iii. 308, 344 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XXT11 



Alexander v. Gibson 
v. Greene 
v. Heriot 
v. Herr 
v. Hickox 
v. Hutcheson 
v. McKenzie 
v. Merry 
v. Morgan 
v. N. W. Univ. 
v. Pierce 
v. Polk 
v. Pratt 

f. Springfield Bank 
v. Thomas 
v. Wellington 
v. Whipple 



i. 62 
ii. 181 
i. 367 
iii. 237 
ii. 862 
i. 363 
ii. 333 
iii. 12 
i. 383 

i. 94 
i. 444 
ii. 908 
ii. 528 
i. 292 
i. 280 
i. 256 
iii. 103 



Alexander, The ii. 385, 403, 404 

Alexandre v. Sun Ins. Co. ii. 517 

Alexandria Canal Co. v. Swann ii. 825 
Alfred v. Fitzjames ii. 51 

Alger v. Kennedy i. 542 

o. Seoville iii. 24, 26 

v. Thacker ii. 890, 891 

Alida, The ii. 383 

Aline, The ii. 403 

Alivon v. Furnival ii. 738 ; iii. 429 

Alkan v. New Hampshire Ins. Co. ii. 557, 

575 

Aikinson v. Horridge i. 635 

Allaback v. Utt iii. 181 

Allaire v. Hartshorne i. 292 

v. Whitney iii. 235 

Allaire Works r. Guion iii. 206 

Allan v. Eldred i. 303 

v. Gripper i. 648 

Allard v. Greasert iii. 53 

v. Lamirande ii. 909 

Allegre v. Maryland Ins. Co. ii. 484, 524, 

587, 667, 844 

Allen v. Aldrich i. 393, 396 

v. Allen ii. 730 

v. Anderson i. 637; iii. 245 

v. Bennett iii. 4, 9, 18 

v. Blunt ii. 304; iii. 176 

v. Brown ii. 28 

v. Bryan i. 95 

v. Burke iii. 309 

v. Cameron i. 494 

v. Centre Valley Co. i. 240 

v. Chambers iii. 347 

v. Charlestown Ins. Co. ii. 555, 

560 
v. Citizens, &c. Co. i. 155 

v. Commercial Ins. Co. ii. 397, 505, 
506, 507, 515 
v. Culver i. 536 

v. Davis i. 77, 167 

v. Deming ii. 900, 905, 907 

v. Duffle ii. 901 

v. Dunn i. 233 

v. Dykers ii. 124, 126 

v. Edgerton ii. 815 

v. Fosgate i. 11 

v. Fourth Bank i. 800 



Allen v. Hallet 


ii. 459 


v. Ham 


iii. 267 


</. Harrah 


i. 312 


v. Hay ward 


i. 116, 120 


v. Hearn 


ii. 897 


v. Hooker 


i. 637 


v. Hunter 


ii. 317 


v. Jackson 


ii. 79 


v. Jarvis 


iii. 224 


v. Kincaid 


ii. 664 


v. King 


i. 307 


v. Lenoir 


i. 406 


u. Mackay 


ii. 429, 431, 433, 455 


v. McKean 


iii. 488 



v. Merchants Bank i. 41 ; ii. 112, 

674 
v. Merchants Bank of N. Y. i. 67 

v. Mille iii. 107 

v. Minor i. 335, 353 

v. Mutual Ins. Co. ii. 545, 547, 551, 

562 

v. New Gas Co. ii. 46 

v. Pink i. 634 

v. Polereczky i. 263 

v. Rawson ii. 305 

v . Rescous ii. 886 

v. Rightmere ii. 31 

o. Sewell ii. 181, 194 

v. Sharpe ii. 753 

v. Smith's Adm'r i. 307, 308 

v. Sugrue ii. 507 

v. Suydam i. 92 ; iii. 206 

v. Thompson ii. 9 ; iii. 27 

v. Watson ii. 847 

„. Wells i. 232, 238 

v. Williams i. 329 ; ii. 411 

v. Woonsocket Co. i. 166, 224 

Allen's Estate iii. 348 

Aller v. Aller i. 457 

Allerton v. Lang i. 264 

Alleson v. Marsh ii. 459 

Alletson v. Chichester ii. 610 

Alley v. Deschamps iii. 305, 338, 339 

Alliance Bank v. Kearsley i. 207 

Alliance Ins. Co. v. La. State Ins. Co. 

ii. 541, 567 
Allibone v. Hager i. 161 

Allies v. Probyn ii. 819 

Allin v. Shadburne ii. 852 

Ailing v. Boston, &c. R. Co. ii. 274 

Allison v. Haydon ii. 60 

Allkins v. Jupe i- 111 

Allmand v. Russell iii. 382 

Allnutt v. Ashenden ii. 24 

Allore v. Jewell i. 435 

Alloway v. Braine iii. 311 

Allwood v. Haseldon i. 306 

Alman v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 543 

Almgren v. Dutilh ii. 420, 421 

Almy v. Wilcox i. 393 

v. Winslow i. 281 

Alna v. Henckell ii. 512 

v. Plummer iii. 12, 14, 248 

Alner v. George ii- 749 

Aloffi*. Scrimshaw ii. 850 



XXV111 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Alonzo Pearce, Matter of iii. 477 

Alsager, Ex parte iii. 427 

v. St. Katherine's Dock Com- 
pany ii. 413, 648 
Alsop v. Coit ii. 526 
v. Commercial Ins. Co. ii. 483, 489, 

491 

v. Price iii. 466 

Alston v. Balls ii. 134 

v. Herring ii. 417 

v. Mechanics Ins. Co. ii. 524, 552 

v. State Bank iii. 82 

Altham's case ii. 689 

Althorfe v. Wolfe i. 130 

Alvanley v. Kinnaird iii. 370, 371 

Alves v. Hodgson ii. 700 

Alvord v. Smith i. 174 

Alvord Carriage Co. v. Gleason i. 546 

Amble v. Whipple i. 219 

Ambler v. Bradley i. 180 

Ambrose v. McDonald i. 130 

Amelia, The ii. 390 

Amer v. Longstretli i. 93 ; iii. 183, 

186 

Amer., &c. Co. v. Gurnee ii. 28 

v. Wolf ii. 203 

American Bank v. Doolittle i. 210 

v. Jenness i. 290 

American Express Co. v. Sands ii. 270 

American Ins. Co. u. Bryan ii. 499 

r. Center ii. 507, 510 

v. Day ii. 586, 592 

v. Francia ii. 506 

p. Griswold ii. 484, 492, 493, 536 

u. Henley ii. 614 

v. Hutton ii. 488 

v. Klink ii. 614, 615 

v. Mahone ii. 543 

u. Oakley i. 154 

o. Ogden ii. 397, 506, 507, 530, 

531 

v. Robertshaw ii. 605 

American Wine Co. v. Brasher ii. 922 

Amery v. Rogers ii. 480 

Ames v. Chew iii. 456 

v. Colburn ii. 861 

u. Dyer ii. 383 

!>. Foster iii. 26 

v. Gilman iii. 427 

.'. Howard ii. 303, 307, 315 

v. King ii. 373 

v. Merriam i. 296 

,,. Millvvard ii. 832 

v. Quimby i. 561 

Amethyst, The ii. 436, 437, 439, 441 

Amherst Academy v. Cowls i. 484 

Amiable Nancy iii. 186, 196 

Amicable Society v. Bolland ii. 601, 

610 
Amidown v. Osgood i. 192 

i". Woodman i. 322 

Amies v. Stevens ii. 171, 172 

Amis i: The Louisa ii. 384 

Amor r. Fearon ii. 38, 39 

Amory v. Broilerjck i. 572, 580 



Amory i\ Francis 
v. Gilman 
v. Jones 
e. Kannoffsky 
v. McGregor 
v. Melvin 



iii. 468 

ii. 489, 896 

ii. 602 

i. 41, 543 

iii. 206 

i. 534 



Amoskeag, &c. Co. v. John Adams, 

The i|- 435 

v. Moore '• 315 

Amoskeag Man. Co. v. Garner ii. 377 

v. Spear ii. 352, 358, 370, 371, 373, 

374, 375, 377 

Amsinck i\ Bean i- 224; iii. 475 

Amstel, The ii- 385 

Ancher v. Bank of England J. 286 

Ancrum v. Slone iih 114 

Anderson v. Anderson ii- 92 

v. Baker i-264 

v. Bruner i- 02 

v. Buckton iii. 239 

u. Burnett ii. 915 

v. Chenney i- 232 

a. Chick ' hi. 12 

„. Clark iii._278 

u. Coonley i- 39 

v. Davis ii. 8 

v. Drake i- 311 

„. Edie ii. 605 

u. Ewing iii- 233 

6-. Fitzgerald ii. 596, 598 

v. Harold iii. 6 

v. Hawkins ii- 753 

< . Hodgson i. 573 

v. Mannon ii. 28 

u. Martindale i. 14, 17, 23, 31 

v. Miller i. 255 ; iii. 435 

v. Morice i. 601 

i). New Jersey ii. 47 

v. Nicholas i. 570 

o. Pitcher ii. 670 

o. Pope i. 193 

v. Powell i. 175 

v. Kobson i. 332 

v. Scott iii. 46 

u. Simpson iii. 39 

r. Smith i. 541 

t: Thornton ii. 481, 522, 525 

v. Tomkins i. 200, 201, 207 

v. Turnpike Co. i. 29 

v. Van Alen i. 258 

v. Wallace ii. 834 

«'. Wheeler iii. 508 

Andover, The ii. 412 

Andover Savings Bank v. Adams ii. 709 

Andree v. Fletcher ii. 481 

Andrew v. Allen i. IW 

v. Boughey ii. 751 

v. Dieterich ii. 914 

Andrewes v. Carstin i. 175 

Andrews v. Belfield ii. 03 

v. Bell iii. 339 

o. Bond i. 253, 2K6 

o. Boyd i. 308 

v. Brown iii. 68, 359 

v. Campbell i. 248 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XXIX 



Andrews v. Durant ii. 380, 650 

v. Essex Insurance Company ii. 495, 
496, 540 
v. Estes i. 55; ii. 421 

v. Franklin i. 280 

v. Herriot ii. 719, 738, 740 

v. His Creditors ii. 700 

v. Hoxie i. 309 

v. Jones i. 382 

u. Kneeland i. 62, 628 

v. Lyon ii. 944 

v. Palmer iii. 427 

v. Planters Bank i. 210 

v. Pond ii. 700, 713, 714; iii. 110, 
119, 145 
v. Torry ii. 702 

v. Wheaton i. 495 

Andrus v. Foster ii. 51 

Angel v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 543 

v. McLellan i. 346, 349 

Angell v. Duke iii. 38 

v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 616 

Angelo v. Angelo ii. 91 

Angerstein v. Bell ii. 488 

v. Handson i. 537 

Angier v. Angier i. 401 

v. Taunton Paper Manufactur- 
ing Co. iii. 210 
Angle v. North Western Ins. Co. ii. 861 
Angus v. Kedford ii. 833, 834 
Anketel v. Converse iii. 294 
Anna Kimball, The ii. 413 
Annandale v. Harris i. 377, 465 
Ann C. Pratt, The ii. 403, 404 
Ann Caroline, The ii. 432 
Ann D. Richardson, The ii. 452 
Annen v. Woodman ii. 480 
Annie Lindsley, The ii. 431 
Anonymous i. 12, 60, 140, 251, 261 ; 
ii. 217, 460, 716, 765, 817, 840 ; iii. 35, 
108, 117, 125, 136, 138, 141, 167, 289, 
414,417,427,439,452 
Ansell, Ex parte iii. 429 
v. Robson iii. 447 
Anstey v. Marden iii. 26 
Anstruther v. Adair ii. 730 
Antarctic, The ii. 383, 384 
Anthony v. Stinson ii. 881 
Antoni v. Belknap i. 546 
Antonio v. Clissey iii. 28 
Antram v. Chace i 481 ; ii. 838 
Antrobus v. Smith i. 263; iii. 315 
Apollo, The ii. 388 
Apperson v. Cross ii. 28 
Appleby v. Dodd i. 441 ; ii. 458 
v. Johnson i. 505 
Applegate v. Jacoby ii. 635 
v. Moffitt i. 62 
Appleton v. Binks i. 68 ; ii. 32 
a. Chase i. 481 
v. Donaldson ii. 127 
v. Fullerton iii. 234 
v. Parker ii. 756 
Appleton Iron Co. v. Brit. Am. Ass. 
Co. ii. 576 



Appollon, The 


iii. 175 


Aquila, The 


ii. 440 


Araminta, The 


ii. 467 


Aranguren v. Scholfield 


i. 331 


Aranzamendi v. La. Ins. Co. 


ii. 509 


Arehard v. Hornor 


ii. 37, 44 


Archer v. Baynes 


' iii. 5, 14 


v. Dunn 


ii. 878 


v. English 


ii. 722 


v. Hudson 


i. 161 


v. Marsh 


ii. 890 



v. Merchants, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 545 

v. Putnam iii. 117 

v. Williams iii. 191 

v. Williamson ii. 834 

v. Zeh iii. 48 

Archibald v. Merc. Ins. Co. ii. 497 

v. Mutual Ins. Co. ii. 609 

v. Thomas ii. 631 

Arctic, &c. Ins. Co. v. Austin ii. 182 

Arden v. Pullen i. 532, 533 

n. Tucker i. 22 

v. Watkins iii. 451 

Ardesco Oil Co. v. Gilson ii. 46 

v. Richardson i. 536 

Arey v. Stevenson iii. 75 

Argall v. Bryant iii. 99 

!■. Smith i. 242 

Argenbright v. Campbell iii. 318, 347, 

352 

Argus Co. v. Mayor, &c. of Albany iii. 15 

Argyle v. Worthington ii. 392 

Arkell v. Commerce Ins. Co. ii. 552 

Armadillo, The ii. 403 

Armel v. Inness ii. 535 

Armfield v. Tate i. 367 

Armiger v. Clarke iii. 366 

Armington v. Barnet iii. 494, 498 

Armistead v. Butler ii. 877 

v. White ii. 147 

!-. Wilde ii. 158 

Armitage v. Insole i. 572 

Armitt v. Breame ii. 798, 835 

Armour v. McMichael i. 293 

v. Mich., &c. R. Co. i. 59 

v. Pecker i. 580 

v. Transatlantic Fire Ins. Co. ii. 554 

Armroyd !.•. Union Ins. Co. ii. 413, 418, 

419 

Arms v. Ashley i. 458 

A. R. M. S. N. Co. v. Marzetti i. 154 

Armstrong v. Baldock i. 530 

v. Burrows ii. 687 

v. Cristiani i. 322 

v. Hussey i. 189 

v. Lawson iii. 37 

v. Lewis i. 175 

v. McDonald i. 349 

v. Percy iii. 176, 227, 229 

v. Robinson i- 126 

v. Stokes i- 65, 67 

o. Toler i. Ill, 486 ; ii. 894 

v. Wheeler iii- 424 

Armstrong, &c. Co. v. Kosure ii. 814 

v, Arnold ii. 869 



XXX 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Arnold v. Brown i. 201, 202, 207, 224, 

225 

v. Crowder i. 546 

v. Downing iii. 77, 82 

v. Dresser i. S23 

v. Halenbake ii. 181 

v. Hudson River R. R. Co. iii. 496 

i'. 111. Cent. R. Co. ii. 238, 270 

!». Lyman i. 245, 497 

••■ Maynard iii. 441, 442 

v. Mayor of Poole ii. 763 ; iii. 367 

v. Prout i. 574 

v. Richmond Iron Works i. 369, 434; 

ii. 713 

v. Spurr i. 387 

v. Wainwright i. 170 

Arnot v. Biscoe i. 621 

v. Erie R. Co. ii. 7 

v. Woodbum i. 290 

Arnott v. Hughes i. 62 1 

v. Redfern iii. 113 

Arnsby v. Woodward i. 539 

Arques v. Wasson i. 613 

Arrington v. Cary i. 109 

v. Liscom iii. 109 

Arrott v. Brown i. 921 

Arthur v. Barton i. 84 

u. Cole ii. 79 

v. The Schooner Cassius ii. 414, 416, 

456; iii. 206 

Arton v. Booth i. 210; ii. 852 

Ascough's case i. 541 

Ash v. Putnam i. 653; ii. 914 

v. Savage i. 612 

Ashburner v. Balchen ii. 422, 423 

Ashburnham v. Thompson i. 137 

Ashby v. Ashby i. 143 

v. James iii. 83 

o. White iii. 233, 234 

Ashcroft v. Morrin iii. 14 

Ashford v. Hand iii. 202 

Ashhurst v. Montour Iron Co. iii. 377, 

378 

Ashley v. Ashley ii. 609 

o. Harrison iii. 193 

v. Pratt ii. 534, 535 

Aslilin v. White ii. 917 

Ashmole v. Wainwright ii. 185 

Ashmore v. Charles iii. 230 

Ashworth v. Builders' Ins. Co. ii. 547 

Aspdin v. Austin ii. 49 

Aspinall v. Wake i. 146 

Aspinwall v. Bartlet ii. 459 

v. Torrance i. 70 

Associated Firemen's Ins. Co. o. 

Assum ii. 584 

Astin v. Parkin iii. 237 

Astley v. Reynolds i. 445 ; ii. 775; 

iii. 290 

v. Weldon iii. 170, 172 

Aston v. Heavan ii. 180, 233 

Astor v. Miller i. 260 

v. Price iii. 119 

v. Union Insurance Company ii. 523, 

667 



Asylum v. New Orleans _ iii- 499 

Atchinson v. Baker ii- 68, 70 

Atchison v. Gee ii- 897 

Atchison, &c. R. Co. v. Flinn ii- 240 

Athelstan v. Moon ii- 828 

Atherton v. Brown ii- 518 

v. Hitchings iii- 107 

v. Newhall iii- 50 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii- 575 

v. Tilton i. 180 

Athol Music Hall Co. v. Carey ^ i. 483 

Atkin v. Acton ii- 38, 43 

v. Barwick i- 563, 654 

Atkins v . Boylston Fire and Marine 

Ins. Co. ii. 798 

v. Burrows ii. 464 

v. Cobb iii. 219, 222 

v. Curwood i. 387, 388 

v. Equitable Ass. Soc. iii. 455 

v. Hill i. 141 

v. Howe i. 633 

v. Johnson i. 36 

v. Sleeper ii. 635 

v. Tredgold iii. 87, 88 

Atkinson, Ex parte iii. 416 

c. Bayntun i. 470 

v. Bell ii. 380 

i-. Brindall iii. 442 

v. Brooks i. 292 

v. Brown ii. 666,- 794 

v. Cotesworth ii. 454 

v. Denby i. 446 

v. Elliott iii. 469 

v. Great Western In3. Co. ii. 500 

v. Jordan iii. 382, 383 

<■. Maline ii. 380, 395, 400; iii. 443 

u. Manks i. 279 

v. Ritchie i. 574, 606, 607 ; ii. 805 

v. Settree i. 471 

v. Teasdale ii. 883 

v. The State Bank ii. 863 

Atkyns v. Amber i. 107 

v. Byrnes i. 552 

v. Kinnier iii. 172 

v. Pearce i. 344 

Atlantic, The ii. 402, 403 

Atlantic Bank v. Savery i. 83 

Atlantic Ins. Co. u. Conard ii. 404 

v. Storrow ii. 499 

v. Wright ii. 587 

Atlantic, &c. R. R. Co. v. Dunn iii. 184 

Atlantic, &c. Tel. Co. v. Barnes ii. 31 

Atlas, The ii. 401, 402 

Atlee v. Backhouse i. 445, 469 ; ii. 823 

Attenboro v. McKenzie i. 282 

Attilla, The ii. 401 

Att'y-Gen. v. Alford i. 136 

v. Ansted i. 78 

... Brooke i. 532 

v. Case ii. 468 

v. Clapham ii. 632, 696 

«• Davy j, 160 

"■ Day iii. 12, 346, 362 

v. Dunn jj. 709 

v. Norstedt ij. 398 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XXXI 



Att'y-Gen. v. North American Ins. 

Co. ii. 615 

t>. Plate Glass Co. ii. 686 

v. Riddle i. 47 

v. Sands i. 133 

v. Shore ii. 696 

v. Sibthorp ii. 689 

</. Siddon i. 114 

v. Sitwell iii. 354 

Attwood, Ex parte iii. 422 
v. Clark i. 581 ; ii. 666, 794 

v. Munnings i. 41, 63 

v. Small i. 78 ; ii. 924 

v. Taylor ii. 769; iii. 112 

v. iii. 316 

Attwool v. Attvrool ii. 879 

Atwater v. Clancy i. 629 

v. Townsend ii. 719 ; iii. 391 

v. Woodbridge iii. 498 

Atwell v. Mayhew iii. 48 

Atwill v. Ferritt ii. 336, 338 

Atwood v. Cobb ii. 683, 794 

i>. Emery ii. 629, 666 

o. Gillett i. 224, 225 

v. Partridge iii. 462 

v. Sellar ii. 446 

v. Vincent iii. 297 

v. Weeden ii. 896 

r. Whittlesey iii. 121 

Aubert v. Maze ii. 835, 838 

Aubery !-. Fiske i. Ill 

Aubin v. Bradley i. 578 

Auburn Bank v. Lewis iii. 124 

Audenreid v. Randall i. 568, 651 

Audenried v. Betteley ii. 937 

Auer v. Penn iii. 39 

Ault v. Goodrich iii. 96 

Aultman v. Jett ii. 757 

v. Lee ii. 745, 747 

Aultman, &c. Co. v. Hetherington ii. 757 ; 

iii. 219 

Auriol v. Mills iii. 448, 449 

v. Thomas iii. 143 

Aurora, The ii. 404 

Aurora Borealis, The, v. Dobbie ii. 392 

Aurora City v. West ii. 870 ; iii. 113 

Aurora Ins. Co. v. Eddy ii. 652 

v. Kranich ii. 587 

Austen v. Wilward i. 28 

Austill v. Crawford iii. 204 

Austin, Ex parte iii. 428 

v. Bethnal Green Guardians i. 154 

v. Bostwick iii. 88 

v. Boyd i. 274-283 

v. Burns i. 279, 280 

v. Caverley iii. 491 

v. Cbarlestown Female Seminary 

i. 370 

v. Drew ii. 567, 669 

v. Hall i. 26 

v. Holland i. 190 

v. Johnson iii. 403 

v. Lawar i. 151 

v. Munro i. 145 

v. Sawyer iii. 35 



Austin v. The M. S. &L. Railway Co. 

ii. 250, 204, 265, 268 

v. Walker iii. 119 

v. Wilson i. 326, 408 ; iii. 185 

Australia Bank v. White ii. 113 

Australian Royal Mail Steam Nav. 

Co. v. Marzetti i. 154 

Auworth r. Johnson i. 535 

Averill v. Hedge i. 614 

v. Irish ii. 129 

v. Loucks i. 169 ; iii. 402 

Averline v. Whisson i. 124 

Avery i>. Baum ii. 939 

v. Bowden ii. 425 

v. Cheslyn i. 547 

v. Hackley iii. 421 

v. Lauve i. 165 

v. Pitch iii. 202 

v. Scott ii. 846 

v. Stewart i. 321 ; ii. 783, 797, 

799 

v. Wilson i. 572 

Aveson v. Kinnaird ii. 693 

Awde v. Dixon i. 273, 285 

Ayer v. Bartlett i. 678 

v. Chase ii. 57 

v. Hall ii. 377 

v. Hawkins ii. 763 ; iii. 82 

v. Hutchins i. 293, 295 

v. New England Ins. Co. ii. 600 

< . Spring iii. 239 

v. Warren i. 407 

Ayers v. Hewitt i. 369; ii. 924 

Aylett v. Ashton iii. 357, 368 

Ayliff v. Arclidale i. 353 

v. Tracy ii. 77 ; iii. 33 

Aymar v. Astor ii. 181, 428 

v. Sheldon i. 314 

Aynsworth, Ex parte iii. 171 

Ayres v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. i. 467 

v. Home Ins. Co. ii. 675 

v. Western R. Co. ii. 262 

Ayton v. Bolt iii. 71 



B. 



B. & E. R. Co. v. Collins 


ii. 227 


Babb v. Clemson 




i. 568 


Babcock v. Beman 




i. 288 


v. Case 




ii. 814 


v. Hawkins 




ii. 818 


v. Herbert 




ii. 181 


v. Montgomery 


Ins. Co. 


ii. 567, 569, 
571 


v. Orbison 




i. 91 


v. Smith 




i. 400 


v. Stone 




i. 209 


v. Thompson 




ii. 896 


v. Weston 




iii. 394 


v. Wilson 




i. 481 


Bach v. Longman 




ii. 334 


v. Owen 




i. 572, 580 



SXX11 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Bachelder v. Fiske 


i. 30, 32 


Bailey v. Smith 


i. 562, 564 


Bachelour v. Gage 


iii. 449 


v. Smock 


i. 281 


Bachurst v. Clinckard 


i. 234 


v. Taylor 


ii. 344, 861 


Backhouse v. Charlton 


i. 227 


v. The Mayor of New York iii. 483 


o. Mohun 


iii. 345, 365, 371 


Baile'yville v. Lowell 


i. 474 


r. Sneed 


ii. 171 


Baillie v. Kell 


ii. 43 


Backman v. Jenks 


i. 282 


Bailly, Ex parte 


iii. 414 


v. Wright 


i. 486 


Baily v. Curling 


ii. 833 


Backus e. Coyne 


i. 206 ; ii. 447 


i: Merrell 


ii. 920 


v. Lebanon 


iii. 486, 494, 498 


v. Taylor 


ii. 348, 349 


o. Spaulding 


i. 477 


Bain v. Brown 


i. 94 


v. The Marengo 


ii. 410 


v. Clark 


i. 104 


Bacon, Ex parte 


iii. 435 


v. Fothergill 


iii. 246 


v. Brown 


i. 622; ii. 765,922 


Bainbridge r. Firmston 


i. 477 


i\ Charlton 


ii. 733 


v. Neilson 


ii. 504, 512 


v. Cranson 


ii. 849 


v. Pinhorn 


iii. 472 


v. Dubarry 


ii. 8l"J 


u. Wade 


ii.8; iii. 16, 17 


v. Dyer 


i. 309, 310 


v. Wilcox 


iii. 159 


<-. Eocles 


iii. 15, 50 


Baines v. Holland 


ii. 520 


v. Jones 


ii. 325 


v. Jevons 


iii. 50 


v. Rives 


iii. 100 


v. Woodfall 


i. 506 


v. Sondley 


i. UU 


Baird v. Folliver 


iii. 168 


Bacot v. Parnell 


ii. 138 


v. Mathews 


i. 624 


Badcock, Ex parte 


iii. 418 


Bakeman v. Pooler 


ii. 776 


Baddeley v. Mortlock 


ii. 69, 70, 74 


Baker, Ex parte 


i. 324; ii. 468 


Badeley r. Vigurs 


ii. 702 


v. Adams 


i. 549 


Badger, In re 


ii. 340 


v. Adm. of Backus 


i. 161 


v. Daenicke 


ii. 766 


v. Arnot 


i. 62 


v. Glens' Falls Ins. 


Co. ii. 586 


v. Baker 


ii. 693 


r. Ocean Ins. Co. 


ii. 512, 513 


v. Barney 


i. 401 ; iii. 415 


v. Phinney 


358, 360, 361 


v. Boston 


iii. 510 


u. Phosnix Ins. Co. 


ii. 587 


v. Briggs 


i. 283 


v. Titcomb 


iii. 202 


v. Brown 


ii. 882 


Badlam v. Tucker 


ii. 129, 395, 400 


v. Cartwright 


ii. 71 


Badnall v. Samuel 


i. 323 


v. City of New York 


Steamship 


Bage, Ex parte 


iii. 422 




ii. 435 


Bagely v. Forder 


i. 339 


v. Cook 


iii. 288 


Bagg v. Jefferson 


ii. 875 


v. Corey 


ii. 61, 458 


Baglehole v. Walters 


i. 634; ii. 394 


c. Dessauer 


ii. 156 


Bagley v. Fiudlay 


iii. 224 


v. Dewey 


ii. 851 


v. Peddie 


iii. 158, 173 


v. Frellsen 


i. 246 


v. Smith 


i. 219 


r. Fuller 


iii. 275 


Bagott v. Mullen 


i. 37 


v. Gray 


ii. 380, 394 


Bags of Linseed 


ii. 407 


c. Higgins 


ii. 650 


Baikie v. Chandless 


i. 126 


r. Hoag 


ii. 105 


Baile v. St. Joseph Ins. 


Co. iii. 32'J 


»■. Jacob 


i. 471 


Bailey v. Adams 


ii. 26, 2b 


c. Jordan 


iii. 34 


v. Bailey 


ii. 92 


r. Keen 


i. 339, 475 


v. Bamberger 


i. 360 


r\ Ludlow 


ii. 545 


v. Bensley 


i. 505 


i ■ Manufacturers Ins 


Co. ii. 428, 


v. Bidwell 


i. 273 




497 


v. Bussing 


i. 136 


i>. Newton 


ii. 689 


i/. Chapman 


i. 109 


r. N. Y. Cent. 1!. R. Co. ii. 240 


v. Damon 


ii. 407, 423 


t . Scott 


i. 283 


v. Day 


ii. 749 


i: Stackpoole 


ii. 765 


v. Pinch 


iii. 469 


u. Stonebreaker 


ii. 719 


c Freeman 


ii. 7; iii. 18 


v. Taylor 


ii. 333 


v. Hastings 


iii. 237 


[•. Union Life Ins. Co. 


ii. 606 


v. Hudson K. Co. 


i. 579 


u . Wheaton iii. 394, 397, 409, 507 


v. Mogg 


ii. 60 


v. White 


ii. 79 


v. Ogden 


iii. 614 


v. Wimpee 


i. 239 


v. Porter 


i. 322 


v. Woodruff 


ii. 143 


v. Quint 


ii. 221 


Baker's Appeal 


i. 231 


v. Shaw 


iii. 269 


Balch, Ex parte 


ii. 864 


u. Simonds 


ii. 795 


v. Smith 


i. 256 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XXX1U 



Balcom v. Richards iii, 91 

Baldey v. Parker i. 525, 571 ; iii. 46 

Baldney v. Ritchie ii. 396 

Baldwin v. Bank of La. i. 326 ; ii. 1 13 

v. Bank of Newbury iii. 396 

v. Burrows i. 174 

v. Casella i. 82, 113 

v. Chouteau Ins. Co. ii. 471 

v. McCrae ii. 871 

v. Munn iii. 245, 246, 217 

v. N. Y. Ins. Co. ii. 601 

c. Palmer iii. 6fi 

i'. Potter i. 96 

v. Society for Dif. of Useful 

Knowledge iii. 330, 360 

v. United States Tel. Co. ii. 279, 280, 

282, 285, 287, 300 

v. Williams iii. 57 

Baldy r. Stratton ii. 73, 75 

Baley r. Homestead Fire Ins. Co. ii. 576 

Balfe v. West ii. 107, 112 

Ball v. Bullnrd iii. 107 

v. Coggs iii. 324, 366, 367 

v. Consolidated, &c. Co. ii. 881 

u. Dunsterville i. 122, 212, 485 

v. Gilbert ii. 896, 897 

v. Loomis i. 569 

v. Newton i. 506 

v. Stanley ii. 753, 779 

v. Storie ii. 625 

Ballard v. Burget i. 580 

u. Burgett i. 557 

o. Child i. 260 

o. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 484 

v. Noaks ii. 818 

v. Oddey iii. 125 

v. Walker iii. 9 

Ballinger v. Bourland iii. 144 

v. Edwards iii. 130, 156 

Ballou v. Farnum i. 117 

v. Jones ii. 944 

v. Talbot . i. 72 

Ballston Spa Bank v. Ins. Co. of N. A. 

ii. 552 
Balmain v. Shore i. 169, 226 

Balmanno v. Lumley iii. 357 

Balme v. Hutton iii. 434, 441 

Baltimore, The ii. 438 

v. Baltimore, &c. R. R. Co. i. 151 

v. Reynolds i. 98 

Baltimore Turnpike v. Boone iii. 186 

Baltimore & Susquehannah R. R. Co. 

v. Nesbit iii. 506 

Baltimore, &c. Ins. Co. v. Dalrymple 

ii. 130 
Baltimore, &c. R. R. Co. v. Blocker 

iii. 184 
v. Breining iii. 186 

v. Campbell ii. 257 

v. Rathbone ii- 270 

v. State ii. 817 

n. Wilkens i. 44 

v. Wilkinson ii. 277 

Bamber v. Savage iii- 9 

Bamford v. Harris ii. 880 



Bamford v. lies 


ii. 18 


v. Shuttleworth 


i. 85 


Bampton v. Paulin 


iii. 31 


Banbury, Ex parte 


iii. 446 


Bancroft v. Dumas 


i. 489 


„. Hall 


i. 312 



u. Merchants' Despatch Co. ii. 227 
v. Snodgrass i. 194 
Bandy v. Cartwright i. 531 
Banglay, Ex parte. iii. 465 
Bangor v. Goding ii. 221 
v. Warren ii. 757 
Bangor Bank ;-. Treat i. 12 
Bangs v. Mosher ii. 27, 30 
v. Strong ii. 28 
Bank v. Carrollton R. Co. i. 220 
u. Curry ii. 861 
u. McChord ii. 861 
o. Myers i. 323 
v. Savery i. 298 
v. Spicer ii. 755 
v. Woods i. 327 
Bank of America v. Senior i. 298 
Bank of Augusta v. Earle ii. 698 
Bank of Australasia v. Bank of Aus- 
tralia i. 487 
Bank of Beloit v. Beale i. 570 
Bank of California u. West. Un. Tel. 

Co. ii. 290 

Bank of Cape Fear v. Sewell i. 322 

Bank of Catskill if. Messenger i. 28 

Bank of Chenango v. Osgood i. 28 

v. Root i. 211 

Bank of Chilicothe v. Dodge iii. 355 

Bank of Columbia v. Fitzhugh ii. 669 

v. Laurence i. 320 

v. Patterson's Administrator i. 22, 

154; ii. 61 

Bank of Commerce v. Mechanics' 

Bank Ass. ii. 853 

v. Union Bank i. 300 

Bank of England, Ex parte iii. 472 

Bank of Galliopolis v. Trimble ii. 722 

Bank of Georgia v. Lewin ii, 716 

Bank of Ireland v. Beresford iii. 495 

Bank of Lansingburg v. Crary iii. 35 

Bank of Louisiana !\ Tournillon i. 320 

Bank of Louisville v. Young iii. 123 
Bank of Metropolis v. Guttschlick i. 52 
v. N. E. Bank ii. 113; iii. 281 

Bank of Middlebury v. Rut. & W. 

R. R. Co. i. 22 

Bank of Mobile v. King i. 65 

Bank of Monro v. Strong iii. 130 
Bank of Mutual Redemption v. Stur- 

gis iii. 276 

Bank of North America v. Bangs i. 300 

v. Kirby i. 313 

u. M'Call ii. 742 

r. Wheeler ii. 738 

Bank of Orleans v. Smith ii. 112 

Bank of Pittsburg v. Neal i. 65 

Bank of Rochester v. Jones i. 107, 108 ; 

iii. 275 

Bank of Salina v. Babcock i. 292 



XXXIV 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Bank of Sandusky v. Scoville i. 292 

Bank of South Carolina v. Myers i. 317 
Bank of St. Albans v. F. & M. Bank 

i. 300 
v. Scott iii. 139 

Bank of Tennessee v. Johnson i. 290 

Bank of the Commonwealth v. Mudg- 

ett i. 190 

Bank of the State v. Bank of Cape 

Fear i.. 309 ; iii. 486 

Bank of United States v. Binney i. 204 

v. Carneal i. 303 

v. Dandridge i. 154 

v. Davis i. 80, 83, 321 

a. Donally ii. 700, 719, 721 

v. Dunseth iii. 238 

v. Halstead iii. 391 

v. Leathers j. 326 

u. Lyman i. 66 

u. Owens iii. 116, 117, 132 

v. Waggener iii. 116, 118 

Bank of Utica v. Bender i. 316, 318 

v. McKinster ii. 112 

v. Phillips iii. 143 

v. Smith i. 311; ii. 669 

v. Wager iii. 123, 139, 143 

Bank of Washington v. Neale ii. 113 

v. Triplet ii. 669 

Bank of Watertown v. Assessors of 

Watertown iii. 498 

Bank, First Nat, of Whitehall v. Lamb 

iii. 124 
Bankard <•■. Bait. & Ohio K. R. Co. 

ii. 271 

Banker v. Banker ii. 87 

Banks v. Adams ii. 827 

c. Gibson ii. 369 

v. Haskie i. 532 

u. Marshall i. 270 

v. Martin i. 83 

v. Mitchell i. 187 

v. Pike ii. 878 

v. Walker i. 448 

«. Werts ii. 898 

v. White i. 532 

Bannister v. Read ii. 654 

Bannon v. Baltimore, &c. R. R. Co. 

ii. 178 
Banorgee v. Hovey i. 46, 122 

Banton v. Hoomes ii. 877 

Baptist Church v. Brooklyn Fire Ins. 

Co. ii. 470 

Barber v. Andover iii. 494 

i'. Barber iii. 96 

v. Barnes i. 220 

u. Brace ii. 448, 669 

v. Briton i. 42 

v. Brown i. 490; ii. 870 

v. Butcher ii. 509 

v. Fox i. 141, 471 

v. Gingell i. 48 

v. Hartford Bank i. 233 

v. Pott ii. 748 

v. Root ii. 736 

Barbin v. Police Jury iii. 233 



Barclay, Ex parte i- 


322 ; iii. 468 


v. Bailey 


i. 303 


v. Cousins 


ii. 483 


v. Kennedy 


iii. 161 


v. Lucas 


ii. 20, 21 


v. Stirling 


ii. 483 


v. Walmsley 


iii. 146 


Barcraft v. Snodgrass 


i. 194 


Barden v. Keverberg 


i. 407 


Bardwell v. Conway Ins. Co. 


ii. 580 


o. Lydall 


ii. 4, 6 


v. Perry 


i. 231, 239 


Barefoot, The 


ii. 437 


Barfield r. Nicholson 


ii. 336 


Barfoot v. Freswell 


ii. 042 


Barger v. Collins 


i. 254 


Bargett v. Orient Ins. Co. 


ii. 478 


Barhydt v. Ellis 


ii. 31 


Barickman r. Kuykendall 


iii. 14 


Baring r. Christie 


ii. 644 


v. Clark 


i. 326 


v. Corie i 


107 ; ii. 938 


v. Lyman 


i. 187 



Barker v. Baltimore, &c. R. Co. ii. 447 

v. Binninger ii. 936 

v. Blakes ii. 519, 520 

v. Bradley ii. 11 
v. Braliam i. 53; ii. 873, 874 

v. Bucklin iii. 24, 28 

v. Cassidy iii. 100 

v. Oheriot ii. 413 

v. Clarke i. 316 

v. Dinsmore i. 556 

l . Goodair i. 224, 258 

v. Harrison i. 522 

v. Hibbard i. 355 

v. Hodgson ii. 425 

i'. Lees ii. 848 

i . Mar. Ins. Co. i. 93 

c Parker ii. 21, 22 
... Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 447, 517, 518, 

519 

v. Pittsburgh iii. 483 

v. Richardson i. 26, 210 ; ii. 749 

u. Roberts ii. 144 

v. Seudder ii. 32 

r. St. Quintin ii. 849 

v. Sutton ii. 792 

i>. Vansommer iii. 117 

v. Windle ii. 422 

Barkley v. Hanlan i. 470 

v. Rensselaer i. 75 

Barklie v. Scott i. 166, 213 

Barksdale v. Brown i, 60 

Barley v. Walford ii. 917 

Barlow v. Bishop i. 285, 392 

v. Leekie ii. 473 

v. Ocean Ins. Co. i. 468 

<■. Planters Bank i. 321 

v. Scott i. 505 

v. Wainwright i. 543 

Barnard v. Adams ii. 444, 445, 446 

v. Backhaus ii. 896 

v. Bartholomew iii. 75, 111 

v. Bridgeman i. 84 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XXXV 



Barnard v. Cushing 


ii. 645 


Barrett i>. Buxton 


i. 435 


v. Eaton 


i. 612, 613 


v. Charleston Bank 


i. 317 


v. Godscall 


iii. 449 


v. Deere 


ii. 747, 774 


v. Kellogg 


i. 629 


v. Dutton 


ii. 425 


o. Lee 


iii. 340 


v. French 


ii. 636 


v. Poor 


iii. 176, 186 


v. Goddard 


i. 566, 648 


v. Yates 


i. 627 


v. Hall i. 625 ; 


ii. 307, 314, 315 


v. Young 


iii. 120 


v. Jermy 


ii. 547 


Barnehurst v. Cabbot 


i. 472 


v. Lewis 


ii. 764 


Barnes, Ex parte 


iii. 427 


v. McKenzie 


i. 232 


v. Barnes 


iii. 507 


v. Pritchard 


i. 578 


v. Bartlett 


iii. 217 


v. Stockton, &c. Railway ii. 638 


v. Boston, &c. R. Co. 


iii. 349 


v. Swann 


i. 188, 204 


v. Cole 


ii. 247, 429 


v. Thorndike 


ii. 862 


v. Gorham 


i. 280 


v. Union M. F. Ins. Co. i. 254 ; ii. 565, 


v. Hedley 


i. 460 ; iii. 128 




584 


v. Holcomb 


i. 611 


Barrick v. Buba 


ii. 425 


v. Marshall 


ii. 220 


Barringer v. King 


ii. 743 


v. Parker 


ii. 836 


v. Sneed 


ii. 683 


v. Perine 


i. 482, 483, 484 


Barron v. Paulding 


ii. 930 


v. Taylor 


ii. 386 


Barrow, Ex parte 


iii. 414 


v. Trenton Glass Co. 


i. 83 


o. Paxton 


i. 611 ; ii. 121 


v. Union Ins. Co. 


ii. 576 


v. Richard 


iii. 331 


v. Warlieh 


iii. 141 


Barrows v. Lane 


i. 284 


Barnesley v. Powell 


iii. 414 


v. Knight ii. 354, 355, 363, 371 


Barnesville Bank v. West. Dn. Tel. Co. 


Barry v. Anderson 


i. 42 




ii. 299 


v. Boninger 


i. 109; iii. 250 


Barnet v. Gilson 


ii. 829 


v. La. Ins. Co. 


ii. 500 


v. National Bank 


iii. 124 


v. Nesham 


i. 182 


v. Smith 


i. 304 


v. Ransom 


ii. 683 


Barnett, Ex parte 


iii. 420 


Barry's case 


i. 449 


v. Goings 


i. 409 


Barstow v. Adams 


iii. 426 


v. Lambert 


i. 59 


v. Bennett 


ii. 23 


v. Stanton i. 


631 ; ii. 918, 922 


v. Gray 


iii. 9 


Barnewell v. Church 


ii. 496, 529, 534 


v. Hiriart 


i. 322 


Barney v. Bliss 


ii. 780 


Barter v. Wheeler 


ii. 228 


v. Brown 


i. 571 


Bartholomew v. Jackson i 


.475; ii. 50, 61, 


v. Coffin 


i. 478 




105 


v. Currier 


i. 211 


v. Sawyer 


ii. 305 


v. Frowner 


iii. 239 


v. St. Louis, &c. R. R 


. Co. ii. 210 


v. Griffin 


iii. 403 


Bartlett v. Carnley 


ii. 407 


v. Maryland Ins. Co 


ii. 504 


i . Drake 


i. 52 


v. Patterson 


ii. 865 ; iii. 12 


o. Farrington 


i. 532, 541 


v. Prentiss 


ii. 273 


v. Hawley 


i. 58, 319 


v. Saunders 


i. 136 ; iii. 422 


v. Hoppock 


i. 631, 632 


v. Smith 


i. 227 


v. Knight 


ii. 741 


Barns v. Graham 


ii. 781, 787 


v. Mayor 


ii. 708 


Barnum v. Barnum 


ii. 85 


v. Pearson 


i. 254 


v. Childs 


iii. 31 


u. Pentland i. 87 ; 


ii. 672, 675, 747 


v. Vandusen 


iii. 239 


v. Robinson 


i. 319 


Baron v. Abeel 


iii. 237 


v. Van Zandt 


i. 381 


v. Husband 


i. 248 


v. Vinor 


i. 488 ; ii. 887 


Barough v. White 


i. 295 


v. West. Un. Tel. Co. 


ii. 286 


Barr v. Armstrong 


i. 389 


v. Williams 


i. 569 ; iii. 145 

i. 442 


v. Hill 


i. 460 


v. Wyman 


v. Lapsley 
v. Marsh 


iii. 331 


Bartlette v. Crittenden 


ii. 330, 332, 333 


i. 316 


Bartley v. Richtmyer 


ii. 76 


v. Myers i. 


575 ; ii. 783, 784 


v. Williams 


i. 185 


v. Sehroeder 


i. 78 


Bartley, The 


ii. 440 


Barratt v. Allen 


i. 321 


Barton v. Baker 


i. 317 


Barrell v. Trussell 


iii. 27 


v. Fitzgerald 


ii. 633, 634, 640 


Barrels of Oil 


ii. 439, 440 


v. Glover 


iii. 172 

i. 196 

ii. 667, 672 

iii. 401 


Barret v. Hampton 
Barrett v. Allen 


ii. 896 
ii. 783, 799 


v. Hanson 
v. McKelway 


v. Barrett 


ii. 874, 875, 884 


v. Tower 



XXXVI 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Barton v. Wolliford 


ii. 174 


Bartram v. Farebrother 


i. 054 


Barwis, Ex parte 


iii. 414 


Basch v. Humboldt Ins. Co. 


ii. 5SG 


Bash v. Bash 


iii. 247 


v. Hill 


i. 109 


Bashford v. Shaw 


ii. 31 


Bashore v. Whistler 


i. 615 


Baskerville v. Brown 


ii. 881 


Baskett v. Cunningham 


ii. 348 


Baskin v. Seechrist 


i. 540 


Bason v. Hughart 


iii. 25 


Bass v. Bass 


iii. 96 


v. Cliicago, &c.R. Co. ii. 246 


; iii. 187 


v. Clive 


i. 300 


v. Clivley 


iii. 309 


v. Smith 


iii. 68 


!•. White 


i. 576 


Basset v. Bassett 


ii. 858 


v. Collis 


i. 635 


v. Kerne 


ii. 784 


Bast v. Byrne 


ii. 53 


Basten v. Butter 


ii. 879 


Bastow v. Bennett 


ii. 21 


Batchelder, Re 


iii. 273 


v. Batchelder 


ii. 736 


v. Sanborn 


ii 939 


o. Sturgis 


iii. 244 


Bate v. Burr i. 66 


iii. Ill 


v. Cnrtwright 


ii. 759 


Bates, Ex parte 


iii. 415 


v. Bates 


ii. 780 


v. Cartwright 


ii. 880 


v. Chesebro 


iii. 58 


v. Churchill 


ii. 7811 


v. Coe 


iii. 382 


v. Cort i. 


478, 490 


v. Delavan 


i. 520 


v. Dandy 


iii. 487 


v. Enwright 


i. 396 


v. Hewitt 


ii. 526 


v. James 


i. 235 


v. Moore 


iii. 44 


v. Staunton ii. 152, 218 


iii. 269 


v. Todd 


i. 410 


v. Watson 


i. 462 


Bateson v. Gosling 


i. 323 


Bath, Ex parte 


iii. 416 


Batson v. Donovan ii. 217, 261, 203, 272, 


Batteman <\ Morford 


i. 515 


Battersby v. Gale 


ii. 385 


Battin v. Bigelow 


iii. 230 


Battishill v. Heed 


iii. 235 


Battle v. Rochester City Bank 


ii. 815 


Battley v. Faulkner 


iii. 99 


Batty v. Hill 


ii. 371 


v. Lloyd 


iii. 150 


v. McCundie 


i. 193 


Baubie v. iEtna Ins. Co. 


ii. 543 


Bauchor r. Cilley 


i. 177 


Baudier, Ex parte 


i. 237 


Bauduy v. Union Ins. Co. 


ii. 182 


Bauendahl v. Horr 


i. 579 


Baugh v. Baugh 


ii. 93 



Baugher v. Nelson 
Baughman v. Gould 
Baum v. Dubois 

v. Stevens 
Bavington v. Clarke 



iii. 506 
ii. 916 
i. 123 
i. 633 
i. 355 



Baxendale v. Eastern C. Ry. Co. 

i. 446; ii. 187 

u. Great Western R. R. Co. i. 395, 

446 

v. Hart ii. 273 

v. London R. Co. iii. 175 

Baxter v. Baxter ii. 92 

v. Bodkin i. 405 

v. Bradbury ii. 933 ; iii. 240 

v. Connolly iii. 323 

v. Earl of Portsmouth i. 434, 430 ; 

iii. 414 

u. Lamont i. 61 

v. Leland ii. 410, 416, 672 

v. Little i. 290 

v. New England Ins. Co. ii. 526 

v. Nurse ii. 35 

v. Penniman iii. 80, 92 

u. People ii. 898 

u. Pritchard iii. 441 

v. Ryerss iii. 242 

v. Wales i. 467 

Bay v. Church i. 325 

v. Coddington i. 285, 292 

v. Cook i. 73, 140, 568 

v. Gunn i. 333 

Bayard v. Lathy i. 303 

v. Shunk i. 302 ; ii. 754 

Bayley r. Ashton iii. 84 

v. Bradley ii. 940 

v. Culverwell i. 563 

c. Edwards i. 864; ii. 740 

v. Gouldsmith i. 581 

v. Homan ii. 819 

v. Lawrence i. 536 

v. Leominster iii. 323 

v. Manchester i. 113 

v. Merrill iii. 267 

u. Rimmell ii. 35 

v. Taylor ii. 336 

Baylie v. Clare i. 446 

Baylies r. Fettyplace ii. 425, 808 

r. Sinex iii. 293 

Bayliffe v. Butterworth i. 60, 87 ; ii. 670 

Baylis r. Attorney-General ii. 681, 693 

v. Baylis ii. 93 

v. Dinely i. 335, 353, 363, 360 

v. Usher ii. 215 

Baylor v. Smithers i. 569 

Bayly v. Garford i. 27 

v. Grant ii. 459 

v. Schofield i. 640 

v. Taylor ii. 376 

Bayne v. Morris ii. 834 

Baynes v. Fry iii. 144 

Baynham v. Guy's Hospital i. 532 

Baynon v. Batley i. 400 

Bay State, The ii. 433 

Bazeley v. Forder i. 393 

Bazin v. Richardson ii. 414 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XXXV11 



Beach v. Beach iii. 236 

v. Berdell ii. 103 

v. Branch i. 87 

t\ Cooke ii. 836 

v. First Methodist Church i. 483 

v. Forsyth i. 103 

v. Ilotchkiss i. 185 

v. Native, The ii. 381, 382 

v. Ranney iii. 189 

v. State Bank i. 209, 303 

Beachey v. Brown ii. 72 

Beak v. Beak i. 205 

Beal v. Alexander i. 299, 322 

u. Chase ii. 893 

v. Nason iii. 511 

v. Park, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 543 

v. Roberts i. 272 

v. Wyman ii. 689 

Beale v. Beale ii. 831 

v. Coon ii. 884 

v. Hayes iii. 173 

v. Nind iii. 69 

v. Paris i. 317 

v. Sanders i. 537 

v. Slaughter i. 282 

v. Thompson ii. 426 

Bealey v. Greenslade iii. 83 

Beall v. Beall i. 376 

v. White i. 543 

Beals v. Cobb i. 392 

v. Guernsey iii. 115 

v. Home Ins. Co. ii. 573 

a. Olmstead i. 623, 630 

v. Peck i. 322 

v. Terry iii. 220 

Beaman v. Russell ii. 859 ; iii. 21 

Bean v. Amsinck iii. 421 

v. Atwater ii. 661 

v. Burbank i. 457, 562 

o. Green ii. 263, 273 

v. Herrick i. 621 

v. Newberry ii. 828 

v. Simpson i. 258, 575 ; ii. 784 

v. Smallwood ii. 307 

v. Stupart ii. 473, 522 

v. Sturtevant ii. 180, 194 

Beane v. The Mazurka ii. 438 

Bearce v. Barstow iii. 131 

v. Bowker i. 48, 500 

Beard v. Denniss ii. 893 

v. Kirk i- 75 

v. Linthicum iii. 309, 310, 347 

v. Turner ii. 377 

o. Webb i. 406 

Beardesley v. Baldwin i. 280 

Beardslee v. Morgner i. 253 

v. Richardson ii. 114 

Beardsley v. Duntley iii. 348 

v. Southmayd ii. 722 

v. Swann iii- 177 

Beardsley Scythe Co. v. Foster iii. 308 

Bears v. Ambler i- 537 

Bearse v. Pigs of Copper }]■ 437 

Beatson v. Haworth ii- 534 

Beattie v. Lord Ebury i. 63 



Beattie v. Robin 


i. 569 


Beatty v. Gilmore 


ii. 250 


o. Lycoming Ins. Co. 


ii. 587 


v. Randall 


ii. 931 


v. Wray 


i. 228 


Beaty v. Knowler 


iii. 488 


Beaubien v. Beaubien 


iii. 308 


Beauchamp v. Damory 


iii. 243 


Beaufort, Duke of, v. Neeld 


i. 42 


Beaumont, Ex parte 


iii. 428 


v. Fell 


ii. 681, 694 


v. Greathead 


ii. 750 


u. Meredith 


i. 230 


v. Reeve 


i. 465 


Beauregard v. Case 


i. 176 


Beavan v. Delahay 


i. 544 


Beaver v. Lewis 


i. 220 


Beaver Co. v. Armstrong 


i. 330 


Bechervaise v. Lewis 


ii. 876 


Bechtel v. Cone 


iii. 352 


Beck v. Allison 


iii. 329 


v. Evans 


ii. 261, 263 


v. Germania Ins. Co. 


ii. 588 


v. Rebow 


i. 547 


v. Robley 


i. 297 


Beck & Jackson, In re 


ii. 844 


Becker v. Hallgarten 


i. 645 


Beckett v. Arldyman 


ii. 33 


v. Taylor 


ii. 826 


Beckford v. Hill 


i. 174 


u. Hood 


ii. 330 


v. Wade 


ii. 723 



Beckham v. Drake i. 7, 65, 56, 66, 145 ; 

iii. 172, 454 

Beckley v. Munson i. 33 

Beckman v. Sbouse ii. 134, 179, 256, 273, 

275 
Beckwith v. Angell i. 284 

v. Brown iii. 382 

v. Cheever i. 511, 514 

v. Talbot iii. 15 

Bedam v. Clerkson ii. 826, 829 

Beddingfield v. Ashley iii. 150 

Beddoe's Ex'rs v. Wadsworth i. 144 

Bedel v. Powell iii. 188 

Bedell v. Janney iii. 112 

Bedell's case ii- 686 

Bedford v. Brutton iii. 426 

o. Hunt ii. 304, 309 

c. Terhune i. 542 

Bee, The ii. 437, 438 

Beebe v. Dudley ii. 24, 32 ; iii. 23 

v. Elliott " ii. 870 

v. Robert i. 66, 628 

Beecham v. Dodd i. 175, 213 

Beecher v. Venn i- 59 

Beecker v. Beecker i. 142, 248 

Beed v. Blandford ii- 814 

Beek v. Robley i. 289 

Beekman v. Saratoga & Schenec- 
tady R. R. Co. iii. 491, 494, 496 
v. Wilson iii- 442 

Beeler v. Young i. 336, 337, 338, 353 

Beeman v. Buck i- 623 

Beems v. C. & C. R. Co. iii. 209 



XXXV111 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Beer v. Beer i. 22 

Beer Co. v. Massachusetts iii. 510 

Beers v. Bridgeport Spring Co. i. 158 

v. Crowell iii- 57 

v. Haughton iii. 391, 397 

v. Horton iii. 503 

v. Housatonic B. B. Co. ii. 184 

v. Reynolds i. 243 

v. Robinson i. 498 

Beeston v. Collyer ii. 35 

Beete v. Bidgood iii. 119 

Beetem v- Burkholder ii. 814 

Begbie v. Levi ii. 899, 907 

v. Phosphate Sewage Co. i. 492; 

ii. 886, 924 

ii. 624 

ii. 777 

ii. 283 

ii. 834 

iii. 456 

i. 628, 629 

iii. 442 

ii. 902, 903 

iii. 429 

iii. 435 

iii. 439, 469 

i. 536 

iii. 441 

iii. 421, 425 

iii. 42 1 , 425, 428 

iii. 333 

ii. 085 

ii. 880, 909 

i. 84 

ii. 77 

ii. 853 

ii. 10 

i. 170 

iii. 465 

ii. 483, 486, 524, 086 

ii. 5, 634, 713 

i. 19 

iii. 72 

i. 49, 93 ; iii. 206 

i. 272 

ii. 306, 327 

i. 103 

i. 496 

ii. 833 

i. 320 

iii. 43 

ii. 882 

i. 408 ; ii. 14 

iii. 97 

iii. 477 

ii. 361 

i. 173 

ii. 487 

ii. 20 

72, 74, 78, 88, 89, 

91 

i. 641, 645, 651 

i. 238 

i. 41 

ii. 700, 730 



. Forbes 
Behaly v. Hatch 
Behm v. West. TJn. Tel. Co. 
Behren v. Bremer 
Beilby, Ex parte 
Beirne v. Dord 
Beisenthal, In re 
Beitenman's Appeal 
Belcher i». Burnett 

v. Campbell 

c. Lloyd 

v. Mcintosh 

v. Prittie 
Belchier, Ex parte 

i . Parsons 

v. Reynolds 
Belden v. Seymour 
Belding v. Pitkin 
Beldon v. Campbell 
Belford t>. Crane 
Belknap r. Bank of N. A 

v. Bender 

v. Wendell 
Bell, Ex parte 

v. Bell 

v. Bruen 

v. Chaplain 

u. Crawford 

u. Cunningham 

v. Dagg 

v. Daniels 

v. Francis 

v. Gardiner 

i. Gipps 

v. Hagerstown Bank 

v. Hewitt 

v. Horton 

v. Kellar 

o. Lamprey 

v. Leggett 

v. Lock 

v. Locke 

v. Marine Ins. Co. 

u. Martin 

v. Morrison 

v. Moss 
v. Newman 
v. Offutt 
v. Packard 



Bell v. Palmer 
v. Phynn 
v. Quiu 
v. Reed 
v. Smith 
v. Speight 
v. Twilight 

u. Walker 

v. Ward 
v. Welch 

v. Whitehead 
Bellairs v. Bellairs 

r. Ebsworth 
Bellemire v. Bank of U. 
Bcllo Corrunnes 
Belloni v. Freeborn 
Bellows v. Lovell 

v. Stone 
Bellringer v. Blagrave 
Beloit v. Morgan 
Belote v. Wynne 
Belshaw v. Bush 
Belt v. Ferguson 
Belton, Ex parte 

v. Hodges 
Belworth v. Hassell 
Beman v. Tugnot 
Bement v. Smith 
Bemie v. Vandever 
Bemis v. Leonard 

v. Smith 

v. Wilder 
Benares, The 
Bench v. Merrick 

r. Sheldon 
Bend v. Hoyt 
Benden v. Manning 
Bender v. Fromberger 
Bendernagle v. Cocks 
Bendetson v. French 
Benedict v. Bachelder 

r. Beebee 

v. Caffee 

v. Cowden 

v. Daris 

r. Field 

v. Lynch 

v. Montgomery 

v. Morse 

v. Smith 
Benefactor, The 
Benfield v. Solomons 
Benford v. Schell 
Benham v. Bishop 

v. United Ins. Co. 
Benjamin v. Benjamin 

v. Groot 

v. Sinclair 

v. Tillman 
Bennecke v. Ins. Co. 
Benner v. Puffer 
Benners v. Howard 
Bennet, Ex parte 

v. Abrams 

v. Davis 



iii. 206 

i. 169 

i. 489 

ii. 527, 528 

ii. 451, 907 

i. 146 

ii. 932 

ii. 346 

ii. 878 

ii 8 

ii. 341 

ii. 79 

ii. 20 

ii. 113 

ii. 442 

ii. 5 

ii. 24, 27 

iii. 354 

iii. 301 

ii. 870 

iii. 90 

iii. 81 

i. 410 

iii. 472 

i. 354; iii. 414 

i. 583 

i. 488 

iii. 225 

i. 229 

ii. 796 

iii. 439 

i. 538 

ii. 454 

ii. 70 

i. 620, 621 

i. 85 

ii. Ill 

iii. 240, 242 

iii. 202 

ii. 160 

ii. 905 

iii. 36 

i. 317 

ii. 853 

i. 196 

i. 595 

iii. 342 

ii. 940 

i. 549 

i. 51 

ii. 433 

iii. 136, 465 

i. 570 

i. 363, 364 

ii. 524 

i. 386; ii. 215 

iii. 104 

ii. 410 

i. 281 

ii. 601 

i. 578, 579 

i. 572 

iii. 468 

iii. 329, 348 

iii. 455, 456 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XXXIX 



Bennet v. Jenkins iii. 240, 242 

u. Mellor ii. 160, 162 

v. Paine i. 468, 469 

o. Pixley ii. 633 
Bennett, Ex parte i. 94, 95; iii. 472 

u. Alcott iii. 240, 454 

v. Austin ii. 702 
v. Bean U. 68, 73, 75 

v. Bennett ii. 91 

v. Bittle i. 541 

v. Brooks ii. 902 

v. Cadwell i. 246 

v. Cook iii. 97 

v. Davis i. 335 

v. Dutton ii. 241 

v. Filyaw ii. 230 

v. Francis ii. 772 

u. Holmes ii. 869 

«,. Hull iii. 60 

v. Lockwood iii. 195 

v. O'Brien ii. 117 
v. P. & O. Steamboat Co. ii. 241, 243 

v. Pratt iii. 17 

v. Russell i. 187 

v. Scott iii. 37 

v. Shackford iii. 293 

v. Sims i. 578 

v. Smith iii. 305 

v. Stickney i. 211 

v. Stout i. 387 

v. Womack i. 534 
v. Woolf oik i. 184, 228 ; ii. 808 

v. Young i. 318 

Benners v. Clemens ii. 716 

Benney v. Pegram i. 103 

Bennington v. Dinsmore i. 282 

Benson v. Blunt ii. 425 

v. Cutler iii- 352 

v. Drake ii- 903 

v. Flower iii- 454 

v. Heathorn ii- 398 

v. Parry iii- 144 

v. Remington i. 343, 348 
v. The Mayor, &c. of New York 

iii. 483, 490 

Bent v. Hartshorn ii- 23 

v. Manning i. 336, 338 

v. Puller i. 571 

Bentall v. Burn iii. 49, 444 

Bentaloe v. Pratt ii. 478,532 

Bentham v. Cooper iii- 17 

Bentley v . Columbia Ins. Co. ii. 567 

v. Doggett _i. 59 

v. Mackay "• 928 

Bently v. Griffin }■ 388 

Benton «. Burgot ii- 740 

v. Chamberlain i. 189 

Benyon v. Nettlefold i- 486 

Berans v. Farrell . i- 625 

Beresford, Ex parte iii. 437 

Bergen v. Bennett , . '• '6 

Bergheim v. Blaenavon Iron Co. iii. 219 

v. Great Eastern R. Co. , ii- 212 

Bergstrom v. Mills JJ- 42b 

Berkeley v. Watling i. 328, 661 ; n. 410 



Berkley v. Hardy i. 122 

Berkshire Bank v. Jones i. 315 

Berkshire Woollen Co. v. Juillard i. 205 

v. Proctor ii. 160, 162, 163, 164 

Bermon v. Woodbridge ii. 479, 480 

Bernal v. Pym iii. 270 

Bernard v. Torrance i. 192 

Berndtson v. Strang i. 650 

Berolles v. Ramsay i. 339 

Berredge, Ex parte iii. 4^7 

Berridge v. Fitzgerald i. 319 

Berrill v. Smith ii. 900 

Berry v. Alderman i. 329 

v. Bates ii. 850 

v. Cox iii. 368 

v. Da Costa ii. 75 

v. Mutual Ins. Co. iii- 432 

v. Pullen ii- 28 

o. Robinson i. 290, 315 

v. Scott "• 60 

v. Vreeland iii- 187 

v. "Whitney iii- 313 

Berthold v. Goldsmith i. 41, 167 

Bertholf v. Quinlan ii. 745, 747 

Berthoud v. Atlantic Ins. Co. ii. 471, 

541 

Bertie v. Falkland iii. 107 

Bertrand v. Barkman i. 292 

Besch v. Frolich i. 224 

Besford v. Saunders i. 364, 463, 464 

Bessey v. Evans ii. 425 

v. Windham ii. 924 

Besshears v. Rowe ii- 10 

Best v. Barber i- 463 

v. Givens i- 364 

v. Jolly _i- 485 

v. Lawson ii- 874 

v. Nokomis Bank i. 298 

v. Osborne i- 635 

v. Saunders ii- 453 

v. Stow i. 522 ; iii. 312, 370, 371 

Betesworth v. Dean and Chapter of 

St. Paul's iii- 307 

Bethel, &c. Co. v. Brown i. 567, 568 

Betsey v. Rhoda ii- 459 

Betsey, The ii- 403 

Betterbee v. Davis ii- 775 

Bettini v. Gye ii- 809 

Betts v. Bagley iii- 394, 396 

v. Gibbins i- 36, 87, 646 

v. June i- 227 

v. Lee . iii- 215 

Bevan v. Lewis i- 203, 206 

v. Waters iii- 266 

v. Rees "• 775, 778 

v. Sullivan }■ 184 

Bever v. Brown ":.^5? 

Beverley v. Beverley "• 77 

Beverley's case |- 433 

Beverleys v. Holmes }■ 457 

Beverly v. Burke iii- 238 

Beverly v. The Lincoln Gas Light and 

Coke Co. i- 154, 581 

Bevier v. Covell i"- 117, 138 

v. Galloway i- 39» 



xl 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Bevin v. Conn. Ins. Co. 


ii. 


600, 605, 


Bingham v. Sessions 




i. 444 






607 


v. Stewart 




i. 58 


Bevis v. Heflin 




ii. 747 


Binghampton Bridge, The 




iii. 484 


Bexwell v. Christie 




i. 529 


Bininger v. Wattles 




ii. 353 


Beyer v. Beyer 




ii. 91, 02 


Binks v. Lord Rokeby 




iii. 357 


Beymer v. Bonsall 




i. 66 


Binney v. Le Gal 




i. 216 


Beynon v. Godden 




iii. 288 


Binnington v. Wallis 




i. 465 


B. F. Bruce, The 




ii. 458 


Binns v. Waddill 




i. 208 


Bianehi v. Nash 




i. 581 


Birch, Ex parte iii. 416 


470, 478 


Biays v. Chesapeake Ins. 


Co. 


ii. 505 


c. Depeyster 


ii 


666, 879 


v. Union Lis. Co. 




ii. 528 


v. Earl of Liverpool 


ii. 49; iii. 40, 


Bibb v. Saunders 




ii. 877 






41 


Bickerton v. Burreil 




i. 70 


v. Funk 




i. 151 


Bickford v. First, &c. Bank 


i. 58, 296 


v. Sharland 




i. 463 


v. Gibbs 


ii. 8, 


24, 31, 32 


v. Tebbutt 




ii. 704 


v. Page 




iii. 240 


Birchett v. Boiling 


iii 


321, 320 


Bicknell v. Todd 




ii. 320 


Bird v. Adams 




iii. 92 


Bidault v. Wales 


ii 


. 912, 915 


c. Astcock 




ii. 216 


Biddell v. Dowse 


i 


. 479, 481 


v. Bird 




ii. 826 


Biddlecombe v. Bond 


i. 640 ; ii. 633 


v. Blosse 


ii. 7 


7 ; iii. 32 


Bidweli v. Madison 




i. 182 


v. Boulter i. 


125; 


ii. 11, 12 


v. Northwestern Ins. 


Co. 


ii. 475, 


v. Brown 


i. 49, 53, 641 




605 


, 521, 577 


r. Caritat 


iii 


407, 409 


v. Rogers 




iii. 76 


u. Cromwell 




ii. 173 


Biffin v. Yorke 




iii. 414 


r. Gammon i. 245, 


249; 


tii. 25, 75 


Bigelow v. Baldwin 




ii. 818 


i\ Hempstead 




iii. 454 


v. Benton 




ii. 5 


v. Jones 




i. 394 


v. Berkshire Ins. Co. 




ii. 603 


v. Le Blanc 




i. 315 


v. Davis 




i. 498 


c. Mayer 




i. 630 


v. Dennison 




i. 49, 51 


«.. Muhlenbrink 




iii. 62 


o. Elliott 




i. 189 


v. Munroe 




iii. 10 


d. Folger 




iii. 439 


v. Pierpoint 


iii. 


407, 409 


v. Grannis 




i. 304 


Bird of Paradise, The 




ii. 407 


v. Heaton 


ii 


221, 413 


Birdsall v. Heacock 




ii. 5 


u. Huntley 




i. 578 


Birdseye v. Flint 




i. 408 


v. Jones 




iii. 242 


v. Frost 




i. 617 


v. Kinney 




i. 308 


v. Kay 




i. 235 


v. Maynard 




ii. 831 


Birdsong v. Birdsong 


i. 


466, 622 


v. State Life Ass. 




ii. 015 


Birdwell v. Cain 




i. 137 


v. Stilphen 




ii. 861 


Birge v. Gardener 




ii. 248 


i. Wilson i. 251, 


256 ; ii. 


796, 707 


Birkenhead, Lancashire, & Cheshire 


v. Woodward 




ii. 941 


Railway v. l'ilcher 


i. 


374, 376 


Biggs v. Hansell 


ii 


828, 814 


Birkettw. Willan 




ii. 2, 612 


r. Lawrence 


ii 


700, 894 


Birkley v. I're.-^rave i. 


34 ; ii. 


445, 448 


r. Wisking 


ii. 651 ; iii. 4!i 


Birks i'. French 




i. 199 


Bigler v. Flickinger 




i. 622 


c. Trippet 




ii. 833 


r. Hall 




i. 568 


Birley r. Gladstone 




iii. 263 


v. N. Y. Ins. Co. 




ii. 583 


Birney v. N. Y. & Wash. 


Printing 


Bilbie v. Lumley 


i. 46" 


; ii. 530 


Tel. Co. ii. 279, 28: 


I, 286, 


287, 288 


Bilborough r. Holmes 




i. 240 


Bischoff i: Wetherell 




ii. 872 


Biles v. Holmes 




ii. 134 


Bisel v. Hobbs 




i. 198 


Bill v. Bament 




iii. 6, 46 


Bishop r. Bishop 




i. 547 


v. Cureton 




i. 411 


v. Breckels 




i. 220 


v. Mason 




ii. 488 


f. Chambre 




ii. 3G0 


v. Porter 




ii. 757 


i. Clay Ins. Co. 




ii. 575 


Billings ii. Billings 




ii. 92 


v. Elliott 




i. 547 


v. Tolland Co. Ins. Co. ii. 


524, 547, 


v. Montague 




i. 53 






651 


v. Sanford 




iii. 69 


Billingsly v. State 




ii. 931 


v. Shepherd 




ii. 40 


Billon v. Hyde 




iii. 434 


v. Smith 




i. 617 


Binford, In re 




i. 579 


v. Williamson 




ii. 155 


Bingham v. Allport 




ii. 774 


r. Wraith 




i. 531 


v. Bingham 




iii. 354 


Bishop of Chester v. John Free] 


and 


u. Maxcy 




i. 015 






i. 487 
410, 412 


v. Kogers 


ii. 256, 


259, 277 


Bissel v. Price 


ii. 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



xli 



Bissell v. Bissell 

v. Briggs 

v. Edwards 

v. Erwin 

v. Hopkins 

v. Lloyd 

v. Morgan 

v. The M. R. Co. 
Bissig v. Britton 
Bitner v. Brougli 
Bitter v. Rathman 



ii. 85, 797 

ii. 740, 741, 742 

ii. 744 

iii. 242 

i. 569, 613 

i. 532 

i. 329 

i. 158 

ii. 10 

iii. 246 

i. 166 



Bitting & Waterman's Appeal ii. 937 

Bixby v. Dunlap iii. 185 

v. Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 386, 396, 447 

v. Whitney i. 576 ; ii. 784 

Bixler v. Ream i. 472 

Bize v. Dickason iii. 439 

v. Fletcher ii. 473, 534 

Blachford v. Christian ii. 916 

Black v. Baxendale iii. 207 

v. Black ii. 91 

v. Blazo iii. 411, 476 

v. Bush i. 231 

v. Cord iii. 310, 314 

v. Homersham i. 159 

v. Marine Ins. Co. ii. 501 

v. Smith ii. 775 

v. The Louisiana ii. 459, 464 

v. Ward i. 279 

v. Webb i. 561 

Blackburn v. Gregson iii. 295 

v. Mackey i. 341 

v. Mann iii. 40 

v. Scholes ii. 745 

v. Smith ii. 815 

Blackburne v. Thompson ii. 482 

Blackett v. Royal Exch. Assur. Co. 

ii. 478, 483, 639, 677 

v. Weir i. 31 

Blackhurst v. Clinkard i- 232 

v. Cockell ii. 518, 521 

Blackman v. Green i. 103 

v. Leonard ii. 762 

v. Nearing i. 322; ii. 797 

v. Pierce i. 646 

v. Tliomas i. 108 

v. Wheaton ii. 928 

Blackmore, Ex parte iii. 416 

Blackstock „. N. Y..& E. R. R. Co. 

ii. 198 

Blackstone v. Alemania Ins. Co. ii. 494 

v. Buttermore i. 78 

Blackstone Bank v. Hill ii. 29, 768 

Blackwell v. Justices of Lawrence 

Co. iii. 242 

v. Willard i. 78 

Blad v. Bamfield ii. 931 

Blades v. Free i- 394, 395, 404 

Blagden, Ex parte iii. 439, 469 

v. Bradbear iii. 12, 14, 347 

Blagge v. N. Y. Ins. Co. ii- 519 

Blagrave v. B. W. Co. ii. 840 

Blague v. Gold i. 531 
Blaine v. The Charles Carter ii. 401, 

403 



Blair v. Bank of Tenn. 

v. Bromley 

v. Drew 

v. Snodgrass 

v. Wilson 
Blair, &c. Co. v. Walker 
Blaisdell v. Pray 
Blake v. Buchannan 

v. Cole 

u. Crowninshield 

u. Dorgan 

u. Ferris 

v. Howe 

v. Lanyon 

v. McMillen 



i. 282, 309 

iii. 107 

iii. 78, 95 

iii. 6 

ii. 755 

iii. 40 

i. 186 

i. 255 

i. 474; iii. 43 

ii. 797 

i. 221 

i. 117 

i. 540 

ii. 52 

i. 312 



v. Midland Railway Co. ii. 247 ; 

iii. 177 

u. Parlin ii. 8 

v. Peck i. 471 

v. Pegram i. 151 

v. Tucker ii. 932, 933 

v. Williams ii. 718 ; iii. 408, 409, 436 

Blakeley v. Bennecke i. 67 

v. Blakeley i. 264, 434 

Blakely v. Graham i. 49, 185 

Blakeman v. Fonda iii. 76 

Blakemore v. E. & B. R. R. Co. ii. 118, 

248 

v. Glamorganshire Can. Nav. ii. 638 

Blakeney v. Dufaur i. 221 

v. Goode iii. 41 

Blakes, Es parte iii. 406, 409 

Blakesley v. Smalhvood ii. 877 

Blakey's Appeal iii. 381, 382 

Blanchard v. Beers ii. 314 

t\ Blanchard iii. 84 

u. Brooks ii. 932 

u. Bueknam ii. 460 

v. Coolidge i. 180 

v. Detroit, &c. R. Co. iii. 307 

v. Eldridge ii. 318 

v. Ely iii. 194, 196, 199, 246 

u. Fearing ii. 400 

v. Hill ii. 348, 376 

v. Hilliard ii. 669 

v. Isaacs ii. 190 

v. Lilley ii. 834 

v. Martha Washington, The ii. 386 

u. Noyes ii. 749 

v. Russell ii. 698, 718 ; iii. 385, 893, 

394, 396, 397, 401, 409, 

502, 507, 508 

v. Sprague ii. 311 

v. Stevens i. 292 

v. Stone ii. 866 

v. Waite ii. 471, 474, 539, 540 

v. Wood ii. 32 

Blanchard G. S. Man. Co. v. Warner 

ii. 328 
Blanchard Gun Stock Turning Co. 

v. Jacobs ii. 321 

Bland v. Collett ii. 759, 896 

v. Haselrig iii. 68 

Blane v. Proudfit i. 48 

Blaney v. Hendrick iii. Ill, 112 



xlii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Blantin v. Whitaker ii. 940 

Blanton v. Knox iii. 44 

Blasdale v. Babcock iii. 176, 229 

Blasdel v. Fowle iii. 432 

Blatchford r. Kirkpatrick iii. 334 

v. Milliken i. 274 

Blattmaker v. Saul ii. 72 

Blaurett r. Woodworth iii. 293 

Bleaden v. Hancock iii. 272 

Bleeker v. Hyde ii. 4, 14 

Blenden Hall, The ii. 439 

Blenkinsop v. Clayton iii. 46, 68 

Blennerhasset v. Monsell i. 380 

Blighr. Brent i. 374; iii. 37 

Blight v. Page i. 490 

v. Rochester ii. 940 

Blin r. Pierce i. 245, 255 

Blinn v. Chester ii. 751, 823 

Bliss, Ex parte iii. 418 

r. Collins i. 550 

i . Lawrence i. 253 

v. Mclntire ii. 802 

v. Robins ii. 840 

v. Thompson ii. 925 

Bliven v. N. E. Screw Co. ii. 077 

v. Hudson R. R. R. Co. ii. 153, 173 

Block v. Bell ii. 640 

Blodget p. Jordan ii. 744 

Blodgett r. Sleeper i. 208 

Blofield v. Paine ii. 376 

t». Payne ii. 372 

Blood v. Enos ii. 43 

u. Fairbanks i. 220 

r. French i. 63 

v. Goodrich i. 52, 123 

v. Howard Ins. Co. ii. 552 

v. Palmer i. 581 

v. Shine ii. 831 

Bloodgood v. Bruen iii. 75, 92 

Bloom r. Helm i. 210 

v. McGrath iii. 20 

v. Richards ii. 898, 901 

Bloomer ?>. Bernstein _ ii. 813 ; iii. 224 

v. McQuewan ii. 319 

v. Millingen ii. 319 

v. Millinger ii. 321 

v. Sherman ii. 837 

Blore v. Sutton iii. 359 

Bloss v. Bloomer i. 480 

!•. Kittridge i. 021 

Blossburg, &c. R. R. Co. v. Tioga R. R, 

Co. iii. 105 

Blossom v. Dodd ii. 200 
Blot d. Boiceau i. 74, 108 ; iii. 204, 205, 

Blount v. Hawkins ii. 11 ; iii. 27 

v. Patten ii. 334, 344 

Blow v. Russell ii. 775 
Blower v. Great Western Railway ii. 174 

Blowers v. Sturtevant i. 303, 304, 397 

Bloxam v. Hubbard iii. 420 

v. Sanders i. 563, 575, 042 

Bloxham, Ex parte iii, 451, 408 
Bloxsome v. Williams ii. 898, 899, 905, 

007 



Bluck v. Gompertz iii- 1 

Bluett v. Osborne i- 632 

Blum v. Robertson i- 60 

Blumantle v. Fitchburg R. Co. ii. 274 

Blumenthal v. Brainerd ii. 197, 212, 260 
Bluraer v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 552 

Blundell v. Brettargh ii. 845 ; iii. 332, 

360 

v. Gladstone ii. 689, 693 

v. Winsor i. 216 

Blunt v. Boyd i. 245, 249; iii. 28 

v. Melcher ii. 56 

Blydenburgh v. Welsh i. 620 ; ii. 918, 

923 ; iii. 222 

Blythe v. Bennett i. 550 

(.. Dargin iii. 369 

v. Pulteney iii. 293 

v. Waterworks ii. 96 

Boalt v. Brown ii. 856 

Boardman v. Close i. 187 

v. Cutter iii. 56 

c. Gore i. 209; ii. 861 

r. Keeler i. 189 ; iii. 247 

v. Lake Shore, &c. R. Co. i. 225 ; 

iii. 325 

v. Meriden Britannia Co. ii. 353, 370, 

371 

u. Mostyn iii. 352 

r. Page i. 33, 34, 35 

v. Sill iii. 200, 285 

v. Spooner iii. 14 

Board of Commissioners v. Younger i. 130 

Boatman's Institution t>. Holland i. 292 

Bobbitt r. Shryer ii. 8 

Bobo r. Hansell i. 364 

Boddam r. Riley iii. 112 

Bode's Heirs v. Stickney ii. 764 

Bodenlmm c. Bennett ii. 261, 203, 272 

i: Purchas ii. 20, 633, 758, 700 

Bodger v. Arch iii. 80 

Bodine r. Exchange Ins. Co. i. 90 ; ii. 614 

?•. Glading iii. 332 

Bodle v. Chenango Co. Ins. Co. ii. 577, 586 

Bodley r. Goodrich iii. 403 

v. Reynolds iii. 215 

Bodwell '■. Bragg ii. 100 

v. Swan iii. 179 

Boenm p. Stirling i. 296 

v. Wood iii. 336, 338, 341 

Boelime r. Carr i. 322 

Bogert v. Vermilya iii. 89 

Boggs [-. Curtin i. 26, 35 

v. Martin iii. 270 

v. Teakle iii. 291, 404 

Bogue's Appeal i. 232 

Bohanan v. Bohanan iii. 352 

Bohannon v. Pace iii. 04 

Bohn v. Bogue ii. 341, 349 

Bohtlingk v. lnglis i. 649 

Boinest i\ Leignez i. 527 

Boit i'. Maybin i. 515 

Bolan v. Williamson ii. 155 

Bold v. Molineux ii. 641, 644 

v. Rayner i. 588 

Bold Buccleugh, The ii. 434 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



xliii 



Boldero v. East India Company ii. 678 

Bolin v. Huffnagle i. 649 

Bolland v. Nash iii. 439, 469 

Bollande v. Disney ii. 602 

Bolton v. Colder ii. 671 

v. Hillersden i. 51 

v. Lee i. 12 

v. Madden i. 466 

v. Prentice i. 389, 393 

v. Puller i. 286 ; iii. 440 

u. Richards ii. 755 

u. Riddle i. 563, 572 

v. Sowerby iii. 416 

v. Street iii. 123 

v. The Bishop of Carlisle ii. 802 

Bomar v. Maxwell ii. 212, 275, 270 

Bomeisler v. Dobson ii. 625 

Bon v. Railway Passenger Ass. Co. 

ii. 619 

Bonaparte, The ii. 404, 405 

Bonar v. Macdonald ii. 19 

v. Mitchell i. 325 

Bonbonus, Ex parte i. 203 

Bond v. Bond i. 433 

u. Clark i. 622 

u. Cummings ii. 712 

o. Farnham i. 308, 317 

v. Gibson i. 205, 207, 208 

v. Hays i. 186 

v. Kent iii. 295 

v. Loekwood i. 151 

v. Moore i. 308 

v. Nutt ii. 520, 521 

v. Pittard i. 188 

u. Seymour iii. 403 ; ii. 447 

v. The Cora ii. 406, 438, 439, 533 

v. The Superb ii. 447 

Bondies v. Sherwood ii. 442 

Bonham v. Badgley ii. 88, 726, 727 

v. Iowa, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 559 

Bonine v. Denniston ii. 7 

Bonnell v. Allen i. 545 

v. Jacobs i. 603 

Bonner v. Liddell ii. 827 

v. Welborn ii. 155 

Bonney v. Bonney ii. 28 

v. Foss i. 540 

v. Seeley i. 33 

Bonsey v. Amee ii. 380 

Bonynge v. Field i. 130 

Boody v. McKenny i. 362, 366, 367 

Booker v. Kirkpatrick i. 226 

Bool v. Mix i. 334, 362, 365 

Boon v. Mtna. Ins. Co. ii. 571 

v. Moss i. 172, 579 

Boone v. Eyre ii. 658, 661, 662 

v. Poindexter iii. 136 

Boorman v. Am. Express Co. ii. 265 

v. Brown iii. 235 

v. Jenkins i. 628, 634 

v . Nash iii. 220, 225, 429, 435, 462, 

466 

Boot v. Wilson iii. 448, 449 

Booth v. Boston, &c. E. Co. ii. 45 

v. Eighmie iii- 25 



Booth v. Garelly 


ii. 321 


v. Garnett 


ii. 835 


v. Hartley 


iii. 370 


v. Hodgson 


i. 313 


v. Kennard 


ii. 310 


v. Powers 


ii. 853 


i'. Smith 


ii. 757, 823, 824 



v. Spuyten Duyvil Rolling Mill 

Co. ii. 806 

v. Storrs ii. 8 

v. Terrell ii. 118, 137 

v- Tyson ii. 785, 792 

Boothby v. Scales i. 62 

Bopp v. Fox i. 167 

Boraston v. Green i. 544 

Borchsenius v. Canutson ii. 877; iii. 27 

Borden v. Borden ii. 810 

v. Fitch ii. 740 

u. Hingham Insurance Co. ii. 580 

v. Houston ii. 16 

v. Sumner iii. 409 

Border State, &c. Assoc, v. McCarthy 

iii. 117 
Boreal v. The Golden Rose ii. 382 

Borman v. Schober iii. 292 

Boroughes's case ii. 645 

Borradaile v. Brunton iii. 194 

v. Hunter ii. 158, 603 

Borrekins v. Bevan i. 624, 628, 03G 

Borries v. Hutchinson iii. 223 

v. Imperial Ottoman Bank ii. 882 
Borrowman v. Drayton i. 697 ; ii. 674 
v. Free i. 565 

Borst v. Corey i. 440 

Borthwick v. Carruthers i. 333 

Borum v. Fouts i. 127 

Bosanquet v. Dashwood iii. 137 

v. Wray i. 186; ii. 764 

Boscowitz i\ Adams Ex. Co. ii. 257 

Bosler v. Kuhn iii. 478 

Bosley v. Chesapeake Ins. Co. ii. 511, 512 
Bosman v. Akeley ii. 32 

Boson v. Sandford ii. 182, 183 

Boss v. Lytton ii. 247 

Bosseau v. O'Brien i. 51 

Bostick v. Winton i. 615 

Boston, The ii. 404, 433, 440, 443, 533 
Boston v. Benson ii. 420, 856 

v. Brazier ii. 826 

Boston Bank o. Chamberlin i. 366 

Boston Ice Co. v. Potter i. 246, 557 

Boston India R. F. v. Hoit ii. 740 

Boston Manuf. Co. v. Fiske iii. 176, 185 
Boston Water Power Co. v. Boston 

& Worcester R. R. Co. iii. 493, 
494, 496 
v. Gray ii. 838, 840 

Boston & Lowell R. R. Co. v. Salem 
& Lowell, B. & Me., and Lowell & 
L. R. R. Cos. iii. 495 

Boston & Maine R. R. Co. v. Babcock 

iii. 309, 367 
v. Bartlett i. 510; iii. 367 

Boston & Sandwich Glass Co. v. Bos- 
ton i. 496 



xliv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Boston & Worcester R. R. Corp. v. 

Dana ii. 866 

v. Sparhawk ii. 944 

Bostwick v. Dodge i. 292 

v. Leach iii. 36 

Bosvil v. Brander iii. 437, 456 

Boswell v. Green i. 199 

v. Tunnell ii. 863 

Botiller ;■. Newport i. 373 

Bott v. McCoy i. 60 

Bottomley v. Bovill ii. 535 

v. Brooke ii. 884 

r. Forbes ii. 076 

Bottomly v. Nuttall i. 106 

Bottsford v. Sandford iii. 129 

Bouchaud v. Dias ii. 867 

Bouchell v. Clary i. 353 

Bouclier v. Lawson ii. 182, 454, 700, 739, 

894 

v. Vanbuskirk iii. 367 

Boucicault v. Fox ii. 333, 338 

c. Wood ii. 334 

Bouck v. Wilber iii. 333 

Boultbee i\ Stubbs i. 325 

Boulter r, Peplow i. 31, 34 

Boulton r. Bull ii. 309 

v. Jones i. 557 

v. Welsh i. 322 

Bound v. Lathrop i. 211 ; iii. 88 

Bourcier v. Lanusse ii. 730 

Bourdillon v. Dalton iii. 424, 446 

Bourke v. Lloyd ii. 831, 833 

Bourne, Ex parte iii. 441 

v. Cabot iii. 452 

u. Diggles i. 92 

u. Dodson iii. 428 

v. Freeth i. 163 

v. (iatliff ii. 675 

v. Mason i. 496 

v. Maybin i. 151) 

Boussmaker, Ex parte iii. 4b5 

Boutelleu. Smith ii. 888 

Bouton v. Am. Ins. Co. ii. 600, 616 

Bouttilier v. Thick ii. 840 

Bovil v. Hammond i. 184, 185 

Bovill c. Key worth ii. 310 

Bowcher v. Noidstrom ii. 468 

Bowdell i'. Parsons i. 572; ii. 800, 809 

Bowdsn v. Gray i. 385 

v. Moore ii. 152 

p. Vaughan ii. 523, 524 

Bowditch v. Winslow ii. 557 

Bowdre r. Hampton iii. 88 

Bowen v. Burke i. 563 

r. Hope Ins. Co. ii. 483 

v. Lake Erie Tel. Co. ii. 279, 290, 

294, 301 

v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 487 

o. Newell i. 313 

v. Stoddard ii. 076 

v. Sullivan i. 562 ; ii. 106 

Bower v Major i. 549 

v. Peate i. 116 

v. Swadlin i. 210 

Bowerbank v. Monteiro i. 142 ; ii. 631 



Bowers, Ex parte 

p. Hurd 

r. Jewell 

v. Johnson 

v. Parker 
Bowes, Ex parte 

v. Howe 

o. Sliand 

v. Tibbets 
Bowie v. Napier 

v. Stonestreet 
Bowker v. Hoyt 

v. Lowell 
Bowles r. Round 

v. Woodson 
Bowling v. Harrison 



iii. 416 

ii. 0S5 

ii. 856, 858 

ii. 921 

ii. 609 

iii. 416 

i. 306, 316 

i. 024 ; ii. 624 

ii. 50, 57 

i. 102 

iii. 858 

ii. 655, 785, 791 

i. 444 

i. 520 

iii. 306, 313 

i. 300, 319 



Bowling Green Bank i>. Todd i. 129 

Bowman r. Bailey i. 184 

r. Cecil Bank i. 212 

v. Coffroth ii. 895 

v. Curd ii. 32 

r. Floyd ii. 378 

v. Franklin ii. 557 

r. Herring i. 5G9 

v. Hilton ii. 220 

v. Horsey ii. 667 

v. Officer i. 93 

v. Sanborn iii. 99 

«.-. Teall ii. 173, 215 ; iii. 208 

r. Woods ii. 58 

Bowne v. Joy ii. 739, 863, 864 

Bownell v. Briggs i. 66 

Bowring v. Andrews i. 307 

a. Shepherd ii. 668 

Bowsall r. McKay iii. 184 

Bowser v. Blits ii. 891 

Bowyer v. Bright i. 526 

lio.x of Bullion ii. 436 

Boyce v, Anderson ii. 234, 238 

r. California Stage Co. ii. 239 

c. Douglas ii. 863 

t. Edwards ii. 716 

v. Ewart ii. 24 

Boyd v. Anderson i. 492 

v. Blanknian i. 147 

v. Bopst i. 616 

v. Brinckin i. 507 ; iii. 313 

v. Brown iii. 188, 196 

v. Browne ii. 321, 917 

v. Cleaveland i. 815 

v. Cowan iii. 236 

v. Croydon R. R. Co. i. 153 

v. Day ii. 881 

v. Dubois ii. 496 

i'. Graves ii. 940 

v. Hitchcock ii. 751 

u. Kennedy i. 330 

v. Mangles iii. 439, 469 

v. McAlpine ii. 321 

v. Plumb i. 210 

c. Siffkin i. 596 

r. The Falcon ii. 392 

v. Vanderkemp i. 80 ; iii. 466 

v. Wilson i. 625, 628 

Boydell v. Drummond iii. 5, 42, 65 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



xlv 



Boyden v. Boyden 


i. 367, 370 


v. Moore 


ii. 771 


Boyers v. Elliott 


i. 168 


Boykin v. Dohlonde 


iii. 2:! 


Boyle, Ex parte 


Hi. 409 


v. Brandon 


ii. 194 


v. McLaughlin 


ii. 198, 214 



v. Peabody Heights Co. i. 032 

v. Zacharie iii. 393, 394, 395, 396, 507 

Boyle's Estate i. 411 

Boynton ik Bodwell i. 548 

v. Braley iii. 273 

v. Clinton Ins. Co. ii. 475, 587 

v. Dyer i. 136, 137 ; iii. 422 

v. Hazleboom iii. 372 

v. Hubbard ii. 925 

v . Kellogg ii. 64, 70 

v. Page ii. 901 

v. Veazie iii. 49 

Boys v. Ancell iii. 172 

Boyson v. Coles i. 102 

Bozon (i. Farlow iii. 323, 366, 374 

Brabin v. Hyde iii. 20 

Bracegirdle v. Heald ii. 49 ; iii. 40, 44 

Bracey v. Carter i. 128 

Bracken v. Miller i. 81 

Bracket v. McNair iii. 207 

Bfackett v. Blake i. 253 

v. Bullard i. 613 

v. Evans iii. 38 

v. Hoyt i. 489 

v. Mountfort ii. 858 

v. Norton ii. 746 

v. Rich ii. 3, 31 

v. The Hercules ii. 461 

Bradburn v. Great Western R. Co. 

iii. 186, 196 

Bradburne v. Botfield i. 17, 23 

v. Bradburne i. 485 

Bradbury v. 'Wright i. 533 

Braden v. Gardner ii. 39 

Bradfield v. Tupper iii. 83 

Bradford v. Bush i. 62, 623 

v. Cary iii. 483 

v. Corey i. 317 

v. Farrand iii. 396, 507 

u. French i. 374 

u. Greenway i. 409 

v. Johnson i. 166 

v. Manley i. 628, 634 

v. Tappan i. 561 

Bradhurst v. Col. Ins. Co. ii. 446, 449, 

510 

Bradish v. Henderson ii. 115 

Bradlee v. Boston Glass Co. i. 56 

v. Warren Savings Bank i. 64 

Bradley v. Bolles ii. 385 

v. Bradley ii. 613 

v. Cary ii. 4 

v. Chester Valley R. R. Co. iii. 378 

v. Davis i. 322 

v. Holdsworth i. 374 

v. Hunt i. 266 

v. Johnson iii. 369 

v. Lowry ii. 709 



Bradley v. Munton iii. 337 
v. Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. ii. 602 

v. Nashville Ins. Co. ii. 487 

v. N. Y., &c. R. Co. ii. 46 

v. Pratt i. 353 

v. Rea ii. 903 

v. Richardson i. 101 

v. Toder ii. 804 
v. Wash. A. & G. Steam Packet 

Co. ii. 680 

v. Waterhouse ii. 261 

v. Wheeler i. 573 

Bradlie i'. Am. Ins. Co. ii. 515 

v. Maryland Ins. Co. " ii. 507 

Bradsey v. Clyston ii. 826 

Bradshaw v. Bennett i. 524 

v. Buchanan iii. 181 

u. Combs ii. 30 

v. Heath ii. 736 

v. Klein iii. 421, 441 

v. Lancashire, &c. R. R. Co. i. 144 

v. McLoughlin i. 459 

v. Warner i. 578 

Bradstreet v. Baldwin ii. 415 

v. Clark iii. 103 

v. Everson i. 90 

u. Heron ii. 415 

<.-. Neptune Ins. Co. ii. 399, 718 

u. Supervisors of Oneida County 

i. 448 

Bradt v. Koon iii. 286 

v. Towsley iii. 189 

Brady r. Giles i. 119 

o. Haines i. 569 

u. Little Miami R. R. Co. i. 296 

v. Mayor i. 127 

v. Todd i. 62, 63 

Bragdon v. Appleton Ins. Co. ii. 540 

Bragg v. Anderson ii. 535 

v. Cole ii. 792 

v. Fessenden i. 123 

</. Morrill i. 630 

r. New England Ins. Co. ii. 576 

Brahain v. Bustard ii. 353, 363 

Brahn v. Jersey City, &c. Co. i. 548 

Brainard v. Buck iii. 72 

Braithwaite v. Coleman ii. 882 

v. Skinner i. 141 

o. Skofield i. 163 

Bramah v. Roberts i. 163, 294 

Bramhall v. Beckett _i. 292 

Brammer v. Jones ii. 324 

Bramwell v. Halcomb ii. 344, 348, 378 

Branch v. Burnley ii. 746 

v. Ewington ii. 56 

v. Wiseman i. 232 

Branch Bank v. Boykin i. 464 

v. James i. 274 

Brand v. Boulcott i. 20, 26, 34 

v. Frumveller i. 532, 534 

Brandao v. Barnett ii. 113 

Brandas v. Barnett iii. 281 

Brandon v. Brandon iii. 471 

v. Curling ii. 481 

v. Hibbert ii. 759 



xlvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Brandon v. Hubbard 


i. 26 


v. Nesbitt 


ii. 481 


v. Newington 


ii. 780 


u. Old 


i. 435 


v. Pate 


iii. 426, 454 


v. Robinson 


iii. 429, 449 



Brandon Manuf. Co. v. Morse i. 570 

Brandram r. Wharton iii. 87 

Brandt r. Bowlhy i. 328; ii. 412; iii. 206 

v. Lawrence ii. 790 ; iii. 223 

Brannon v. Hursell iii. 113 

Branston, The ii. 438 

Brashear v. West iii. 382 

Brashier v. Gratz iii. 340, 364 

Brason v. Dean ii. 807 

Brass v. Maitland ii. 417 

v. Worth i. 53 ; ii. 120 

Braswell v. Am. Ins. Co. i. 75 ; ii. 617, 745 

Brather v. McEvoy ii. 87!' 

Brawdy v. Brawdy iii. 349 

Braxton v. Wood iii. 75 

Bray r. Bates ii. 402 

v. Gunn i. 88 

i. Hadwen i. 321 

v. Hartshorn ii. 308 

v. Kettell ii. 421 

v. Mayne ii. 131 

v. The Atlanta ii. 466 

v. Wheeler i. 349 

Braynard v. Marsliall ii. 718 ; iii. 394, 395, 

396, 397 
Brazelton v. Colyar i. 99 

Brazier ;;. Bryant ii. 762 

Brazill v. Isham ii. 820 

Brealey v. Andrew i. 473 

v. Collins i. 522 

Breary v. Kemp ii. 838 

Breasted u. Farmers' Loan & Trust 

Co. ii. 604 

Breek v. Cole ii. 685 

Breckenridge's Heirs v. Ormsby i. 335, 

370 

Breckinridge v. Shrieve i. 203 

Brecknock Co. u. Pritchard i. 536 ; 

ii. 199, 805 

Bredin v. Dubarry i. 51 

Bredin's Appeal ii. 886 

Bree v. Sayler ii. 818 

Breed v. Eaton ii. 533 

v. Hillhouse i. 308; ii. 32 

v. Hurd ii. 777 

v. Judd i. 353 

o. The Venus ii. 404, 453 

Brees v. U. S. Tel. Co. ii. 279, 282, 285, 

287 
Brehm v. Great Western Ry. Co. ii. 239 
Breinig v. Meitzler i. 393 

Bremner v. Williams ii. 242, 243, 244 

Brenchley, Ex parte iii. 471 

Breneman, Ex parte iii. 402 

Brennan v. Currint iii. 262 

Brenner v. Duard iii. 478 

v. Herr ii. 822 

Brent v. Cook iii. 97 

v. Green i. 510 ; iii. 12 



I Brenton v. Davis i- 630 

J Brereton v. Hull iii- 442 

Breslauer v. Brown iii- 411 

Breton v. Hull iii- -577 

v. Woolven i- 384 

Brett v. Brett ii. 732 

v. Carter i- 013 

v. Cumberland iii. 449 

Brettel v. Williams iii. 18 

Bretton v. Prat ii. 826, 835 

Brenner v. Liverpool Ins. Co. ii. 669 

Breverton's case i. 251 

Brewer v. B. & W. R. R. Co. ii. 944 



v. Dew 


iii. 183, 454 


v. Dyer 


i. 498 ; ii. 941 


v. Hardy 


ii. 035 


v. Herbert 


iii. 313 


('. Linnasus 


ii. 708 


!-. Norcross 


ii. 878 


i\ Salisbury 


i. 564, 566, 570 


v. Sparrow 


i. 61, 52 


Brewers v. Fleming 


ii. 777 


Brewerton r. Hnrris 


ii. 874 


Brewster v. Baker 


i. 578 ; ii. 938 


v. Burnett 


ii. 814, 922 


i'. De Fremery 


i. 535 


v. Edgerly 


iii. 168, 173 


v. Hammett 


i. 231, 232 


f. Hough 


iii. 497, 498, 499 


v, Kitchell 


ii. 518, 807 


v. McC'all's Devisees ii. 692 


v. Silence 


ii. 12, 604 


v. Wakefield 


iii. 113 


Breyfogle v. Beckley 


iii. Ill 


Brice v. Bannister 


i. 205 


!•. Stokes 


i. 29 


Bricheno v. Thorp 


i. 127 


Brichta v. N. Y. Lafayette Company 


ii. 477, 


566, 574 ; iii. 436 


Brickhouse v. Hunter 


ii. 831 


Bridge v. Hubbard i. 


488; iii. 127, 129, 

131 

i. 497 


t'. Niagara Ins. Co. 


r. Sumner 


ii. 871 


r. The Grand Junction Co. ii. 250 


v. Wain 


iii. 195, 228 


Bridge Proprietors v. Hoboken iiil 607 


Bridgeman's case 


i. 517 


Bridgeport Bank v. Dyer ii. 669, 675, 


Bridger v. Rice 


iii. 3..1 


Bridges v. Berry 


i. 306 


v. Hawkesworth 


ii. 106 


v. Hitchcock 


i. 532 


v. Mitchell 


iii. 96 


v. North London, &c 


. Co. ii. 251 


Bridgewater Academy v 


Gilbert i. 482 


Bridgham i\ Henderson 


iii. 394 


Brien v. Harriman 


i. 228 


Brier's Appeal 


i. 469 


Brigg p. Washburne 


ii. 895 


Briggs v, A Light-Boat 


ii. 384 


<■•■ Boston, &e. R. R. 


Co. ii. 231; 




iii. 212 


u. Briggs 


ii. 734 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



xlvii 



Briggs ii. Downing 

v. Earl of Oxford 

v. Georgia 

v. Hall 

-.. N. A. Ins. Co. 

v. Partridge 

v. Strange 

v. Vanderbilt 
Brigliam v. Clark 

v. Home Life Ins. Co. 

v. Peters 

n. Smith 
Bright v. Boyd 

v. Carpenter 

v. Cowper 

v. Juilson 

i: Mi-Knight 

v. Paige 

c. Rowland 

v. Sneff 
Brightman v. Hicks 
Brigstocke v. Smith 



ii. 7 

iii. 831 

i. 128 

i. 542, 551 

ii. 570 

i. 65 

ii. 304 

i. 176 

i. 183 

iii. 441 

i. 48, 51 

i. 309 

iii. 238 

i. 274 

ii. 406 

i. 292; ii. 719 

ii. 16 

ii. 425 

iii. 173 

iii. 268 

iii. 26 

iii. 72 



Brind v. Dale ii. 134, 168, 179, 188 

Bringloe v. Morrice ii. 118 

Brink v. Hanover Ins. Co. ii. 587 

Brinker v. Brinker iii. 343, 362 

Brinley v. Mann i. 155 

v. National Ins. Co. ii. 579 

u. Spring ii. 395 

v. Whiting ii. 909 

Brinsby v. Gold ii. 863 

Brisban v. Boyd i. 514 

Brisbane v. Stoughton iii. 378 

Bristol v. R. & S. R. ft. ii. 199 

v. Warner i. 282 

Bristow v. Eastman ii. 748 ; iii. 425 

v. Whitmore ii. 421, 454 

Bristovve v. Fairclough iii- 201 

o. Needham ii. 874 

Brit. & Am. Tel. Co. v. Colson i. 515 

Brit. No. Amer. Bank v. Merchants 

Bank iii. 98 

Britannia Co. v. Zingsen ii. 11 

British Empire, The ii. 442 

British Linen Co. v. Drummond ii. 719, 

721 
British Wagon Co. v. Lea i. 256 

Brittan v. Barnaby ii. 413 

Britten r. Hughes "z. 477 

Britton v. Angier ii 11 

v. Bishop i. 290 

v. Turner ii. 42, 655, 879 

Brix v. Braham i- 463 

Brizsee v. Maybee iii. 183, 215, 217, 218 
Broad v. Jolyffe ii. 888, 891 

». Thomas i. 109, 110 

Broadwater v. Blot ii. 149 

Broadway Bank v. Adams iii. 429 

Broadwell v. Getman ii. 49; iii. 44 

v. Howard j- 665 

Brock v. Rice . '• 527 

v. Thompson iii. 126, 156 

Brockbank v. Anderson ii. 937 

Brockelbank v. Sugrue . i- 47 

Brockway v. Burnap i- 180 



Brockway v. Clark 


iii. 126 


v. Lascala 


ii. 36 


Broddie v. Johnson 


iii. 72 


Brodie v. Howard 


ii. 389, 396 


c. St. Paul 


iii. 18, 66 


Broeder Trow, The 


ii. 182 



Broennenburgh i\ Haycock i. 635 

Brogden v. Metropolitan R. Co. i. 507 

v. Walker iii. 372 

Bromage v. Lloyd i. 272, 285 

v. Prosser iii. 177 

Bronson v. Alexander i. 275 

v. Cahill iii. 308 

v. Gleason ii. 783 

v. Green iii. 184 

v. Kinzie iii. 505, 511 

v. Newberry iii. 506 

v. Newbury iii. 504 

v. Stroud iii. 22 

v. Wiman iii. 62 

Brook i: Brook ii. 728 

v. Hook i. 279 

v. Smith ii. 739 

Brooke v. Bridges iii. 237 

a. Enderby i. 189 ; ii. 766 

c. Evans i. 195, 199, 203 

a. Gaily i. 364 

v. Hewett iii. 429, 435, 454 

v. La. St. Ins. Co. ii. 509 

v. Mitchell ii. 837 

v. Pickwick ii. 261, 273, 276 

v. Washington i- 188 

Brooker v. Scott i. 337 

Brookes, Ex parte iii. 474 

Brooklyn Bank v. De Grauw ii. 818 

Brooklyn, The, White Lead Co. n. 

Masury ii. 360, 371, 374 

«. Mesury ii. 352 

Brookman v. Metcalf i. 158 ; ii 945 

Brooks w. Aston ii- 308 

«. Ball i. 474 

v. Bicknell ii. 308, 314, 315, 319, 324 

v. Brooks i- 228 

v. Byam ii. 318 

v. Hargreaves i- 280 

v. Harison iii. 181 

i/. Harrison iii. 267 

„. Hubbard iii. 232, 233 

v. Marbury iii. 382 

v. Minturn i. 57 ; ii. 415, 424, 425 

v. Mitchell i- 295 

v. Moody iii- 244 

v. Oriental Ins. Co. ii. 446, 491, 507 

v. Powers i- 569 

u. State ii- 106 

v. Stuart i. 27 ; ii. 851 

v. Wheelock iii. 312, 347 

v. White ii- 751, 823 

Broom v. Batchelor ii. 635 

v. Broom i- 168 

v. Robinson iii- 448 

Broome, Ex parte i. 229 

Broomley v. Holland i- 74 

Brothers v. Brothers i- 94 

Brough v. Oddy iii- 318 



xlviii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Brough v. Whitmore 


ii. 


483, 666 


Broughton v. Brougliton 




i. 93 


v. Conway 




ii. 634 


v. Sillaway i 


.527 


; ii. 746 


Brousseau v. The Hudson 




ii. 41C 


Brouwer v. Hill 




i. 483 


Brower v. Lewis 




i. 628 


Brown, Appeal of 




i. 233 


Ex parte iii. 416, 


427, 


463, 471 


In re 




i. 313 


u. Ackroyd 




i. 402 


r. Adams 




i. 457 


v. Alden 




i. 380 


v. Allen 




. 28, 228 


v. Arrot 




iii. 206 


v. Bartee 


iii. 


378, 382 


v. Bachelor 




ii. 23 


v. Bellows 




i. 561 


v. Bement 




i. 611 


v. Berry 




ii. 781 


v. Bigelow i 


625 


; iii. 427 


v. Bigley 




i. 129 


v. Bowen 




ii. 939 


u. Bragg 




i. 533 


v. Bridges 




iii. 77 


v. Brine 




i. 470 


v. Brown i. 263, 266, 384, 409; ii. 11, 




832 ; iii. 39 


v. Buffalo & S. L. R. R. 


Co. 


ii. 247 


v. Burns 




ii. 763 


t. Byrne 




ii. 667 


v. Chase 




i. 152 


v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. 




iii. 187 


v. Clark 




i. 230 


v. Clegg 




ii. 182 


u. Cole 




i. 501 


v. Collier 




i. 403 


v. Collins 




iii. 398 


v. Combs 




i. 500 


v. Coombs 




i. 107 


o . Cousens 


ii 


. 68, 107 


u. Crump i. 


502, 


536, 537 


v. Cuming 


iii. 


420, 439 


v. Cummings 




iii. 199 


v. Curtiss i. 274 


; ii. 


7; iii. 28 


v. Davies i. 


288, 


289, 293 


u. Delano 




ii. 425 


v. Denison 




ii. 150 


v. Dewey 




iii. 125 


n. De Winton 


i. 


277, 278 


u. Dickerson 




iii. 212 


i . Donnell 




i. 155 


v. Doyle 




i. 12 


v. Duchesne 




ii. 325 


v. Dudley 




ii. 805 


i'. Dunckel 




ii. 757 


v. Durham 




i. 356 


c. Dysinger i. 54C 


; ii. 


773, 779 


v. Eastern R. R. Co. 




ii. 273 


v. Edes 




iii. 72 


v. Edgington 




i. 630 


v. Elkington 




i. 635 


v. Evans 




ii. 827 


c. Everhard 




i. 455 


v. Eergusoa i. 


320, 


323, 326 



Brown 



v. Eitch 


i. 579 


Foster 


i. 564 ; ii. 63 


Galloway 


iii. 237 


Gammon 


ii. 789 


Garland 


ii. 877 


George 


iii. 28 


Gibbins 


i. 196 


Gilman 


iii. 293 


Gil more 


ii. 776 


Girard 


ii. 528 


Hankerson 


ii. 829 


Harrison 


iii. 143, 145 


Hartford Ins. Co. 


i. 79,200; ii. 492 


Hatton 


ii. 624 


Heathcote 


iii. 424, 443 


Hiatts 


iii. 98 


Howard 


iii. 99 


Hummell 


iii. 485 


Hunt 


ii. 424 


Independence, The ii. 464 


Joddrell 


i. 434 


Johnson 


ii. 424, 799 


Keller 


i. 541 


Kewley 


ii. 755 


Kimball 


ii. 792 


Lacy 


iii. 129 


Langford 


i. 486 


Leavitt 


i. 292; ii. 848 


Leeson 


ii. 897 


Leonard 


i. 188 


Litton 


i. 97, 229 


Lull i. 441 


ii. 456, 458, 459 


Maine Bank 


i. 255 


Marsh , 


i. 28 


Maxwell 


. 356 ; ii. 46, 248 


McCormack 


ii. 933 


McCune 


i. 357 ; ii. 942 


McGran i. 


74, 103, 104, 108 


Miller 


iii. 223 


Morris 


ii. 882 ; iii. 39 


Mott 


i. 293 ; iii. 451 


Mullins 


i. 151 


Neal 


ii. 772 


Neilson 


ii. 428, 498 


Nevitt 


iii. 116 


Olmsted 


ii. 756 


Orland 


ii. 624, 025 


Orr 


i. 392 


Overton 


ii. 463, 533 


Batton 


i. 394, 3110 


People's Ins. Co. 


ii. 473 


Pforr 


i. 70 


Prophit 


ii. 28 


Quilter 


ii. 589 


Ralston 


ii. 415, 425 


Rawlings 


iii. 66 


Reed 


ii. 862 


Royal Ins. Co. 


ii. 579 


Saul 


ii. 753 


Savage 


ii. 827, 837 


Sax 


iii. 215 


Sayles 


i. 631 


Simms 


i. 553 


Slater 


ii. 635 


Sloan 


i. 468 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



xlix 



Brown r. Smith 
v. Stapyleton 
v. Sullivan 
v. Swineford 
v. Tapscott 
v. Tarkington 
v. Tayleur 
v. Tiglie 
v. Toell 

v. Union Ins. Co 
v. United States 
v. Vawser 
v. Vigne 
v. Wade 
o. Walli9 
v. Ward 
v. Warnock 
v. Waters 
v. Weber 
v. Wilkinson 
v. Williams 
v. Witter 
v. Wood 
u. Wootton 
v. Yaryan 
Brown's Appeal 
Browne v. Lee 
v. Meverell 
v. Robinson 
Brownell v. Flagler 

v. Hawkins 
Browning v. Beston 
v. Hart 

v. Home Ins. Co. 
v. Magill 
u. Marvin 
v. Morris 

v. Provincial Ins. Co, 
v. Eeame 
v. Wright 
Broxham v. Wagstaffe 
Bruce v. Andrews 

v. Bruce i. 298 ; 

v. Hunter 
v. Learned 
v. Lytle 
v. Pearson 
v. Pettengill 
v. Schuyler 
v. Smith 
v. Wait 
Bruen v. Marquand 
Brumby v. Smith 
Brummel v. Stockton 
Brundage v. Brundage 
Brundige v. Poor 
Brundred v. Muzzy 
Brundrett, Ex parte 
Brundridge v. Whitcomb 
Brunswick Sav. Inst. v. 

Ins. Co. 
Brush v. Keeler 
v. Scribner 
Brutton v. Burton 
Bryan v. Bradley 



ii. 513 
ii. 451 
i. 147 
hi. 182 
i. 184; ii. 390 
i. 273 
ii. 487, 532 
iii. 323 
iii. 125 
ii. 500, 520 
i. 41!) 
ii. 837 
ii. 487, 488 
ii. 818; iii. 46 
i. 546 
ii. 127 
ii. 827, 831 
iii. 116, 129 
iii. 29 
ii. 454 
ii. 55-3 
:i. 815 
iii. 430 
i. 12 
ii. 51 
i. 228 
i. 31, 34 
ii. 828 
ii. 882 
ii. 247, 248 
iii. 122, 127, 401 
ii. 639, 640, 641 
iii. 402 
ii. 546 
i. 556 
i. 224 
iii. 137 
i. 65 
ii. 87 ; iii. 414 
ii. 623, 634, 640 
ii. 37, 44 
iii. 277 
ii. 701, 709, 823 
hi. 159 
iii. 216 
i. 308, 316 
i. 505, 506' 
iii. 235 
iii. 507 
iii. 382 
iii. 277, 279 
i. 26, 210 
ii. 140 
i. 569 
i. 158 
iii. 310 
i. 174 
iii. 416 
ii. 878 
Commercial 

ii. 470 
ii. 897 
i. 292 
i. 122 
ii. 635 



Bryan v. Horseman 

v. Jackson 

v. Lewis 

v. Stewart 

v. Weatherhead 
Bryant, Ex parte 

v. Am. Tel. Co. 

v. Booze 

v. Christie 



iii. 69, 70 
i. 342 
i. 500 
i. 146 
i. 530 
iii. 470 
ii. 288, 291, 301 
i. 515 
iii. 477 



v. Commonwealth Ins. Co. ii. 418, 
478, 505, 676 



o. Craig 

v. Eastman 

v. Flight 

v. Goodnow 

v. Harabrick 

v. Jackson 

v. Kelton 

v. Ocean Ins. Co. 

v. Pottinger 

v. Poughkeepsie Ins. Co, 

v. Proctor 

v. Sears 

e. Whitcher 

v. Young 
Bryce v. Brooks 
Bryden v. Taylor 
Bryer v. Weston 
Brymer v. Atkins 
Bryson v. Browning 

v. Rayner 

v. Whitehead 
Buchan v. Sumner 
Buchanan v. Curry 

v. Howland 

v. Marshall 

v. Ocean Ins. Co. 

v. Rucker 
Buchans v. Harwell 
Buck v. Albee 

v. Buck 

v. Chesapeake Ins. Co. 

v. Fisher 

v. Hermance 

v. Lane 

v. McCaughtry 

v. Mosley 

i/. Rawlinson 

v. Smiley 

v. Smith 

v. Winn 
Buckbee v. U. S. Ins. Co. 
Bucker v. Klerkgeter 
Buekhause, Re 
Buckingham v. Burgess 
v. McLean 

v. Smith 
Buckland v. Butterfield 
v. Conway 
v. Hall 
Buckle v. Mitchell 
Buckley, Ex parte 
v. Artcher 
v. Barber 
v. Bentley 



i. 106 

i. 274 

ii. 69 

i. 474, 483 

iii. 238, 247 

i. 434 

i. 569 

ii. 523, 524 

i. 361 

ii. 545 

ii. 818 

iii. 224 

i. 556 

iii. 403 

i. 107 

i. 325 

i. 198 

iii. 425 

i. 263 

ii. 130 

ii. 889 ; iii. 323, 374 

i. 168, 171 

i. 210 

ii. 325 

i. 315 

ii. 505 

ii. 740, 872 

ii. 941 

i. 486 

i. Ill 

ii. 524 

iii. Ill 

ii. 307, 327 

ii. 465 

i. 526 

i. 208 

ii. 458 

ii. 28 

iii. 321 

i. 168 

ii. 614 

ii. 466 

iii. 475 

i. 196 

iii. 145 

iii. 75 

i. 546, 547 

ii. 825, 833 

iii. 364, 454 

ii. 317 

i. 136 

ii. 915 

i. 147, 227 

i. 315 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Buckley v. Buckley 
v. Cater 
v. Furniss 
r>. Guildbank 
v. Wells 



i. 168, 170 

i. 230 

i. 645, 649, 653 

ii. 644; iii. 138 

i. 387 



Bucklin v. Thompson i. 612 

v. Ward i. 254 

Buckman v. Levi i. 574; iii. 193 

Buckmaster i>. Harrop iii. 12, 66, 349 

v. Smyth i. 578 

Buckmyr v. Darnall ii. 4 

Bucknam v. Barnum i. 176, 198 

?■. Goddard i. 016 

Buckner v. Finley i. 326 

v. Smyth i. 383 

Budd v. Busti iii. 297 

v. Fairmaner i. 622 

Buel v. Gordon iii. 464 

Buell v. Buckingham i. 95 

Bufe v. Turner ii. 558, 910 

Buffalo v. Holloway i. 120 

Buffalo Bank v. Fiske i. 651 

Buffalo Steam Engine Works v. Sun 

Ins. Co. ii. 475, 577 

Buffam v. Merry ii. 143 

Buffett v. Troy, &c. K. R. Co. ii. 237 

Buffington v. Curtis i. 329; ii. 411 

v. Quantin i. 636 

Buffinton v. Ulen i. 568 

Bufford v. Caldwell ii. 917, 927 

v. McNeely i. 222 

Buffum v. Buffum i. 168 

u. Fayette Ins. Co. ii. 541 

v. Green iii. 381, 382 

Building, &c. Assoc, v. Dorsey iii. 117 

Bulger v. Koche ii. 721 

Bulkley v. Barber ii. 387 

o. Dayton i. 20 

v. Derby Fishing Co. i. 157; ii. 521 

o. Honold ii. 393 

v. Morgan ii. 923 

Bull r. Bull ii. 82-1 

v. Parker ii. 77'.) 

r. Robison i. 573, 631 

Bullard, Ex parte iii. 417 

v. Roger Williams Ins. Co. ii. 5u6, 

511, 529 

v. Young ii. 212 

Bullen i'. Denning ii. 039 

v. Sharp i. 183 

Buller !•. Fisher ii. 183, 434 

v. Harrison i. 85, 80 

Bullett v. Bank of Penn. i. 331, 332 

Bullitt v. Musgrave ii. 843 

Bullock r. Babcock i. 35 i 

o. Boyd iii. 143, 157 

v. Bullock ii. 92 

v. Campbell iii. 98 

v. Dommitt i. 536; ii. 805 

v. Lamar, The ii. 431 

v. Smith iii. 76 

u. Taylor i. 279 

v. Wilson iii. 237 

Bulwer v. Horne ii. 772 

Bumgardner w. Circuit Ct. iii. 506 



Bunger v. Koop 

Bunker v. Athearn 
u. Miles 

Bunn v. Guy 
v. Ricker 
v. Thomas 



ii. 823 

i. 279 

i. 94 

i. 459, ii. 889 

ii. 761, 896, 897 

ii. 644 



v. Winthrop i. 377 ; iii. 315, 318 

Bunney v. Poyntz i. 529, 645; iii. 263, 274 

Buntin v. French iii. 294 

Burbank r. Beach i. 319 

c Rockingham Ins. Co. ii. 477, 577, 

583 

Burbridge r. Manners i. 318 

Burcli v. Breckinridge i. 408 

Burchard v. Tapscott ii. 394 

Burchell v. Marsh ii. 840 

Burchfield v. Moore ii. 854 

Burcle r. Eekart i. 180 

Burd v. Smith iii. 382, 383 

Burdell v. Denig ii. 328 

Burden v. Corning ii. 317 

c. Ferrers i. 12 

v. M'Elhenny iii. 69 

Burdeno v. Amperse ii- 79 

Burdett v. Willett iii. 438 

v. Withers i. 536; iii. 249 

Burdick v. Green ii. 757 

o. Post iii. 403 

Burgan v. Lyell i. 192 

Burge v. Cedar Rapids, &c. R. Co. ii. 815 

v. Coul i. 570 

Burgess, Ex parte iii. 414 

v. Atkins i. 234 

r. Burgess ii. 372, 373 

u. Clements ii. 158, 159 

c. Equitable Ins. Co. ii. 532 

v. Eve ii. 33 

u. Gray i. 118, 120 

v. Gun ii. 407 

v. Hately ii. 377 

r. Hills ii. 373, 375, 377 

h. Pollock i. 433 

v. Tucker ii. 875 

v. Vreeland i. 318 

v. Wheate iii. 295, 312 

Burgliart v. Angerstein i. 336, 337, 353 

v, Gardner i. 120, 128 

v. Hall i. 336 

Burgoyne v. Showier ii. 860 

Burk v. Baxter i. 548 

v. McClain iii. 409, 436 

v. Serrill iii. 309 

Burk '8 Appeal iii. 370 

Burke v. Cruger ii. 28 

r. Haley iii. 12, 14 

v. McKay i. 325 

</. Noble i. 27 

j>. Norwich R. R. Co. ii. 46 

v. Winkle i. 40T 

Burkett v. Trowbridge i. 387 

Burkhalter v. Second Bank ii. 757 

Burkholder v. Plank i. 457 

Burks v. Shain ii. 74 

Burleigh v. Gebhard Ins. Co. ii. 552 

v. Parton i. 208 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Burleigh v. Stott 
Burlen r. Shannon 
Burleson v. Burleson 
Burley v. Russell 
Burliner c Boyle 



iii. 87, 88, 90 

ii. 981 

ii. 939 

i. 357 

iii. 411 



Burlingame v. Brewster ii. 853 

v. Burlingame i. 349 ; iii. 247 

Burlingliame v. Robbing iii. "293 
Burlington Mut. Loan Assoc, v. Hei- 

der iii. 117 

Bnrraester v. Barrow i. 316, 320 

Burn r. Boulton iii. 83 

u . Miller ii. 655 

v. Morris i. 52 

Burnaby's case ii. 874 

Burnand v. Rodocanachi ii. 563 

Burnby v. Bollett i. 632 

Bumell b. Minot i. 34 

Burness v. Pennel i. 48, 163, 193 

Burnet v. Bisco i. 458 

Burnett v. Chetwood ii. 337, 342, 347 

v. Eufaula Ins. Co. ii. 576 

v. Phalon ii. 353, 371, 376 

v. Scribner ii. 940 

v. Snyder i. 183 

Burnhara v. Allen ii. 625 

v. Dorr ii. 702 

v. Gentrys iii. 118 

v. Noyes iii. 441, 478 

v. Tucker i. 290 

v. Webster i. 290 

v. Wood i. 290 

Burns v. Bryant i. 549 

v. Fletcher i 682 

v. Pilsbury i. Ill 

u. Poulson i. 113 

v. Rowland i. 304 

v. Thornburgh ii. 874 

Burnside v. Merrick i. 170 ; iii. 426 

Buron v. Denman i. 53, 549 

Burpee v. Sparliawk iii. 411 

Burr v. Cowperthwaite ii. 311 

v. Duryea ii. 311 

v. Foster ii. 524 

u. Sim ii. 613 

v. Stenton i. 531 

v. Wilcox i. 474; iii. 23 

v. Williams i. 566 

Burrall v. Acker i. 234 

v. Jacob i. 507 

v. Rice iii. 396, 508 

Burrell v. Jones i. 129 ; ii. 32 

v. North ii. 194 

Burridge v. Fortescue iii- 167 

v. Row ii- 610 

Burrill v. Stevens ii- 914 

Burritt v. Belfy iii- 203 

u . Saratoga Co. Ins. Co. ii. 523, 542. 

553, 554, 555, 556, 557, 558, 560 

Burrough v. Moss i. 290 ; ii. 877 

Burroughes v. Clarke ii- 59 

Burroughs v. Hanegan }■ 308 

v. Richmond _ __ '■ 435 

Burrows v. Jemino ii- 700, 737 

„, Pierce iii- 238, 242 



Burrows v. Trieber ii. 156 

v. Whitaker i. 564, 566 

Burrus v. Kyle i. 108; iii. 275 

v. Roulhac iii. 294 

Burschalter v. Erie Bank i. 296 

Burson v. Edwards iii. 180 

v. Kincaid i. 210 

Burt v. Dutcher i. 668 

v. Sternburgh ii. 867 

Burtis v. Thompson ii. 810 

Burton, Ex parte i. 463 

a. Blin ii. 670 
v. Chinn ii. 877 
„. G. N. R. Co. i. 479 
o. Griffiths i. 140 

b. Huglies ii. 103 
v. Issit i. 211 
b. Lockhert iii. 452 
v. Philadelphia, &c. Railroad i. 154 
o. Schermerhorn i. 495 
v. Stewart ii. 922 
v. Wilkinson ii- 152 

Burton's case iii. 116, 125, 149 

Burwell v. Mandeville's Ex'r i. 223, 220 

v. Knight . ii. 871 

Bury b. Bradford ii- 368 

b. Philpot i. 377 

Busby b. Clienault i- 228 

o. North Amer.Jns. Co. . ii. 616 

Busehman b. Wilson i. 536 

Bush, Ex parte [iii. 287 

b. Barnard i. 404 

b. Canfield iii. 220 

v. Clark i- 228 

v. Davies i- 563 

a. Dutcher iii- 212 
u. Lathrop i- 255, 258 
i: Livingston iii- 125, 127 

b. Marshall ii- 933 
b. Miller ii- 135 
b. Pettibone i- 434 
v. Shipman iii. 483 
o. Steinman i. 120 
v. Stevens iii- 31 

Bushee v. Allen iii- 23 

Bushell b. Beavan iii- 24 

v. Wheeler iii- 54 

Busk v. Davies i. 563, 560 

v. Royal Exch. Ass. Co. ii. 527 

Buskirk v. Purin iii. 269 

Buson v. Dougherty i- 578, 579 

Buss v. Gilbert _ iii. 470, 478 

Bussard v. Levering i. 313, 318, 321 

Bussfieid b. Bussfleld ii- 836 

Bussman v. Ganster i- 537 

Bustard's case iii- 243 

Butcher v. Dresser i- 227 

p. Easto iii- 441 

v. Forman ii- 463 

u. London & Southwestern Ry. 

Co. "• 188, 203 

b. Stewart ii. 694 ; iii. 25 
Butcher's and Drover's Bank b. 

Brown i- 271 

Butler, Ex parte iii- *24 



lii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Butler v. American Toy Co. i. 166 

v. Arrow, The ii. 410 

v. Basing ii. 194 

v. Breck i. 337, 383 

u. Buckingham i. 406 

v. Carver i I i - 435 

v. Chariton County Court iii. 481 

v. Heane ii. 273 

u. Hicks iii. 211 

v. Hildreth iii. 441 

v. Howe iii. 102 

v. Hunter i. 116 

v. Inneys ii. 875 

v. Knight i. 130 

v. Lee ii. 900, 905 

v. Northumberland iii. 219 

v. Paine i. 280 

v. Palmer iii. 486, 611 

v. Pennsylvania iii. 483 

v. Powis iii. 309, 351 

v. Rhodes iii. 477 

v. Stocking i. 208 

v. Thompson i. 583 

v. Tufts i. 616 

v. Wigge i. 487 

v. Wildman ii. 497 

v. Winters iii. 72 

Butman v. Monmouth Ins. Co. ii. 573 

Bntnam v. Abbot ii. 59 

Butt v. Ellett iii. 302 

v. Great Western R. R. Co. ii. 134 

Butterfield v. Forrester ii. 250 

v. Hartshorn i. 246, 248 

v. Hemsley i. 210 

o. Jacobs iii. 72, 76 

v. Kidder iii. 121 

Butterfill, Ex -parte iii. 470 

Butters v. Haughwout i. 557 

Butterworth r. McKinley i. 566 

v. Robinson ii. 327, 345 

Button v. Downham iii. 150 

v. Great Western Cotton Co. ii. 45 

Buttrick v Holden iii. 313 

Butts v. Cuthbertson ii. 392 

v. Dean ii. 756 

v. Newton i. 387 

Buxton, Ex parte iii. 422 

v. Bouglian iii. 285 

v. James ii. 348 

v. Jones i. 76, 311 

u. Lister iii. 321, 325, 328, 329 

BuzzpII v. LaconiaMan. Co. ii. 45 

Kyam v. Farr ii. 317 

Byars v. Doores i. 69 

Byassee v. Reese iii. 35 

Byers v. Cliapin i 630 

v. Pobey i. 12 

v. Farmers Ins. Co. ii. 476, 554 

v. Hussey ii. 28 

v. McClanahan i. 37, 123 

v. Van Deusen ii. 828 

Byrne v. Doughty i. 51 

Byrd v. Boyd ii. 37, 39 

v. Fox j. ] 85 

v. Odem ii. 908 



Byrne v. Crowninshield ii. 722 ; iii. 103, 

1 105 

v. Fitzhugh i- 13, 19, 22 

v. Jansen i- 617, 618 

v. La. State Ins. Co. ii- 532 

v. Van Tienhoven i. 515 

Byrnes v. National Ins. Co. ii. 516 

Byrnside v. Burdett i. 616 

Byron v. N. Y. State Printing Tel. 

Co. ii. 292 

Bywater v. Richardson i. 633 



C. 



C. & X. & L. M. R. R. Co. v. Webb ii. 46 

Cabarga v. Seeg ii. 686, 687 

Cabeen v. Buckenridge i. 523 

Cabell v. Vaughan i. 12 

Cabellaro v. Slater i. 480 

Cable v. Dakin iii. 218 

<>. Ellis iii. 223 

v. Rogers ii. 836, 837 

Cabot r. Haskins i. 467, 498 ; iii. 8 

v. Winsor i. 584, 589 

Cadens v. Teasdale i. 248 

Cadman v. Horner i. 522; iii. 371 

v. Lubbock ii. 775 

Cadmus, The ii. 467 

». Matthews ii. 466, 467 

Cadogan v. Kennett i. 569 

Cadwallader v. Howell ii. 709, 710 

v. Kroesen i. 216 

Cady ti. Goodnow iii. 132 

v. Shepherd i. 122 

Cage v. Acton ii. 852 

v. Phillips ii. 880 

v. Wilkinson iii. 285 

Cagger v. Lansing iii. 38 

Cahen v. Piatt iii. 219 

Cahill v. Bigelow ii. 11 ; iii. 64 

Cahoon v. Ring ii. 304, 314, 317 

Cailiffr. Danvers ii. 149 

Cain v. Spann i. 290 

Caine r. Horsefall ii. 633 

Caines v. Smith ii. 69, 809 

Cairnes v. Bleecker i. 52; ii. 827 

Cairns v. Cairns ii. 93 

Cairo Bank v. Crocker i. 574 

Calahan v. Babcock i. 645 

Calais Co. v. Van Pelt i. 80 

Calbreath r. Graey ii. 519 

Calcraft v. Harborough iii. 191 

Caldecott v. Smytlnes i. 544 

Calder v. Bull iii. 506 

v. Dobell i. 66 

v. Rutherford- i. 129 

Caldwell v. Alton i. 160 

v. Ball i. 594 

v. Bartlett i. 657 ; iii. 290, 337 

v. Brown iii. 177 

v. Carrington's Heirs iii. 347 

v. Cassidy i. 309 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



liii 



Caldwell b. Drake i. 404 

v. Murphy ji. 233 

v. New Jersey Steamboat Co. ii. 186 

v. Scott i. 208 

v. Shepherd i. 128 

v. St. Louis Ins. Co. ii. 497 

v. Tutt iii. 266 

v. Van Vliessingen ii. 324, 826 

v. Wentworth ii. 763 

v. West iii. 217 

Calhoun v. Richardson ii. 936 

v. Vechio i. 620 

Caliot o. Walker iii. 141, 143, 159 

Calisto, The ii. 384, 385 

Calkins v. Chandler i. 472; ii. 7, 10 ; 

iii. 27 

v. Lockwood iii. 49 

Call v. Calef ii. 907 

v. Hagger iii. 511 

v. Scott iii. 126 

v. Ward i. 343 

Callaghan v. Atlantic Ins. Co. ii. 521 

v. Callaghan iii. 314, 316 

v. Hallett i. 467 ; ii. 439 

v. Myers i. 561 

Callahan v. Caparata iii. 184 

i; McAlexander ii. 830 

o. Shaw iii. 190 

Callen v. Thompson ii. 569 

Callender b. Ins. Co. ii. 419 

Callisher-B. BischofEsheim i. 468 

Callo v. Brouncker ii. 38 

Callow v. Lawrence i. 297 

Calton v. Bragg iii. 112 

Calvert v. Carter ii. 829 

v. Gordon ii. 34 

v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 550, 557 

Calvin's case i. 448 

Calvo v. Davies i. 245; ii. 18, 28 

Calye's case ii. 158, 159, 160, 166 

Camarillo v. Fenlon i. 540 

Cambell v. Galbreath i. 384 

Cambioso v. Maffett ii. 894 

Cambridge, The ii. 466 

v. Anderton ii 505, 506 

Cambridge Ins. for Savings v. Lit- 

tlefield i. 463 ; ii. 936, 938 

Cambridge University b. Bryer ii. 330 

Camden v. McKoy i. 284 

o. Vail iii. 294 

Camden & Amboy Railroad Co. b. 

Baldauf ii. 256, 259, 268, 273 

v. Belknap ii. 192 

v. Burke ii- 234 

Cameron v. Baker i- 351 

v. Boyle iii- 176 

v. Francisco i- 228 

v. Little j- 550 

v. Montgomery iii- 382 

v. Scudder iii- 382 

v. Wynch iii- 216 

Camidge v. Allenby i. 298, 306 ; iii. 263 

Cammack v. Johnson i. 233, 235 

Cammer v. Harrison i- 313 

Camp b. Bates iii- 159 



Camp b. Camp 


i. 613 


b. Grant 


i. 228, 238 


v. Hamlin 


iii. 224 


v. Meyer 


iii. 440 


b. Pulver 


ii. 911 


v. Scott 


i. 296 


e. Western Union Tel 


Co. ii. 286, 




287, 288 


Camp's Appeal 


i. 263 


Canipanari v. Woodburn 


i. 76 


Camparree v. Brockway 


i. 284 


Campbell, Ex parte 


iii. 471 


v. Baker 


ii. 28 


v. Boggs 


iii. 99 


v. Bowen 


i. 199 


v. Butler 


i. 274, 284 


v. Butts 


ii. 866 


v. Colhoun 


i. 167 


r. Dearborn 


iii. 432 


b. Fleming 


ii. 923 


v. Galbreath 


ii. 78 


b. Gittings 


ii. 663 


v. Gullatt 


ii. 85 


v. Hall 


i. 86 


v. Hamilton i. 


22; ii. 878, 884 


v. Hicks 


i. 41, 57 


v. Innes 


ii. 525 


b. Jones 


ii. 662 


v. Knapp 


i. 317 ; ii. 8 



v. Leach 

v. Lewis i. 259, 261 

v. Mesier i. 32 

v. Morris iii. 15 

v. Morse ii. 172 

u. New England Ins. Co. ii. 556, 592, 

607 

b. Parker ii. 122 

v. Perkins iii. 466 

v. Read iii. 127 

v. Scott ii. 341 

v. Shields iii. 126 

b. Shipley i. 540 

v. Smith i. 245 

v. Stakes i. 356 

v. Walker iii. 422 

Campion v. Kille ii. 702 

Camus v. Citizens Co. i. 117 

Can v. Read ii. 748 ; iii. 425 

Canaan b. Hartley iii. 447 

Canal Bank v. Bank of Albany i. 298, 

300, 301 
v. Cox iii. 382 

Canal Fund b. Perry i. 483 

Candee u. Western Union Tel. Co. 

ii. 278 

Candler v. Fuller ii. 835 

Candor's Appeal ii. 52 

Candy, Ex parte iii. 419, 420 

Cane v. Com. Ins. Co. ii. 580 

Canfield v. Hard i. 223 

o. Vaughan ii. 3 

v. Watertown Ins. Co. ii. 588 

Canfranque v. Burnell iii. 391 

Canham v. Barry ii- 913 

v. Jones ii. 362, 366, 372 



liv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Canizares v. The Santissima Trinidad 

ii. 404 
Cannan v. Denew iii. 416 

v. Meaburn ii. 396, 454 

Cannel v. Buckle ii. 852 ; iii. 307, 310 

Cannell v. M'Clean iii. 247 

Cannon v. Alsbury i. 370, 481 

v. Mitcliell i. 524 

Canover v. Cooper i. 349 

Canter v. Amer. & Ocean Ins. Co. iii. 175 
Cantrel r. Graham iii. 449 

Cany v. PaLton i. 394, 395, 401 

Cape Ann Bank v. Burns ii. 862 

Cape Fear Bank v. Stinemetz i. 325 

Cape Fear Steamboat Co. i . Conner 

ii. 380 

Capel v. Tliornton i. 529; ii. 745 

Capen v. Alden ii. 766 

v. Barrows i. 26, 184 

v. Crovvell iii. 113 

, . Glover iii. 498 

v. Washington Ins. Co. ii. 530, 531 

Capper r. Dando iii. 414 

v. Spottiswoode iii. 295 

Capron c. Johnson iii. 396, 508 

Carbonel r. Uavies ii. 644 

Card v. Hope ii. 388 

Cardell v. Bridge ii. 873 

Carden v. General Cemetery Co. i 164 

Cardigan v. Armitage ii. 03 'J 

Cardinell v. Bennett i. 567 

Caitiffs v. Careless ii. 089, 692 

Carew v. Northrup ii. 882 

Carey v. Berkshire K. R. Co. i. 352 ; ii. 247 

r. Brown iii. 258 

Cargey v. Aitcheson ii. 831 

Carhart v. Austin ii. 308 

Cariss v. Tattersall ii. 860 

Carle v. Hall i. 120 

Carleton v. Leighton i. 560; iii. 431 

v. Woods ii. 049 

Carley o. Green i 397 

v. Jenkins i. 200 

v. Vance i. 309; ii. 773 

v. Wilkins i. 623, 020 

Carlisle v. Fleming iii. 302 

Carliss i.'. McLaughlin iii. 110 

Carl Johan, The ii. 4o4 

Carlton v. Bailey i. 296, 486 

u. Cummins i. 219 

?'. Mays i. 228 

Carman v. Beach i. 94 

i'. Elledge ii 14 

C'armichael v. Hughes i. 347 

('armichel n. Latimer i. 172 

Carnan v. Bowles ii. 336, 339, 341 

Carne v. Brice iii 456 

Carnegie c. Morrison i. 303, 497, 498 ; 

iii. 429 
Carnes v. Field ii. 043 

Carnochan v. Christie ii. 833 

v. Gould i. 627 

Carolan v. Brabazon iii. 375 

Carolina, The ii. 519 

Carolus, The ii 4G8, 469 



:enter v. American Ins. 


Co. i. 80 ; 




ii. 556 


u. Butterfield 


ii. 873, 882 


v. Carpenter 


i. 361 


v. Dodge 


i. 263, 460 


v. Graham 


i. 566 


v. Lockhart 


iii. 173 


v. Marnell 


iii. 435 



v. Mutual Ins. Co. ii. 540 ; iii. 329, 330 

v. Oaks i 283 

c. Providence Ins. Co. ii. 493, 563, 

564, 575, 577, 583 

v. Schermerhorn ii. 933 

v. Simmons ii. 934 

v. State iii. 74 

e. Stevens iii. 217 

v. Stilwell ii. 939 

v. Thompson i. 540 ; ii. 929 

v. Washington Ins. Co. ii. 559 

u. Woods i. 274 

Carpentier v. Gardiner iii. 189 

v. Mitchell iii. 68 

Carprew v. Canavan ii. 882 

Carpue u. L. & B. Railway Co. ii. 239, 

244 
Carr, Ex parte iii. 427 

v. Bartlett i. 483 

u. Burdiss iii. 441 

v. Clough i. 334, 361, 362 

v. Ellison i. 532 ; iii. 368 

v. Ilinchlifl ii. 882, 884 

r. Jackson i. 69, 71 

i. King i. 404 

u. London, &c. R. Co. ii. 934 

r. Rice ii. 314 

v Roberts i. 144 

r. Rowland i. 284 

v. Security Bank i. 303 

v. The L. & Y. Railway Com- 
pany ii. 250, 204, 268 
< . Welch ii. 858 
Carradine v. Collins i. 204 
Carraway v. Odeneal i. 470 
I Carrier v. Brannan ii. 896 
Carrington, Ex parte iii. 415 
v. Brents iii. 300 
v. Cantillon i. 211 
u. Ficklin ii 108 
u. Manning iii. 75 
v. Pratt ii. 403, 404 
v. Roots iii. 37, 04 
Carrol v. Blencow i. 407 
Carroll v. Boston Ins. Co. ii. 574, 577 
i'. New York &, N. H. R. R. Co. ii. 250 
v, St. John's Society i. 66 
.... Upton i. 320 
v. Weld i. 274, 275, 284 
v. Wiggins i. 579 
Carruth v. Paige iii. 72 
v. Walker i. 279 
Carruthers v. Sheddon ii. 689 
i'. Sydebotbam ii. 469 
f. West i. 290, 293 ; iii. 461 
Carshnre v. Huych iii. 92 
Carsley v. White ii. 430, 431 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lv 



Carson v. Baillie 
v. Blazer 
v. Carson 
v . Percy 
Carstairs v. Stein 
Carter v. Abbott 
v. Boebra 
v. Bradley 
v. Brick 
i'. Burley 
v. Burris 
v. Carter 
v. Crick 
v. Dean 
u. Flower 
u. Hamilton 
v. Hobbs 



i. 625 
i. 544 

iii. 499 

iii. 373 
iii. 119, 145, 469 

iii. 426 
ii. 481, 524, 598 
i. 323 
i. 621 
i. 319, 326 
i. 611 
i. 3!i0 
i. 629 

iii. 416 
i.307 
ii. 596 
ii. 163 



v. John Hancock Ins. Co. ii. 618 

v. Kungstead ii. 644, 045 

v. Lewiston Bank i. 141 

w. Rockett ii. 565 

v. Bollard i. 347 

v. Royal Exch. Ass. Co. ii. 533 

u. Scargill ii. 809 

v. Smith i. 309 

u. Southall i. 211 

v. Stennel i. 636 

v. Talcott ii. 746 

v. Toussaint i. 571 ; iii. 46 

v. United Ins. Co. i. 251 

v. Walker i. 637 ; ii. 922 

v. Whalley i. 189 

v. Willard iii. 444 

v. Wormald ii. 819 

Carteret v. Paschal i. 381 

Carthrae v. Brown i. 26 

Cartier v. Carlisle ii. 355, 357, 373, 376 

Cartland v. Morrison i. 563 

Cartwell v. The John Tyler ii. 461 

Cartwright v. Cooke i. 478 ; ii. 819 

v. Green ii. 719 

v. Rowley ii. 1S5 

Carvalho v. Burn iii. 435 

Carver v. Braintree Man. Co. ii. 315 

i). Hyde ii. 311 

v. Jackson ii. 931 

Carville v. Crane ii. 12 ; iii. 25 

Carwiek v. Vickery i. 213 

Cary v. Bancroft ii. 885 

v. Crisp iii. 434 

v. Curtis __ i. 85 

v. Faden ii. 342 

v. Gruman i. 636, 637 ; iii. 227 

v. Hotailing ii. 914 

v. Kearsley ii. 342, 344 

v. Longman ii. 336, 344 

v. Matthews i. 153 

o. Whiting i. 538 

Caryl v. Russell iii- 477 

Casamajor v. Strode i- 525, 526 

Casborne v. Dutton i- 280 

Casco, The Brig ii. 171, 183, 423 

Casco Bank v. Keen ii. 941 

Case v. Arnett i- 546 

v. Bank ii. 113 ; iii. 281 



Case v. Barber ii. 818 

v. Beauregard i. 240 

u. Boughton i. 457 

v. Brown ii. 327 

v. Ferris ii. 831 

v. Green ii. 787 

v. Hart i. 183 

v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 569, 571 

v. Howard ii. 14 

a. Mechanics Banking Associa- 
tion i. 273 
v. Northern, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 186 
v. Winship i. 613 
Casell, In re ii. 844 
Casey v. Brush i. 185 
v. Harrison ii. 863 
v. Inloes ii. 939 
Cash v. Gilles i. 638 
v. Young iii 458 
Cashaw v. North Western Ins. Co. ii. 494 
Cason v. Cheely iii. 60, 62 
Cassedy v. La. St. Ins. Co. ii. 511 
Cassel v. Cassel iii. 348 
v. Dowes i. 303 
Cassiday v. McKenzie i. 76 
Castalia, The ii. 466 
Castellain v. Preston ii. 564 
Castelli v. Boddington ii. 480, 879 
Castello v. Bank of Albany ii. 129 
Castle v. Candee i. 285 
v. Sworder iii. 262 
Castledon v. Turner ii. 093 
Castleman v. Holmes ii. 20 
Castling v. Aubert iii. 29, 30- 
Caswell v. Coare i. 636; iii. 227 
v. Davis ii. 353 
v. Districh i. 183 
v. Fellows i. 246 
v. Ware i. 263 
v. Wendell iii. 240 
Catavvissa R. R. Co. v. Armstrong ii. 47 
Cate i-. Cate iii. 219 
Cater v. Startute ii. 834 
Cates v. McKinney ii. 75 
Cathcart v. Robinson iii. 371 
Catherine, The ii. 396 
v. Dickinso^ ii. 429, 430 
Catherine, of Dover, The ii. 429 
Catlett v. Pacific Ins. Co. ii. 513, 519, 

567 

Catley v. Wintringham ii. 204 

Catlin v. Barnard i. 25 

v. Bell i. 88, 89, 109 ; ii. 894 

v. Hansen i- 329 

v. Hills ii- 250 

v. Martin '■ 386 

v. Springfield Ins. Co. ii. 546, 554, 

573, 586 

v. Ware i. 406 ; iii. 239 

Catling v. Skoulding iii. 69, 78, 79, 96 

Catoir v. American Ins. Co. ii. 615, 616 

Caton v. Rumney ii- 181 

v. Shaw ii. 13 ; iii- 118 

Cator v. Great Western Ins. Co. ii. 497 

Catron v. Tenn. Ins. Co. ii. 491, 559 



lvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Catskill Bank i>. Gray 


i. 176 


Chamberlin v. Collinson 


i. 49 


v. Messenger 


i. 211 


v. Griggs 


iii. 477 


Catt v. Howard 


i. 215 


0. Ingalls 


iii. 28 


Caudell v. Shaw 


i. 406 


v. Perkins 


ii. 757 


Caujolle v. Ferrie 


i. S77 


v. Shaw 


iii. 210 


Caul v. Gibson 


i. 484 


Chambers v. Crawford 


i. 630 


Caunt v. Ward 


iii. 455 


v. Davidson 


iii. 273 


Causten v. Burke 


i. 184 


v. Goldwin 


iii. 159 


Cavander r. Bulteel 


i. 172 


v. Griffiths 


i. 525 


Cave v. Coleman 


i. 623 


o. Jaynes 


ii. 793 


v. Hastings 


iii. 18 


v. Masterson 


ii. 163 




ii. 832 

i. 227 


v. Jliller 


i. 496 


Cavitt v. James 


v. Minchin 


i. 29 


Cavode v. McKelvy 


i. 468 


v. Robinson 


iii. 188 


Cawley v. Furnell 


iii. 72 


v. Snooks 


iii. 96 


Cayme v. Watts 


ii. 831 


v. Winn 


ii. 783 


Cayuga, The 


ii. 43.j 


Champant v. Ranelagh 


ii. 716 


Cayuga Bank v. Hunt i. 


303 ; iii. 145 


Champenois r. Port 


ii. 762 


Cayuga County Bank r. Warden i. 322 


Champion v. Bostick 


i. 181 ; ii. 246 


Cazc v. Baltimore Ins. Co. 


ii. 413, 419 


v. Brown 


iii. 308, 313 


v. Beilly 


ii. 446 


v. Griffith 


i. 284 


v. Richards 


ii. 446 


v. Plummer 


iii. 14 


Cazenove v. British Ass. Co. 


ii. 592 


i: Short 


ii. 791 


C. B. & Q. R. R. u. Payne 


ii. 816 


v. White 


ii. 663 


Cecil v. Mix 


i. 274, 284 


Champion, The, v. Jantzen 


ii. 392 


v. Blaistow 


iii. 477 


Champlin v. Butler 


ii. 400 


Celt, The 


ii. 429, 434 


v. Laytin 


iii. 355 


Center u. American Ins. Co. 


ii. 505, 507, 


r. Parish 


iii. 10 




508, 515 


v. Rowley 


ii. 655, 792 


v. McQuesten 


ii. 11 


Champney ;-. Blanchard 


i. 265 


Central Bank v. Allen 


i. 308, 313 


Chancellor v. Poole 


iii. 448 


v. Lang 


i. 278 


v. Wiggins 


i. 616 


v. Pindar 


ii. 815 


Chandelor v. Lopus 


i. 622, 625 


v. Richards 


i. 303 


Chandler, Ex parte 


iii. 417 


v. Shine 


ii. 16, 31 


Re 


iii. 416 


Central, &c. Corp. c. Lowell 


iii. 484 


v. Belden 


i. 328; ii. 413 


Centurion, The 


ii. 438 


c. Brainard 


i. 213 


Chace v. Brooks 


ii. 28 


u. Coe 


i. 56, 65 


Chadbourn v. Watts iii. 


127, 130, 135 


v. Drew 


i. 290 


Chaddock v. Vanness 


i. 275 


v. Pulton 


i. 640, 643 


Cliadwick v. The Dublin S. 


P. Co. ii. 432 


v. Herrick 


ii. 850 


r. Maddon 


i. 68 


; . Sanger 


i. 446 


Chaffee v. Boston Belting Co 


. ii. 319, 320, 


o. Siddle 


iii. 400 




321 


c: Sprague 


ii. 411 


v. Boston, &c. R. R. Co. 


ii. 817 


(•. Worcester Ins. Co. 


ii. 495, 574 


v. Jones 


i. 32, 34, 36 


Ohandos v. Talbot 


iii. 437 


r. Memphis / 
Chaffraix v. Harper 


i. 275 


Channel v. Passitt 


i. 174 


i. 108 


Channell v. Ditchburn 


iii. 87, 90 


Chalmers, Ex parte 


ii. 813 


Chanoine v. Fowler 


i. 323 


v. Lanior 


i. 287, 289 


Chanter v. Hopkins 


i. 603, 631 


Chamberlain v. Bagley 


iii. 168 


v. Lcese 


i. 19, 23 


c. Carlisle 


ii. 866 


Chapel v. Bull 


iii. 245 


v. Chamberlain 


i. 157 


v. Hickes 


i. 494 ; ii. 655 


v. Chandler 


ii. 242 


Chapin v. Clemitson 


ii. 634 


i: Cuyler 


iii. 79 


v. Dobson 


ii. C84 


v. Parr 


i. 570 


v. Lapham 


i. 474 


v. Harrod 


ii. 475 


v. Merrill 


iii. 24 


v. Mill. & Miss. R. R. C( 


ii. 46 


v. Thompson 


iii. 127 


v. N. H. Ins. Co. 


ii. 586 


v. Warden 


iii. 75 


v. Reed 


ii. 452 


Chaplin v. Hawes 


ii. 250 


v. Walker 


i. 186 


v. Rogers 


iii. 46, 47 


v. Ward 


ii. 431 


Chapline v. Moore 


i. 383 


p. Western Transp. Co. 


ii. 186 


Chapman v. Black iii. 127, 128, 129 


v. Williamson 


i. 145 ; ii 74 


v. Chapman 


iii. 297 


Chamberlaine v. Turner 


ii. 681 


r. Collins 


ii. 6 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lvii 



pman v. Crane 


ii. 56 


v. Dalton 


ii. 637, 640, 800 


v. Derby 


iii. 439 


v. Eames 


i. 174 


v. Erie R. Co. 


ii. 46 


v. Forsyth 


iii. 478 



v. Great Western E. Co. ii. 152 

v. Ingram iii. 224 

v. Keane i. 322 

v. Koops iii. 298 

v. Lampliire iii. 416 

v. Lemon i. 407 

v. Murch i. 023 

u. Partridge iii. 12, 13 

e. Robertson ii. 714, 715; iii. 123 

v. Searle i. 645; iii. 263 

v. Secomb ii. 633 

v. Shepard i. 505 

v. Speller i. 615 

v. Sutton ii. 24; iii. 17 

v. Thames Manuf. Co. iii. 234 

v. Walton i. 91 

Chappel v. Brockway ii. 891 

v. Marvin i. 570 ; iii. 48 

Chappell v. Purday ii. 349 

Chappie v. Cooper i. 337 

v. Durstor ii. 881 ; iii. 108 

Chard v. Fox i. 322 

Charles, Ex parte iii. 478 

v. Andrews iii. 293 

v. Branker ii. 772 

v. Marsden i. 293 ; iii. 451 

Charles River Bridge v. Warren 

Bridge ii. 638 ; iii. 488, 490, 506 

Charleston S. B. Co. v. Bason ii. 173 

Charlestown v. Hubbard i. 500 

Charleton v. Cotesworth ii. 453 

Charlotte, The ii. 436 

Charlton v. Lay i. 492 

v. Wood i. 110 

Charnley v. Winstanley i. 76 ; ii. 848 
Charter v. Trevelyan i. 94 ; iii. 107 

Chartered Bank v. Dickson i. 295 

Chartered Mercantile Bank v. Nether- 
lands, &c. Co. ii. 434 
Charters v. Bayntun i. 338 
Chase v. Bradley ii. 633 
o. Debolt i. 69 
v. Denny iii. 302 
v. Dow iii. 716 
v. Dwinal i. 446 
v. Eagle Ins. Co. ii. 527, 528, 530, 

534 
v. Garvin i. 184, 186 

v. Goble iii. 441 

v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 557 

v. Ostrom i- 90 

v. Phcenix Ins. Co. ii- 618 

u. Stevens i. 182 

u. Strain ii- 885 

u. Walker ii- 319 

v. Washburn ii. 143, 147 

v. Wash. Ins. Co. ii. 169, 485, 526, 

566 
v. Westmore ii. 148 ; iii. 262, 266 



Chase v. Wingate i. 546 

Chase's Ex'r v. Burkholder i. 487 

v. Washington Ins. Co. ii. 169 

Chasemore i\ Turner iii. 76 

Chastain v. Smith iii. 347 

Chater v. Beckett i. 486 ; iii. 19 

Chattahoochee Bank v. Schley ii. 99 

Chattock v. Shawe ii. 598 

Chatzel v. Bolton ii. 864 

Chauneey v. Jackson ii. 392 

Chaurand v. Augerstein ii. 666 

Cheddick ». Marsh iii. 168, 173 

Chedworth v. Edwards i. 96 

Cheek v. Roper i. 302 

Cheesman v. Excell ii. 156 

v. Ramby ii. 889 

Cheetham v. Hampson ii. 136 

p. Ward ii. 852 

Cheever v. Wilson ii. 737 

Cheminant v. Thornton ii. 779 

Cheney, In re iii. 425, 429 

v. Arnold ii. 85 

a. B. &M. R. R. Co. ii. 273 

Clienot v. Lefevre iii. 106 

Chenowith v. Dickinson ii. 149 

Cheriot v. Foussat ii. 742 

Cherry v. Boultbee iii. 429, 469 

v. Clements i. 408 

v. Heming i. 124; ii. 50; iii. 41 

Chesapeake, The ii. 435 

Chesapeake Co. v. Blair i. 330 

Chesapeake Ins. Co. v. Allegre ii. 484 

Chesapeake & Ohio Canal v. Knapp 

ii. 61 
Cheshire v. Barrett i. 361, 367 

r. Taylor i. 315 

Cheshire Bank v. Robinson ii. 828 

Chessman r. Whittemore ii. 862 

Chester v. Dickerson i. 167 

Chester Glass Company v. Dewey i. 482 ; 

ii. 941 
Chesterfield v. Jansen iii. 116 

Chesterfield Manuf. Co. v. Dehon iii. 439, 

441 
Chesterman i\ Lamb i. 636 ; iii. 227 

Chestnut Hill Turnpike v. Rutter i. 154 
Chevalier v. Lynch iii. 406 

Chevallier v. Patton ii. 173 

v. Straham ii. 169, 172, 177 

Chew v. Morton ii. 939 

Cheyney's case ii. 690 

Chicago !'. Sheldon ii. 625 

Chicago Bank v. Bayley i. 579 

Chicago Marine Bank v. Wright i. 579 
Chicago Packing Co. v. Tilton i. 030 

Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy R. R. 

Co. v. Dewey ii- 250 

Chicago, &c. Dock Co. u. Dunlap ii. 881 
p."Kinzie iii- 65 

Chicago, &c. R. R. Co. v. Bensley ii. 203 
v. Dana i- 511 

u. Flagg iii- 186 

v. Flexman ii- 244 

v. Iowa ii- 184 

v. Merrill ii- 188 



Iviii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Chicago, &c. R. R. Co. v. Montfort ii. 227 

v. Nortliern Illinois, &c. Co. iii. 106 

v. Ponclrom ii. 817 

v . Sawyer ii. 203 

i'. Schoeneman iii. 373 

v. Shea ii. 213 

v. Swett iii- 235 

Chichester v. M'Intire iii- 333 

Chick v. Fillsbury i. 318 

Checkering v. Fowler ii. 205, 207, 208, 416 

v. Globe Ins. Co. ii. 010 

Chicopee Bank v. Chapin i. 292 

v. Eager ii. 669 

Chilcott v. Trinkle i. 344 

Child c. Comber iii. 350 

... Eureka Works i. 131 

i". Godolphin iii. 346 

v. Hardy man i. 394 

v. Horden ii. 801 

v. Morley i. 32 

... Sun Mutual Ins. Co. ii. 531, 666, 

672 

Childe Harold, The ii. 462 

Childers v. Deane iii. 139, 159, 161 

Childs, In re iii. 440 

t. Barnum iii. 18 

i: Childs ii. 91 

v. Monins i. 135, 142 

v. Wyman i. 283 

Chiles v. Drake iii. 184 

v. Nelson i. 514 

v. Smith ii. 486 

Chilson v. Philips i. 349 

Chilton v. Brarden iii. 294 

China, The ii. 435 

Chinn v. Hamilton iii. 113 

Chion, Er parte iii. 435, 439 

Chipman ;>. Poster i. 55 

v. Morrill i. 32 

Chippendale v. L. & Y. Railway Co. ii. 204 

v. Thurston ii. 791; iii. 121, 149 

v. Tomlinson iii. 454 

Chisholm v. Gadsden ii. 918 

C'liism v. Woods i. 010 

Chiswell v. Gray i. 238 

Chitty v. Naish ii. 7C2, 705 

c. Selwyn ii. 532 

Choen v. Sorter i. 408 

Choice v. Moseley ii. 790 

Cholmondeley v. Clinton i. 127; ii. 034; 

iii. 354 

Chomqua v. Mason iii. 104 
Clioppin i: New Orleans, &c. R. R. 

Co. iii. 184 

b. Wilson i. 220 
Chorley v. Bolcot ii. 60 
Chouteau v. Allen i. 80 

c. Leach i. 59; ii. 173 
v. Merry i. 407 
i\ Steamboat ii. 194 

Choynski v. Cohen ii. 353 

Chrisman v. Partee iii. 369 

Christian v. Clark iii. 331 

v. Coombe ii. 530 

Christiana, The ii. 468 



Christie v. Griggs ii. 234, 239, 242, 243 

v. Lewis ii- 421 

v. Sawyer i- 130 

v. Simpson iii- 12 

v. Trott ii. 423 

Christman v. Moran ii. 844 

Christoffersen v. Hansen i. 66, 68 

Christophers v. Garr iii. 104 

v. Sparke iii. 67 

Christy v. Barnhart iii. 349 

v. Douglas i. 128; iii. 285 

v. Flemington iii. 72, 77, 92 

v. Murphy ii. 361, 378 

v. Row ii. 414 

v. Smith ii. 155 

Chrysler r. Renois i. 279 

Chudleigh's case i. 133 

Chumar o. Wood i. 569 

Church v. Barlow i. 294, 321 

u. Brown i. 538 

c. Clark i. 303 

(,. Feterow ii. 785 

v. Hubbart ii. 496 

v. Imperial Gas Co. i. 154 

v. Knox i. 233, 234 

c. Landers i. 386 

v. Mar. Ins. Co. i. 93, 150 

v. Roper ii. 834 

v. Sparrow i. 205 

Churchill v. Hulbert ii. 665 

v. Hunt iii. 200 

r. Palmer i. 62 

v. Rosebeck ii. 250 

v. Sutcr iii. 153 

Churchwardens of St. Saviour i. 260 ; 

ii. 632, 636, 638 

Churton r. Douglas ii. 368, 369 

Chusan, The ii. 385 

Chute i'. Pattee ii 19 

Cicero v. Clifford i. 330 

Cincinnati <.. Marcus ii. 213 

v. Rice ii. 901 

v. Spratt ii. 226 

Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Bakewell ii. 508 

v. May ii. 527 

Cincinnati, &c. R. R. Co. v. McCool 

ii. 197 

Citizens Bank ;;. Culver iii. 285 

v. Howell i. 327 

v. Nantucket Steamboat Co. ii. 181, 

187, 190, 194 

v. Payne i. 292 

v. Richmond ii. 853 

Citizens Ins. Co. c. Doll i. 176 

Cilizens Security Co. v. Uhler iii. 117 

City Bank v. Barrow i. 102 

v. Cutter ii G69, 771, 776 

v. First Bank ii. 853 

v. Phelps ii. 27 

City Bank of Brooklyn v. MeChes- 

ney i. 191 

City Council v. Benjamin ii. 905 

City Discount Co. o. McLean ii. 766 

City Fire Ins. Co. v. Corlies ii. 571 

City Ius. Co. v. Bricker ii. 470 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lix 



City of Buffalo v. Holloway i. 120 

City of Cincinnati v. Rice ii. 001 

City of Edinburgh, The ii. 439 

City of London v. Mitford iii. 323 

v. Pugh iii. 328 
City of Worcester v. Worcester Ins. 

Co. ii. 553 

Civilita and The Restless, The ii. 433 

Clafflin v, Lenheim i. 75 

Claflin r. Boston, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 197 

v. Meyer ii. 134 

v. Ostrom ii. 3 

Clagett v. Kilbourne i. 167 

v. Salmon i. 210, 325 

Claghorn v. Cullen iii. 486 

Clamorgan v. Lane i. 363, 366 

Clancey v. Robertson ii. 37 

Clancy v. Piggott iii. 16, 17 

Clanrickard v. Sidney ii. 637 

Clap, Re ii. 756 

Clapham v. Cologan ii. 484, 518 

v. Moyle ii. 642 

v. Shillits iii. 370 

Clapp v. Hale ii. 903 

v. Rogers i. 230 

v. Smith ii. 903 

v. Thomas iii. 453 

u. Young ii. 430 

Clara, The ii. 430, 431 

Clare v. Maynard iii. 227 

Clarence v. Marshall ii. 870 

Clarence Railway Co. v. Great North 

of England Railway Co. ii. 664 

Claridge v. Mackenzie i. 541 ; ii. 940 

Clarion Bank v. Gruber iii. 124 

Clarisse, The ii. 437, 440 

Clark, Ex parte ii. 454 

v. Allen ii. 609 

v. Babcock i. 536 

a. Badgley iii. 121, 132 

v. Baker ii. 650, 676 

v. Barlow iii. Ill 
v. Barnwell ii. 172, 173, 183, 216, 407, 
410, 412, 414 

«. Bayer i. 407 

v. Bigelow i. 316 

v. Bowen i. 216 ; ii. 872 

v. Boyd i. 272, 285 

«. Bradshaw iii. 69 

v. Burdett ii. 23 

v. Burns ii. 188 

v. Burt ii. 829 

v. Bush ii. 16, 850 

v. Chamberlin iii. 15 

v. Caldwell iii. 373 

«. Calvert iii. 427, 454 

v. Clark ii. 357, 371, 372, 375, 
736 ; iii. 500 

v. Cox i- 386 

v. Crabtree «• 423 

v. Cushing i- 232 
v. Dales i. 514; iii. 220 

v. Depew i- 264 

v. Des Moines i. 160 

v. Dibble i- 186 I 



ark v. Dignum 




i. 89 


v. Dinsmore 




i. 29 


v. Dutcher 




iii. 75 


B.Ely 




i. 292 


v. Farmers Man. 


Co. 


i. 331 


v. Eaxton 




ii. 179, 259 


v. Flint 




iii. 313 


v. Foxcroft 




ii. 5 


v. Gamwell 




i. 468 


v. Garfield 




i. 151 


v. Gordon 




i. 154 


v. Graham 




i. 12.'! 



v. Guardians of Cuckfield Union 

i. 151 
v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 558, 580 

v. Hatch iii. 397 

v. Hayward i, 579 

v. Hougham i. 146 ; iii. 69, 70, 92 
v. Houghton i. 207 

u. Iselin iii. 421 

v. Jones iii. 201 

o. Keliher i. 548 

v. King i. 279 

v. Kingsley iii. 293 

v. Lyman i. 231, 234 

v. Man. Ins. Co. ii. 473, 524, 554, 557 
v. Marsiglia ii. 919 

v. Massachusetts F. & M. Ins. 

Co. ii. 418, 510 

v. Mauran i. 645 

u. McDonald ii. 235 

v. Meriam i. 284 

v. Moody iii. 98 

v. Morse — i. 569 

v. Needles ii. 192 

v. New Eng. Ins. Co. ii. 493, 575, 
583, 586, 587 
u. Nichols iii. 60 

o. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 490, 491 

v. Parr iii. 240, 242 

v. Pendleton iii. 32, 43, 188 

v. Phcenix Ins. Co. ii. 588 

v. Pinney ii. 632, 789 ; iii. 211, 212, 
220, 231 
v. Ralls i. 617 

o. Reed i. 213 

o. Roberts i. 87 

v. Rochester, &c. R. R. Co. iii. 306 
v. Rogers ii. 860 

v. Russel i. 472 ; ii. 849 

v. Schneider i- 282 

o. Shee i. 329; iii. 137 

v. Sickler ii- 28 

v. Sigourney i. 272, 285 ; iii. 88 

v. Small i. 458 ; ii. 6 

v. Smith ii- 60, 745, 747 

v. Spence ii. 134, 153, 277, 280 

v. Swift i- 144 

v. Tarbell ii- 702 

v, United Ins. Co. ii. 487 

v. Whitaker iii- 211 

v. White iii. 381, 382 

v. Woodruff ii- 647 

v. Wright iii- 14 

Clark's Ex'rs v. Van Riemsdyk i. 49 



lx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Clarke, Ex parte 
v. Courtney 
v. Dodge Healy, The 
v. Fell 
v. Gordon 
v. Grant 
i>. Henty 
v. Hogeraan 
v. Hutchins 
v. Leslie 

t>. Mayor of N. Y. 
o. Minot 
v. Morey 
v. Perrier 
v. Price 
v. Remington 



iii. 414- 

i. 5o 

ii. 437, 43.S 

iii. 40!) 

i. 304 

iii. 354, 371 

i. 323 

i. 200 

i. 574 

i. 338 

ii. 03 

iii. 429, 458 

i. 450 

i 88 

iii. 360 

ii. 15, 795 



Rochester, &c. R. R. Co. iii. 307, 



v. Spence 

v. Thompson 
Clarkson v. De Peyster 

u. Edes 

i'. Garland 

i'. Hanvvay 

v. Parker 

v. Phcenix Ins. Co. 
Clason v. Bailey 

v. Simmonds 

i'. Smith 
Clawson r. Clawson 
Clay, Ex parte 

v. Cottrell 

!•. Crowe 

v. Edgerton 

o. Harrison 

c. Huston 



i!) 

ii. 134, 64'J 

i. 254 

i. 137 

ii. 423 

iii. 116, 136 

i. 458 

iii. 454 

ii. 447, 509 

iii. 7, 9, 365 

ii. 634, 535 

ii. 523 

ii. 78 

i. 238 

i. 20S, 290 

i. 331 

ii. 31 

i. 0-12, 644 

iii. 233 

v. Rufford iii. 333, 345, 308 

r. Smith iii. 394, 397, 508 

v. Wood ii. 248, 250 

Clay Ins. Co. <•. Beck ii. 559 

r. Huron, &e. Co. ii. 556 

Clayards v. Dethick ii. 250 

Clayton v. Adams i. 407 

v. Andrews iii. 59 

v. Brown ii. 78 

c. Gosling iii. 402 

v. Gregson ii. 667, 672, 675 

v. Harmony, The ii. 43,8 

v. Hunt ii. 273 

r. Kynaston i. 27 

u. Lord Nugent ii. 680, 681 

v. Phipps i. 316 

v. Stone ii. 330, 334, 335 

v. Wardell ii. 83, 85 

Clayton's case ii. 7C6 ; iii. 150 

Cleave v. Jones iii. 84 

Cleaves v. Foss iii. 12 

v. Stockwell i. 91 

Cleem v. Brewer ii. 318 

Clegg i». Levy ii. 700 

Cleghorn v. Ins. Bank of Columbus 

i. 238 

o. N. Y., &e. P.. Co. i. 113 

Clemens, In re iii. 410 

Clement, The ii. 431, 432 



Clement v. Clement I 248, 


256; ii. 785 


y. Durgin 


ii. 


827, 835 


v. Henley 




i. 22 


v. Mad dicks 




ii. 361 


v. Mattison 


i. 


393, 396 


v. Reid 




i. 522 


r. Repard 




i. 290 


Clement & Co. v. Meserole 




iii. 219 


Clementi v. Goulding 




ii. 334 


Clements v. Smith's Adm'rs 




i. 638 


t: Wells 




i. 539 


!■. Williams 




i. 340 


Clemontson v. Blessig 




ii. 425 


Clemson v. Davidson 


ii 


407, 417 


Clendaniel v. Tuckerman 


ii. 


415, 425 


Clenes v. Willoughby 




i. 532 


Clerk v . Blackstock 




i. 11 



v. Tailors of Exeter ii. 888 

Clerment v. Tasburgh i. 522 ; iii. 371 

Cleu v. McPherson i. 587, 602 

Cleve !■. Mills iii. 406 

Cleveland v. Covington i. 33 

v. State Bank ii. 130 

v. Union Ins. Co. ii. 485 

v. Williams i. 76 

Cleveland, Col. & C. R. R. Co. v. 

Kearny ii. 46 

Cleveland, &c. R. R. Co. v. Curran ii. 271 

Clevenger v. Dunaway iii. 181, 183 

Cleworth v. Pickford ii. 880 

Clews !•. Bank of New York ii. 944 

r. Traer ii. 922 

Clifford v. Burton i. 391 

c. Hunter ii. 527, 628 

e. Laton i. 387, 394 

v. Luhring iii. 29 

v. Parker ii. 860 

v. Reilly i. 539 

v. Richardson iii. 199 

*. Turrell ii. 685, 686 ; iii. 311, 344 

Clift ti. Schwabe ii. 604 

Clinan v. Cooke iii. 13, 18, 343, 350, 354, 

359 

Cline c. Myers iii. 219 

r. Templeton i. 470 

Clinen v. Cooke i. 46, 123 

Clinton v. Eddy ii. 881 

c Hope Ins. Co. ii. 502 

r. York i. 349 

Clinton Wire Cloth Co. v. Gardner i. 535 

Clippinger v. Hepbaugh ii. 895 

Clive ii. Beaumont iii. 334 

Clodfelter v. Cox i. 258 

Clopham v. Gallant iii. 424, 435 

Clopper v. Poland ii. 11 

v. Union Bank of Maryland i. 294 ; 

ii. 850 

Clopton v Cozart ii. 915 

v. Hall ii. 7, 8 

Close v. Close ii. 91 

Clothier v. Webster i. 98 

Cloud c. Hamilton i. 349 

v. Whiting ii. 944 

Clough v. Davis ii. 905 

Clouser v. Clapper ii. 93 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxi 



Clouston v. Barbiere 


i. 284 


Cloutman v. Tunison 


ii. 466, 467 


Clowes v. Brooke 


i. 338 


o. Clowes 


ii. 90 


v. Higginson 


iii. 344 


v. Van Antwerp 


i. 150 


Clubb v. Hutson 


i. 273 


Clugas i\ Penaluna 


ii. 700 


Clum v. Brewer 


ii. 319 


Clute f. Barron 


i. 95 


v. Carr 


iii. 40 


u. Robinson 


ii. 790 


v. Wiggins 


ii. 106, 167 


Coakley v. Weil 


iii. 298 


Coalter v. Coalter 


iii. 95, 96 


Coates v. Chaplin 


iii. 54 


v. Gealach 


i. 410 


v. Holbrook 


ii. 357, 373, 375 


v. Lewis 


ii. 745, 938 


v. Sangston 


ii. 684 


v. Stephens 


i. 635 



v. The Mayor, &c. of New York 

ii. 510 

v. Williams i. 174 

v. Wilson i. 337 

Coats v. Holbrook i. 449 

Cobb, Ex parte iii. 452 

v. Abbot ii. 246 

v. Becke i. 90 

v. Blanchard ii. 410 

v. Doyle i. 292 

v. Hall i. 47 

v. Hatfield ii. 923 

v. Haydock ii. 875 

v. HI. Cent. R. Co. i. 579 

v. Knapp i. 68 

... New England Ins. Co. ii. 482, 486, 

528, 847 

v. Rice iii- 403 

v. Selby ii- 665 

v. Symonds iii. 416 

v. Titus iii- 158 

v. Wood ii- 843 

Cobban v'. Downe ii- 190 

Cobbett v. Hudson i. 386 

Cobble v. Tomlinson i. 222 

Cobden v. Bolton ii. 273 

Cobhara, Ex parte i- 237 

Coburn v. Pickering i. 569 

v. Ware i- 495 

v. Webb i. 65 ; ii. 853, 861 

Cocheco Bank v. Haskell ii. 113 

Cocheco Manuf. Co. v. Whittier ii. 638 

Cochran v. Fisher ii- 520 

v. Nebeker ii- 853 

v. Perry i- 222 

v. Retberg ii- 424, 666 

Cock v. Bunn ii- 799 

u. Goodfellow iii- 381, 382, 383 

v. Honychurch ii- 818 

Cockburn v. Alexander iii- 165 

v. Ashland Lumber Co. iii- 199 

Cocke v. Bank of Tennessee i- 212 

v. Chaney «• lf» 

Cockell v. Taylor i- 466 



Cocker v. Franklin Hemp & Flax 

Manuf. Co. i. 581 ; ii. 794 

Cockerill v. Cincinnati Ins. Co. ii. 471 

Cocking v. Fraser ii. 505, 509 

v. Ward iii. 38 

Cockle v. London, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 251 

Cockran v. Irlam i. 89, 109 

Cockroft v. N. Y., &c. R. Co. iii. 21!) 

Cockshott v. Bennett ii. 477 

Cockson v. Ogle ii. 828, 829 

Cocrill v. Sparkes iii. 74 

Coddington v. Davis i, 308, 315 

v. Goddard ii. 683 

v, Idell i. 187 

Coder r. Huling i. 168 

Codman v. Hall i. 534 

v. Rogers iii. 95 

Coe v. Clay i. 531 

v. Smith ii. 36 

v. Vogdes i. 532 

Cofer v. Flanagan ii. 612 

Coffee v. Ruffin ii- 815 

Coffeen v. Brunton ii. 335, 370, 371, 373, 

378 

Coffin v. Coffin iii. 98 

v. Dunham i. 403 

v. Jenkins i. 196, 442 ; ii. 466, 407 

v. Lunt i. 549 

v. Newburyport Ins. Co. ii. 531, 532 

v. Ogden ii. 304 

v. Storer ii. 420, 424 

Coffman v. Winslow ii. 10 

Cofield v. Clark i. 508 

Coggeshall v. Am. Ins. Co. ii. 487 

Coggs v. Bernard i. 470 ; ii. 97, 98, 99, 109, 

110, 120, 169, 171, 172, 237 ; iii. 253 

Cogill v. H. & N. H. R. R. Co. i. 579 

Cognac, The ii. 402 

Cogswell, Ex parte iii- 419 

v. Dolliver iii- 79 

v. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 497 

Cohea v. Hunt i- 303 

Cohen v. Dry Dock i. 113 

o. Dupont i- 542 

v. Frost ii- 180 

v. Hume ii. 181 

v. New York Ins. Co. ii- 601 

v. New York Mutual Ins. Co. ii- 615 

v. Wright i- 125 

Coit v. Commercial Ins. Co. ii. 667 

v. Houston ii. 773, 818 

v. Smith "• 484 

v. Starkweather ii- 690 

v. Tracy iii- 88 

Coit & al. v. Houston ii- 780 

Coke v. Whorwood ii. 826 ; iii. 188 

Colbeck r. Girdler's Co. i- 536 

Colbourn v. Dawson ii- 684, 694 

v. Duncomb 'i- 348 

v. Morrill i- 541, 542 

v. Simms i'- 349 

Colby v. Colby ii- 877 

v. Hunter "• 52 1 

v. Norton "• 9«j 

v. Reed »• 802 



lxii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



i. 335, 353 

i. 61(3 

i. 406 

ii. 634 

iii. 230 

iii. 382 

i. 579 

ii. 770 

ii. 937 

ii. 709 

ii. 67, 08 

i. 569 

iii. 16 

ii. 212, 253, 251, 255, 

256, 258, 250, 203 

ii. 030 

ii. 634 

ii. 861 

i. 280; iii. 104, 105 

iii. 324 

i. 570 

iii. 123, 143 

i. 220 



Colcock v. Ferguson 

v. Goode 
Colcord v. Swan 
Coldham r. Showier 
Coldren v. Miller 
Cole v. Albers 

t'. Berry 

v. Blake 

v. Bolaid 

v. Cheshire 

V. Cottingham 

v. Davies 

v. Dyer 

v. Goodwin 

v. Green 
v. Hawes 
«. . Hills 
u. Jessup 
v. Kernot 
v. Kerr 
v. Lockhart 
v. Moxley 

v. Northwestern Bank i. 102 ; ii. 133 

v. O'Neill i. 409 

u. Pennoyer i. 335 

v. Robbins i- 435 

v. Ross iii. 231, 232 

v. Sackett ii. 757 

a. Saxby i- 364 

v. Taylor ii. 686 

.,. Trull ii. 764 

v. Turner i. 20 

v. Tyng ii. 153 

v. Wade i. 134 

v. White iii. 349 

Colegate v. Bacheler ii. 888 

Coleman v. Carpenter i. 318 

v. Chester iii. 39 

v. Eyre iii. 39 

v. Fobes iii. 88 

c. Frazer i. 433 

u. Garrigues iii. 11 

v. Harriet, The ii. 402 

v. Lansing ii. 760 

v, Meade i. 109 

v. Pearee i. 96 

c. Riches i. 44; ii. 190, 409 

v. Sherwin i. 12 

v. Waltham ii. 333 

Coles v. Bank of England ii. 942 

v. Bowne iii. 10, 354 

v. Coles i. 169, 207 

v. Gurney i. 211 

v. Hulme ii. 634 

v. Marine Ins. Co. ii. 496, 532, 535 

v. Robins iii. 458 

u. Soulsby ii. 824 

v. Trecothick i. 46, 93, 95, 123, 460, 

522, 523 ; iii. 8, 12, 13, 316, 429 

v. Turner ii. 658 

v. Wight iii. 458 

?>. Wright iii. 434 

Colgin v. Henley i. 470 

Colgrove v. N. Y. & H. R. R. Co. ii. 233 



Colgrove v. Tallman 
Collamer v. Day 
Collard v. Groom 

v. Sampson 
Colledge v. Harty 

v. Horn 
Collen v. Wriglit 
Collenburg, The 
Collet v. Podwell 
C'ollett n. Morrison 



ii. 28 

ii. 896 

i. 526 

iii. 335 

ii. 520 

iii. 09, 75 

i. 69 

ii. 418 

ii. 834 

ii. 475, 599 



(.'oilier v. Baptist Educational Society 

i. 483, 484 

a. Jenkins iii. 357 

w.NiMU iii. 125, 128 

Collingburne v. Mantell ii. 819 

Collinge v. Ileywood iii. 98 

Collingridge v. Royal Exchange Ass. 

Co. ii. 5Q2 

Collingwood t. Pace i. 448 

Collins, In re iii. 415 

i\ U. & E. R. Ry. Co. ii. 226 

v. Barrows i. 532, 633 

v, Blantern i. 486; ii. 685 

v. Bradbury i. 281 

a. Bums ii. 151 

<■. Butler i. 311 

t. Canty i. 550 

u. Cliamp i. 150 
v. Charlestown Ins. Co. ii. 549, 556 

v. Collins i. 397 ; ii. 92 

v. Decker i. 167 

l\ Denison ii. 917 

v. Evans i. 71 ; ii. 016 

v. Everett i. 274 

v. Forlies ii. 144; iii. 435 

v. Godefroy i. 467 

v. Hathaway iii. 286 

v. Lemastera i. 12 

v. Locke ii. 893 

v. Martin i. 103, 272, 286, 292 

v. Merrill i. 486 

v. Myers i. 613 

v. Owens iii. 298 

v. Pellerin i. 569 

a. Powell ii. 838 

v. Prentice ii. 664 

v. Price ii. 44 

v. Prosser i. 12, 210 

v. Roberts iii. 129 

v. Rudolph i. 408 

v. Secreh iii. 118 

v. Suau i. 49, 257 

u. The A. & S. R. R. Co. iii. 188 

v. Tillou ii. 940 

v. Trist i. 275 

v. Wallis ii. 870 

v. Westbury i. 445 

v. Wheeler ii. 462 

v. Woodruff ii. 138 

Collins Co , The, v. Brown ii. 357 

<•. Cowen ii. 357 

v. Walker ii. 377 

Collinson v. Owens iii. 298 

Collis v. Emett i. 283 

v. Stack iii. 75 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxiii 



Collman ». Collins 




ii. 223 


Collumer v. Foster 




i. 185 


Collund i>. Read 




i. 169 


Collyer v. Fallon 




i. 253 


Colman v. Upcot 




iii. 9 


Colonel Ledyard, The 




ii. 416 


Colpoys <-. Colpoys 




ii. 691 


Colson v. Bonzey 




ii. 396 


v. Thompson 




iii. 309 


v. Welsh 




iii. 452 


Colt v. C'lapp 




i. 97 


v. Mass. Arms Co! 




ii. 314 


v. McMechen 




ii. 171 


i'. Netterville 


ii 


. 56, 416 


v. Partridge 


ii. 


863, 866 


Col. Ins. Co. v. Ashby ii 


446, 


448, 450 


v. Catlett 




ii. 419 


a. Lawrence ii. 556, 


558, 


559, 562, 


565 


573, 


586, 587 


v. Lynch 




ii. 480 


Columbia v. Patterson 




ii. 57 


Columbian Ins. Co. v. Bean 




ii. 877 


Columbo, The 




ii. 412 


Columbus v. Howard 


ii. 


131, 137 


v. Jaques 




i. 160 


Columbus & Indiana Central R 


R. 


Co. v. Arnold 




ii. 47 


v. Farrell 




ii. 251 


Columbus, &c. R. R. Co. v. Troesch. ii. 46 


i'. Watson 




iii. 304 


Colvil v. Besley 




i. 402 


Colvin v. Corwin 




iii. 202 


v. Holbrook 




i. 70 


v. Williams 




iii. 57 


Colwell r. Child 




ii. 831 


v. Lawrence 




iii. 167 


Colwill v. Reeves 




iii. 214 


Colyear v. Countess of Mulg 


rave 


iii. 308, 

316 

ii. 2b 


Coman v. State 




Combe i'. Greene 




ii. 663 


Combe's case 


i 


. 89, 156 


Combes v. Chandler 




i. 252 


Combs v. Tarlton 




iii. 245 


Comegys v. Vasse 




i. 253 


Comer v. Cunningham 




i. 580 


Comfort v. Duncan 




i. 544 


v. Eisenbeis 




iii. 464 


Coming, Ex parte 




iii. 297 


Commander-in-chief 




*i. 181 


Commerce, The 




ii. 433 


Commercial Bank v. Bobo 




ii. 757 


v. Colt 




i. 254 


v. Cunningham i 


.294 


; ii. 768 


v. Gorham 




i. 12 


v. Hamer 




i. 303 


v. Kortright 




i. 59 


v. Lum 




ii. 800 


v. Martin 




ii. 119 


v. Nolan i 


479 


iii. 145 


a. Wilkins i. 


231, 


232, 234 



Commercial Bank of Buffalo v. Kort- 
right i. 154; iii. 220, 221 

Com. Bank of Natchez v. The State 
of Miss. "'■ 486 



Commercial Bank of Pa. v. Union 

Bank of N. Y. i. 89 

Commercial Ins. Co. v. Union Ins. 

Co. ii. 470 

v. Whitney ii. 479 

Commercial Steamship Co. v. Boul- 

ton ii. 424 

Commercial Union Ass. Co. v. Scam- 

mon ii. 575 

Commins v. Scott iii. 4 

Commissioners v. Perry i. 482 

Commonwealth v. Bacon iii. 483 

r. Cheney ii. 865 

u. Churchill ii. 865, 866 

v. Collins i. 407 

v. Cooper i. Ill 

v. Courow ii. 55 

v. Crevor iii. 112 

v. Curtis i. 160 

v. Dorchester Ins. Co. ii. 539 

v. Emigrant, &c. Bank ii. 858 

v. Frost iii. 134 

o. Gamble i. 355 

v. Green ii. 741 

v. Hantz i. 355 

v. Hemperly ii. 65 

v. Hide & Leather Ins. Co. ii. 561 

v. Holmes i. 47 

v. Hunt ii. 724 

r. Kendig ii. 900, 907 

v. Knox ii. 901 

!\ Lane ii. 92 

v. Manley i. 285 

v. Mann iii. 483 

v. Munson ii. 85, 86 

v. Murray i. 348, 355 

v. Nesbit ii. 902 

v. Pash ii. 897 

v. Power ii. 241 

v. Proprietors ii. 831 

v. Ricketson ii. 468 

v. Sessions of Norfolk iii. 187 

v. Shepherd i. 377 

v. Shuman ii. 938 

v. Stamp ii- 85 

v. Stone ii. 754 

v. Wentz i- 377 

v. Wolf ii. 905 

v. Worcester T. Co. ii. 941 
Commonwealth Bank v. Law i. 208, 210, 

.. 283 

v. Mechanics Bank ii. 762 

v. Mudgett i. 319 

Commonwealth Ins. Co. u. Chase ii. 508 

i;. Globe Ins. Co. iii. 585 

Comp v. Henchman i. 95 

Compta, The iii- 207 

Compton v. Bearcroft ii- 723 

v. Bedford iii. 441 

v. Martin iii- 44 

Com stock, Ex parte iii. 407 

Matter of iii- 471 

v. Farnum i- 254 

v. Grout iii- 465 

v. Hannah i- 289 



lxiv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Comstock v. Howk 


i. 482 


c. Hutchinson i. 636, 


iii. 227 


v. Moore 


ii. 364 


v. Norton 


iii. 23 


v. Ray ford 


i. 569 


v. Smith 


ii. 757 


Comus, The 


ii. 441 


Comyns r. Boyer 


i. 488 


Conant, Matter of 


iii. 428 


v. Frary 


i. 231 


r. Raymond 


ii. 57 


v. Seneca County Bank 


i. 258 



Conard r. Atlantic Ins. Co. ii. 395, 40. 

iii. 292, 443, 444 

v. Pacific Ins. Co. iii. 185 

Contlerman r. Smith i. 013 

Cone !'. Baldwin i. 280 

v. Niagara Ins. Co. ii. 501 

Conger r. Ring i. 95 

Congress Spring Co. v. High Rock 

Spring Co. ii. 351 

Congress and Empire Spring Co. v. 
High Rock Congress Spring Co. ii. 351, 

361 
Congress, &c. Co. u. High Rock, &c. 

Co. ii. 351 

Congreve v. Evetts i. 560 

Coningharn r. Plunkett iii. 315 

Conkey e. Hopkins ii. 8 

Conklin r. Barton i. 182 

v. Underhill iii. 127 

Conkling v. Carson iii. 403 

Conlin v. Cantrell i. 409 

Conn v. Coburn i. 338 ; ii. 4 

v. Conn i. 408 

v. Wilson ii. 75 

Connecticut v. Jackson ii. 769 ; iii. 159, 

101, 168 

Connecticut Ins. Co. v. Groom ii. 603 

i . N. Y. & N. Haven R. Co. ii. 608 

v. Schwenk ii. 580 

Conn. Life Ins. Co. v. Schaefer ii. 606 

Connelly v. Cheever i. 227 

Conner r. City of New York iii. 483 

v. Coffin i. 545 

v. Henderson i. 022 

c. Robinson ii. 668, 076 

v. Trawick i. 263 

Connerat v. Goldsmith ii. 4 

Conners r. Hennessey i. 116 

Connersville r. Wadleigh ii. 915 

Connolly v. Warren ii. 275 

Connor r.Bellamont ii. 716 

Connory v. Kendall i. 200, 297 

Conollv r. Kettlewell ii. 12 

v. Pardon ii. 681, 093 

Conover v. Mass. Life Ins. Co. ii. 692 

v. Mut. Ins. Co. ii. 575 

v. Stillwell i. 459 

Conro v. Pt. Henry I. Co. i. 230 

Conroe r. Birdsall i. 353, 357, 369 

Conroy v. Warren i. 273 

Conroy v. Woods i. 232 

Consolidated Ins. Co. v. Cashaw ii. 494 

Const v. Harris i. 217 



Constable v. Clobery i 12 

v. Noble "• 475, 487 

Constantia, The i- 640 

Constantine o. Constantine ii. 645 

Constitution, The, v. Woodworth ii. 392 
Contee v. Dawson ii- 844 

Continental Bank v. Commonwealth 

Bank i. 279 

!-. Townsend i. 292 

Continental Ins. Co. v. Hulman ii. 476, 

577 
c. Palmer ii. 608 

Converse p. Boston & Maine R. Co. 

ii. 197 
v. Bradley iii. 394 

v. Citizens Ins. Co. ii. 562 

v. Converse i. 438 

v. McKee i. 237 

v. Norwich, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 231 

Converseville Co. c Chambersburg 

Co. i. 558 

Convoy's Wheat, The ii. 298 

Conway, Ex parte iii. 381 

v. Beazley ii. 723, 735, 730 

r. Bush i. 575 

c . Edwards i. 568 

i\ Gray ii. 425 

v. Kinsworthy iii. 311 

Conway Tool Co. v. Hudson River 

Ins. Co. ii. 583, 584 

Conwell v. Sandridge i. 222 

Conyers r. Ennis ii. 915 

v. Kenans iii. 107 

Cooch v. Goodman i. 485 

Cook r. Bank of Louisiana i. 52 

i\ Black ii. 610 

r. Bradley i. 7, 351, 457, 462, 463, 
464, 474 
v. Caldecott iii. 441 

c. Champlain Trans. Co. ii. 247, 218 
v. Collingridge ii. 309 

v. Comm. Ins. Co. ii. 500 

v. Continental Ins. Co. ii. 546 

\ r. Cook ii. 91 

* c-. Creswell i. 548 

r. Darling i. 313 

c. Ellis iii. 185 

r. Field ii. 605 

v. Fiske i. 110 

t\ Fowler iii. 112 

v. Genesee Mut. Ins. Co. ii. 751 

!■. Hartle ii. 773 

v. Hill iii. 187 

c. Husted ii. 50 

i . Jennings ii. 419, 647 

r. Johnson ii. 893 

v. Litchfield i. 314, 322 

v. Moffat iii. 390, 507 

r. Moseley i. 623 

v. Newman i. 145, 253 

i . Pritchard iii. 381, 477 

v. Satterlee i. 280 

v. Southwick i. 274, 284 

r. State Bank ii. 113 

v. Stearns ii. 042 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Ixv 



Cook v. "Warren 

v. Y/elch 

v. Wot ton 
Cooke, Ex parte 

r. Booth 

r. Callaway 

i\ Clayworth 

c. Colehan 

v. French 

r. Millard 

i . Nathan 

t, Orne 

c. Oxley 

l: Tombs 

v. Whorwood 
Cooke's Appeal 
Cooke's case 
Cookendcrfer v. Preston 
Cookes p. Mascall 



i. 110 
i. 18 

iii. 440 
i. 532 
i. 311 
i. 435; iii. 373 
i. 280 
i. 322 
iii. 40 
i. 285 
ii. 16 
i. 514 
iii. 19 

iii. 202 
i. 150 
i. 546 
ii. 669, 075 
ii. 77 



Cooley e. Board of Wardens of the 

Port of Philadelphia iii. 511 

v. Broad i. 174 

v. Cook iii. 460 

v. Perrine i. 62 

v. Rose ii. 769 

i . Vansycle i. 147 

v. Willard i. 41 

Coolidge v. Bridgham i. 616 ; ii. 815 ; 

iii. 227, 229 

v. Gloucester Ins. Co. ii. 490, 506, 

510 

■,-. Gray ii. 487 

r. Neat ii. 70, 72, 73 

v. Payson i. 292, 303 

v. Ruggles i. 254 

v. Smith i. 387 

v. Miles iii. 118 

Coombs v. Emery i. 489 

v. Gortlen i. 556 

v. Scott i. 53 

Coomer v. Bromley i. 209 

Coon v. Plymouth Plank Road iii. 285 

o. Syracuse & Utica R. R. ii. 46 

Coope r. Bowles i. 201 

v. Eyre i. 196 

Cooper v. i. 582; ii. 832 

v. Bigalow ii. 874 

v. Blandy ii. 940 

v. Bockett ii. 860 

v. Burr i. 264 

r. Chitty iii. 426, 434 

v. Dedrick iii. 18 

v. Hamilton Man. Co. ii. 47 

v. Elston iii. 60 

v . Johnson ii. 848 

t: Martin i. 348, 460 

v. Matthews ii- 324 

a. Mullins ii. 47 ; iii. 178 

v. Mass. Ins. Co. ii. 605 

v. Newman i- 619 

v. Parker ii. 750; iii. 72 

v. Pena iii- 306 

v. Phillips i. 339 ; ii. 44 

w.Rankin ..i-46 

v. Robinson ii. 879 



Cooper v. Smith 
v. South 
v. Stevenson 
v. Turner 
v. Twibill 
v. Willomatt 
v. Wyatt 



ii. 040 ; iii. 5 
ii. 396 
i. 126 
iii. 67 
i. 632 
ii. 134 
iii. 449 



Co-operative Ass. v. Leflore ii. 550 

Coopwood c. Wallace i. 128, 129; ii. 00 

Coosa, The ii. 520 

Cooth i: Jackson iii. 66, 333, 345, :550 

Cope v. Albinson i. 506 

v. Alden ii. 716 

v. Burt ii. 89 

v. Cope ii. 045 

v. Cordova ii. 204, 207, 415 

v. Dodd ii. 669, 672, 074 

e. Joseph ii. 879 

v. Rowlands i. 489 ; ii. 894 

v. Smith ii. 24 

Copeland, Ex parte iii. 420, 424 

v. Copeland ii. 936, 9?.7 

v. Mercantile Ins. Co. i. 51 ; ii. 474 

c. New England Ins. Co. ii. 527, 529, 

573 

v. Stein . iii. 273, 458 

v. Stephenson iii. 424 

v. Stevens iii. 446 

v. Watts i. -344 

Copelin v. Ins. Co. ii. 512 

Copeman v. Gallant iii. 435 

Copis v. Middleton ii. 

Copland, Ex parte i. 238 

v. Bosquet i. 57'J 

Copp v. McDugall i. 307 

Copper v. Wells ii. 845 

Copper, &c. Co. v. Spencer iii. 39 

Coppin v. Braithwaite ii. 242 ; iii. 178, 

180, 194 

v. Coppin ii. 701 

v. Craig i. 107, 497, 528 ; ii. 883 

v. Walker ii. 883 

Coppock !.-. Bower i. 469 ; ii. 895 

Corbett v. Brown ii. 913, 914, 916 

v. Schumacker i. 91 

Corbin v. 'Am. Mills i. 114 

Corcoran v. Allen i. 150 

v. Harran iii. 177 

Core's case ii. 043 

Corey v. James ii. 875 

v. Ripley iii. 476 

Cork v. Baker ii. 08 

Cork & Bandon Railway v. Caze- 

nove i. 374, 375 

Corlies v. dimming i. 104 

v. Elemming iii. 90 

Cornelius v. Vanarsdallen ii. 803 

Cornell v. Andrews iii. 334 

v. Green ii- 773 

v. Jackson iii. 240, 243 

v. Moulton ii. 797 

r. Nebeker ii. 862 

r. Todd ii- 035 

Corney v. DaCosta i. 317 

Cornfoot r. Fowke i. 64 ; ii. 522, 921 



lxvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Corning v. Abbott 


i. 199 


i . Burden 


ii. 311, 312 


v. Lewis 


i. 411 


Cornish v. Abington 


ii. 942 


c. Stubbs 


i. 548; ii. 6B5 


v. Upton 


ii. 344 


Cornwall v. Haight 


i. 503 


v. Hoyt 


i. 407 


v. Wilson 


i. 88, 104 


Cornwell v. Voorhees 


ii. 154 


Cornwell's Appeal 


iii. 426 


Coromandel, The 


ii. 437, 440 


Corp v. MeComb 


i. 313, 318 


Corps r. Robinson 


i. 211 


Corrie r. Onslow 


iii. 44'J 


Corsbie r. Free 


iii. 424 


Corson r. Mulvany 


iii. 311 



Cort v. Ambergate, &o. Railway Com 

pany ii. 809 

Cortelyou r. Lansing ii. 121 

Corwin v. Benham iii. 292 

v. Daly ii. 352, 353, 354 

c. Hood ii. 040 

Corwith r. Colter i. 572 

Cory v. Boylston Ins. Co. ii. 497 

p. Bretton iii. 72 

v. Burr ii. 501 

v. Cory i. 435 

r. Patton ii. 520 

Coslake r. Till iii. 323, 340 

Cosmopolite, The ii. 481 

Cossens, Er parte iii. 473 

Costa R. R. Co. v, Moss iii. 185 

Coster /-. Murray iii. 95, 96 

v. Thomason i. 212 

v. Turner iii. 330 

Costigan r. Newland i. 85 
v. The Mohawk & Hudson Rail- 
way Co. ii. 37, 38 ; iii. 208 

Costley v. Wilkerson i. 228 

Cotes v. Davis i. 392 

Cothay r. Fennell i. 57, 65, GO 

v. Murray iii. 402 

i. Tute i. 574 

Cother v. Merrick ii. 044 
Cottage St. Church v. Kendall ' i. 483 
Cottam v. Partridge iii. 79, 80, 94, 90 

v. Smith i. 200 

Cotteen v. Missing i. 263 

Cotterel v. Harrington iii. 149 

Cotterill, Ex parte iii. 435 

v. Starkey ii. 247 

Cottinfrtoii's case ii. 739 

Cotton, In re iii. 415 

v. Blane ii. 6 

r. Goodwin ii. 779 

v. Thomas ii. 37(1 

a. Thurland ii. 759, 887 

Cottrell, Er parte iii. 404 

v. Conklin i. 274, 283, 284 

Cottrill v. Van Duzen i. 178, 190, 198 

Coty v. Barnes i. 011, 613 

Cotzhausen v. Judd i. 208 

Couch v. Mills i. 28 

v. Watson Coal Co. ii. 40 



Cougar v. Galena R. R. Co. ii. 174 

Coughlin r. N. Y., &c. R. Co. ii. 908 

Coulter v. Richmond i. 275 

v. Robertson i. 486 

Coulon v. Bowne ii. 524 

Coulston v. Carr i. 485 

Coulter's case iii. 238 

Coulthart v. Clementson ii. 22 
Council Bluff Works v. Cuppey i. 279; 

ii. 786 

Counden v. Clerke ii. 689 

Countess of Durham, The ii. 434 
Countess of Portsmouth v. Earl of 

Portsmouth iii. 414 

Countess of Rutland's case ii. 679 

Couradt v. Sullivan ii. 10 

Courcier v. Ritter i. 87 

Coursen v. Hamlin i. 229 

Courtis v. Cane iii. 210 

Courtnay v. Miss. Ins. Co. ii. 471 

Courtney v. N. Y. City Ins. Co. ii. 477, 

575 

Courtwright v. Stewart iii. 62 

Couston v. Chapman i. 628 

Coutourier v. Hastie i. 101, 559, 610 ; 

ii. 13 ; iii. 29 

Covas v. Bingham i. 495 

Coventry v. Atherton iii. 102 

Covill v. Hill iii. 270 

Cowan, E.r parte iii. 425 

!'. Braidwood ii. 738 

v. Iowa Ins. Co. ii. 576 

v. Milbourn ii. 337 

Cowas-jee v. Thompson i. 650 

Cowdin v. Gottgetreu iii. 26 

Cowdrey v. Vandenburgh i. 252 

Cowell v. Batterley iii. 286 

v. Betteley ii. 838; iii. 280 

v. Brothers, The ii. 439 

v. Edwards i. 33, 34 

v. Simpson i. 107; iii. 259, 263, 2G4, 

» 27-3 

v. Watts i. 143 

Cowie v. Harris iii. 459 

v. Remfry iii. 8 

v. Stirling i. 282 

Cowing v. Snow ii. 407 

Cowles v. Harts i. 322 

i'. Marble iii. 39 

v. Whitman iii. 330 

Cowling v. Beachum ii. 701 

Cowsar v. Wade ii. 885 

Cox, E r parte iii. 427 

v. Adams ii. 37 

v. Bodfish i. 240 



v. Brain 


ii. 771, 772 


v. Buck 


ii. 938 


v. Cooper 
v. Cox 


ii. 882 
ii. 92 


v. Fay 

v. Hickman 


ii. 827 
i. 174 


v . Jagger 
v. Kitchin 


ii. 827 
i. 407 


o. McBurney 


i. 168, 171 



if. Midland Railway Co. 



.48 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxvii 



Cox v. Murray 


ii. 385 


u. Prentice 


i. 185, 490 


a. Russell 


i. 2:32 


v. Smith 


iii. 113 


t-. Sprigg 


iii. 314 


i'. Strode 


iii. 240, 242 


v. United States 


ii. 713 


Coxe v. Gent 


ii. 831 


v. Hale 


iii. 420 


v. Harden 


i. 649; ii. 412 


v. Lundy 


ii. 831 


v. State Bank 


ii. 753, 874 


Coxhead v. Mullis 


ii. 65 


Coxon v. Great Western Railway Co. 




ii. 227, 232 


Coxwell v. De Vaughn 


ii. 762 


Coye v. Leach 


ii. 613 


Coyle v. Fowler 


i. 457, 459 


Coysegame, Ex parte 


iii. 455 


Cozzins v. Whitaker 


i. 616, 627, 636 


Crabill v. Marsh 


iii. 350 


Crabton v. Kile 


i. 636 


Crabtree v. Clapham 


i. 185 


v. Clark 


ii. 423 


Craddock v. Aldridge 


ii. 660 


v. Riddlesbarger 


i. 553 


Craft v. Isham 


ii. 15, 16, 795 


v. McConoughy 


ii. 888 


Crafts v. Mott 


iii. 463, 464 


Cragg v. Bowman 


i. 394 


Craggin v. Bailey 


iii. 464 


Cragoe v. Jones 


ii. 16 


Craig v. Blow 


ii. 917 


v. Childress 


ii. 177 


v. Hawkins 


ii. 842 


v. Hewitt 


iii. 116 


v. Kittredge 


i. 263 


v. Leslie 


i. 150 


v. Miller 


ii. 702 


v. Murgatroyd 


ii. 582, 607 


o. Parkis 


ii. 3, 31 


v. U. S. Ins. Co. 


ii. 529 


v. Wells 


ii. 635 


Craighead v. The Bank 


iii. 79 


Crain v. Beech 


iii. 201 


v. Petrie 


iii. 194 


Craine v. Hubbel 


iii. 125 


Craker v. Railway Co. 


iii. 187 


Cram v. Aiken 


ii. 448 


v. Cadwell 


i. 210 


v. Hendricks i. 


291 ; iii. 153, 156 


Cramer v. Bachmann 


i. 187 


v. Bradshaw 


i. 624 


a. Lepper 


iii. 132 


Cramp v. Symons 


ii. 840 


Crane v. Conklin 


i. 435 


u. Dygert 


iii. 112 


o. French 


i. 234, 236 


v. Gough 


iii. 63, 352 


v. Pratt 


ii. 753 


v. Price 


ii. 309, 312 


v. Roberts 


ii. 789 


Cranley v. Hillary 


ii. 770 


Crans v. Hunter 


i. 52 


Cranson v. Gobs 


ii. 904, 907 



Cranston v. Clarke 

v. Marshall 

v. Phila. Ins. Co. 
Crantz v. Gill 

Cranwell v. Ship Fanny Fosdick 
Cranz v. Kroger 
Crapo v. Allen 
Crauf urd v. Blackburn 

v. Hunter 
Craven v. Craven 

o. Ryder 
Crawford v. Chute 

v. Clark 

v. Forristall 

v. Louisiana State Bank 

i). Slade 

v. Smith 

v. Stirling 

v. Willing 

o. Wilson 
Crawley v. Mullins 



i. 534 

ii. 408 

ii. 474 

i. 339 

iii. 208 

i. 263 

ii. 463, 464 

ii. 82 

ii. 484, 489 

ii. 833 

i. 653 

ii. 865 

ii. 204 

i. 508 

i. 91 

ii. 865 

i. 564, 566 

i. 210; ii. 879 

iii. Ill 

ii. 708, 709, 710 

i. 548 



Crawshay v. Collins i. 173, 219, 224, 227, 

229, 230 ; ii. 369, 845 

v. Eades i. 646 

v. Maule i. 169, 174, 220, 221, 226, 

229, 230 ; iii. 321 

v. Thompson ii. 373, 374 

Craythorne v. Swinburne i. 32, 36 ; ii. 6 

Creamer v. Perry i. 317 

Creed, In re ii. 612, 613 

v. Hartman i. 117 

v. Mallet ii. 459 

v. Penn. R. Co. ii. 245 

v. Stevens iii- 127 

Creery c. Hollis ii. 443 

Creigliton v. Ingersoll iii. 286 

Cremer v. Higginson i. 210 ; ii. 14, 23 

Cressinger v. Lessee of Welch i. 366, 

368 ; ii. 900 

Cresson v. Stout i. 547 

Creswell v. Blank i- 228 

Creuse v. Defiganiere iii- 74 

Crill v. Doyle i. 562 

Cripps v. Davis iii- 77, 92 

v. Golding i- 485 

Crisdee v. Bolton iii. 168, 172 

Crisp v. Churchill i. 337 

v. Gamel i. 485 

Crist v. Brindle ii. 878 

Crittenden v. Fiske ii- 14 

v. Jones iii. 393 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. i. 262 

v. Schermerhorn i. 393 

Crocker v. Colwell j- 205 

v. Crocker i- 557 

v. Franklin H. & F. Man. Co. ii. 666 

v. Higgins i- 498 

v. Jackson ii- 439, 448 

v. Lewis i|- 921 

v. Orpen iii- 328 

v. People's Ins. Co. ii. 524, 553 

v. Whitney i- 254, 255, 258 

Crockett v. Dodge ii- 450 

Crockett v. Newton ii- 433 

Crookford v. Winter i- 79 



lxviii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Crofoot v. Bennett 
Croft v. Alison 

v. Day ii. 3( 

Crofts v. Beale 

!■. Marshall 

v. Waterhouse 
Croker r. Lauder 

!■. Open 
Crompton r. Pratt 
Cromwell, Ex parte 

i. Benjamin 

v. Lovett 

v. (J wings 

v. Sac County 
C'romnger v. Crocker 
Crunise v. Clark 

v. Cronise 
Crook r. Jadis 

v. Stephen 

v. Williams 
Crooke v. Slack 
Crooker v. Crooker 



Crookewit v. Fletcher 
Crooks c. Crooks 

!-. Moore 
Crookshank v. Burrell 
Croom v. Shaw 
Oroome o. Lediard 
Criipp b. Hambleton 
CrosVie v. McDoual 
Crosby r. Berger 

v. Fitch 

t. Grant 

t . Jeroloman 

i. Loop 

v. Mason 

v. Wadsworth 

v. Wyatt 
Crosley v. Arkwright 
Cross c. Andrews 

v. Bryant 

v. Burlington Bank 

v. Cross 

17. DeVille 

v. Hopkins 

v. O'Donnell 

v. Peters 

v. Sackett 

v, Shutliff 
Crosse v. Androes 

v. Gardner 

r. Lawrence 

e. Smith 
Crossing r. Scudamore 
Crosswcll v. Lehman 



i. 566 

i. 114 

2, 366, 369, 372, 373 

i. 292 

ii. 496, 674 

ii. 234, 236, 242 

i. 648 

iii. 312 

ii. 760 

iii. 411 

i. 388 

ii. 755 

ii. 827 

i. 289,330; iii. 113 

i. 572, 573 

i. 335 

iii. 499 

i. 289 

ii. 852 

i. 93 

ii. 383 

i. 192, 231 



ii. 420 

ii. 78 

i. 575 

iii. 01, 02 

i. 62 

iii. 312, 345, 361 

ii. 773 

iii. 314 

ii. 730 

ii. 181, 400 

i. 289, 292 

i. 11 

i. 551 

iii. 112 

iii. 35, 04 

ii. 29 

i. 488 

i. 433 ; ii. 158 

iii. 382 

i. 215 

i. 377 

i. 448 

iii. 321 

i. 642 

ii. 915 

ii. 921 

ii. 534, 535 

i. 355 

i. 614 

iii. 349 

i. 310 

ii. 637 

i. 200 



Crouch v. Credit Foncier of Eng. i. 27S, 

330 
v. Grea t Western Railway Co. ii. 232 
c. Gridley iii. 471, 478 

(-. Roemer ii. 309 

c.The London, &c. Railway Co. 

ii. 185, 187, 224, 259 
Croucher v. Oakman ii. 463 

Croufihton v. Forrest i. 208 

Croukite v. Wells ii. 190 



Crousillat v. Ball 
Crout v. DeWolf 
Crow v. Crow 

v. Rogers 
Crowder v. Austin 
Crowdus v. Shelby 
Crowe >'. Aikin 

v. Clay 
Crowell v. Beebe 

v. Currier 

v. Davis 

c. Gleason 
Crowfoot v. Gurney 
Crowhurst v. Laverack 
Crowie v. Hoover 
Crowley v. Vitty 
Crowly v. Cohens 
Crowther v. Rowlandson 
Croydon Gas Co. v. Dickinson 



ii. 511 

ii. 941 

ii. 91 

i. 496, 497 

i. 526 

i. 34 

ii. 334, 338 

ii. 757 

ii. 939 

i. 498 

ii. 842 

i. 444 

i. 245 

i. 407 

i. 546 

i. 543 

ii. 485, 566 

iii. 100 

i. 315; 

ii. 28 

i. 275 

ii. 774 

i. 52 

ii. 527 

ii. 527, 528 

i. 272 



ii. 703 
ii. 621 
iii. 253 

■>■« 



Crozer v. Chambers 

r. Pilling 
Crozier I-. Carr 
Cruder v. Penn. Ins. Co. 

v. Phil. Ins. Co. 
Cruger v. Armstrong 

v. Jones 
Cruickshanks v. Rose 
Cruikshank v. Janson 
Crumbacker v. Tucker 
Crumless v. Sturgess i. Tin 

Crump !>. U. S. Mining Co. i. 04 

Crusader, The ii. 357, 369 

Crusoe v. Bugby i. 538 

Cruttwell ?>. Lye ii. 309 

Cruzan v. Smith i. 40 

Cry me v. Day i. 300 

Cubberly v. Scott i. 387 

Cud ». Rutter i. 522 ; iii. 325 

Cuff v. Dorland iii. 372 

o. Peim ii. 685 

Culbertson v. Shaw ii. 431 

Culbreath v. Culbreath iii. 354 

Cullara v. Guillot i. 568 

v. Valentine ii. 850 

Cullen r. Butler ii. 497 

v. Duke of Queensbury i. 139 

Cullough v. Wainwright ii. 080 

Culnes, Ex parte iii. 446 

Culter t>. Reynolds i. 313 

Culver 17. Ashley i. 51 ; ii. 827 

Cumber v. Wane i. 249 ; ii. 749, 751 

Cumberland, The ii. 4:-'9 

Cumberland Bank 17. Hall ii. 859 

17. Hann i. 290 

Cumberland Coal and Iron Co. v. 

Sherman i. 95 

Cumberland, Inhab. of, v. Inhab. of 

North Yarmouth ii. 847 

Cumberland Valley Prot. Co. v. 

Schell ii. 558, 580 

Cumberland, &c. Co. <7. Andes Ins. 

Co. i. 565; ii. 561 

Cumberland, &c. Co. v. Douglas ii. 546 
Cuming v. Hill ii. 54, 56 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxix 



Cummer v. Milton 
dimming v. Forrester 

v. Roebuck 
Cummings v. Arnold 

v. Banks 

v. Dennett 

e. Griggs 

v. Harris 

v. Powell 

i*. Spruance 

v. Williams 
Cummings' Appeal 



ii. 712 

ii. 879 

i. 585; iii. 13 

ii. 425 

ii. 740 

i. 458 

i. 560 

iii. 267, 268 

i. 335, 360, 362 

iii. 184, 196 

ii. 877 

i. 466 



Cummins v. Agricultural Ins. Co. ii. 546 

v. Wise iii. 126, 130 

Cunard v. Hyde ii. 485 

Cundell v. Dawson i. 489 

Cunliffe o. Booth i. 289 

v. Harrison iii. 151 
Cunningham v. Ashbrook i. 561, 566 ; 

iii. 46 

v. Bragg i. 225 

v. Dunn ii. 805 

v. Freeborn iii. 383 

v. Hall ii. 393 

v. Holton i. 535 

v. Irwin i. 396 

e. Knight i. 355 

v. Lamar i. 212 

v. Morrell ii. 649, 660 

<.-. Pattee i. 532 

o. Reardon i. 393 

v. Smitli ii. 913 

Cupples r. Whelan . i- 47 

Curley v. Harris ii. 852 

Curling v. Chalklen ii- 16 

v. Long ii. 407 

Curran v. Holyoke Water Co. iii. 351 

Currie v. Misa i. 292 ; ii. 756 

Currier v. Barker i- 549 

o. Continental Ins. Co. ii. 614, 752 

v. Currier i. 576 

u. Fellows i- 34 

v. Hodgdon i. 254 

v. Knapp i- 578 

v. Rovve i. 186 

v. Webster i. 180 

Curry v. Commonwealth Ins. Co. ii. 523, 

545, 558, 586 

v. Larer iii- 173 

v. Powers }■ 263 

v. Rogers i- 483 

v. White i- 225 

Curtin v. Patton i. 364, 369 

Curtis v. Aspinwall i- 627 

v. Barcley ..."'• ^^? 

v. Brown iii- 24, 2o 

v. Bryan ii- 363, 364 

v. Drinkwater ii- 242 

v. Gibbs ii- ? 40 

v. Groat «'• 21 5 

v. Hall ..}■ |35 

v. Hannay m - 2 ^ 

v. Hubbard «■ ^5b 

v. Hunton ">■ 409 

v. Mohr »■ 292 



Curtis v. Parks 


i. 501 


v. Pugh 


iii. 51 


v. R. & S. R. R. Co. 


ii. 234 


v. Sage 


iii. 38 


v. Vernon 


i. 147 


v. Ward 


iii. 210 


v. Williamson 


i. 66 



Curtis's Ex. v. Bank of Somerset i. 142 

Curtiss v. Greenbanks ii. 787 

v. Howell ii. 683 

v. Lawrence iii. 176 

v. Marten i. 315 

Curts v. Cisna i. 93 

Cushing v. Arnold iii. 459 

v. Breed i. 565 

v. Drew iii. 174 

v. John Frazer, The ii. 429, 430, 431 

o. Smith i. 193 

v. Thompson ii. 564 

Cushman v. Bailey i. 176 

v. Blanchard iii. 242 

v. Dement i. 284 

v. Holyoke i. 566 

v. North-western Ins. Co. ii. 580, 

G48 

v. United States Ins. Co. ii. 554, 593, 

597 

Cusic v. Douglas iii. 511 

Cussons v. Skinner ii. 43 

Cuthbert f . Cummings ii. 667, 676 

v. Haley iii. 129 

Cutler v. Ashland i. 55 

u. Bonney ii- 157 

v. Close i- 494 

v. Everett ii- 1 

v. Hinton ii- 12 

v. How i. 466; iii. 126, 171 

v. Johnson i- 466 

v. Rand ii- 607 

v. Rose ii- 861 

v. Southern iii- 200 

v. Thurlo ii- 400 

v. Windsor i. 180; ii. 421, 422 

Cutter v. Cochrane i- 473 

u. Copeland i- 569 

v. Davenport ii- 701 

v. Evans "i- 471 

v. Powell ii. 39, 458, 653, 669, 792 

v. Reynolds _ }■ 458 

Cutting v. Dana iii- 324 

Cutts v. Perkins i-255 

v. Salmon i- ^ 

Cuxon v. Chadley }• 246 

Cuyler v. Cuyler i'- 849 

v. Sanford iii- 14o 

v. Stevens i- s21 

Cynthia, The "• 4 '> J 

Cypress, The 



ii. 458 



D. 



Dabney v. Stidger 
Daby v. Ericson 



i. 211, 212 
i. 228 



lxx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Dadmun Man. Co. v. Worcester Ins. 

Co. ii. 477, 562, 576 

Dacosta v. Davis ii. 713 

Da Costa v. Edmunds ii. 485 

v. Firth ii. 484 

v. Newnham ii. 447 

Daegling v. Gilmore i. 115 

Daglish r. Davidson ii. 452 

Dalihnan v, Forster ii. 930 

Dailey v. Coons i. 103 

Dails i\ Lloyd i. 96, 406 

Dain v. WycofE ii. 76 

Dakin v. Williams ii. 663 ; iii. 174 

Dalby v. Hirst i. 537 

v. India Ass. Co. ii. 606 

v. Pullen i. 526 ; iii. 337 

Dale v. Cook ii. 877 

v. Hall ii. 182, 428 

i . Robinson i. 408 

v. Smithson ii. 355, 364, 373 

v. Sollet ii. 880 

Dalgleish v. Brooke ii. 481 

Dalglish v. Jarvie ii. 598 

Dally v. Smith iii. 416 

D'Almaine v. Boosey ii. 346 

Dairy mple v. Dalrymple ii. 81, 88, 729 

Dalton v. Irvin i. 109 

v. Laudahu i. 552 

Dalton City Co. v. Dalton Mfg. Co. i. 166 

Daly i'. Duggan iii. 374 

v. Palmer ii. 335 

Dalyell i: Tyrer i. 119 

Dalzell c. Crawford iii. 335 

Dame v. Baldwin i. 556 

v. Wingate ii. 869 

Damon, In re iii. 400 

p. Inhabitants of Granby i. 22 

v. Osborne i. 566 

Damont v. N. O. & Carollton E. R. 

Co. ii. 248 

Dana v. Coombs i. 368 

v. Fiedler ii. 687 ; iii. Ill, 220 

v. Hancock iii. 20 

v. Lull i. 201, 222 

v. Sawyer i. 303 

Danaher v. Garlock i. 54 

Danbury Band v. Bean i. 185 

Dance v. Girdler ii. 21 

Dand v. Kingscote ii. 604 

Dandridge v. Harris ii. 783 

Dane !'. Kirkwall i. 437 

Danforth v. Adams ii. 937 

v. Culver iii. 76 

v. Scoharie Turnpike Co. i. 154 

Dangerfleld v. Thomas iii. 435 

Daniel v. Adams i. 41, 60 

v. Ballard i. 33, 37 

v. Bowles ii. 67, 69 

v. Cartony iii. 125, 127 

v. Frazer iii. 305 

r. Mitchell i. 621 

v. Swift i. 107; iii. 275 

Daniell v. Griffin i. 51 

Daniels, E.r parte iii. 465 

c. Harris ii. 527 



Daniels v. Hatch "• 823 

v. Hudson River Ins. Co. n. 542, 5o4, 

557 

v. Newton "• 810 

v. Pond i- 544, 547 

v. Tearney ii- 943 

D'Anjou v. Deagle ii- 194 

Danley v. Rector ii. 239 

Dann v. Do'lman i. 488 

v. Spurrier i. 540 ; ii. 637, 939 

Danolds v. State iii. 480 

Dansey t'. Richardson ii. 155, 162, 164 

Dante, The ii. 404 

Dantzic, The ii. 43 

DAquila v. Lambert i. 642 

Darbj' v. Baines ii. 389 

v. Boucher i. 338, 302 

v. Mayer ii. 701 

Darbyshire v. Parker i. 320 

Darcy v. Askwith ii. 665 

D'Arcy v. Ketchum ii. 742 

Darden v. Lovelace i. 564 

Dardier v. Chapman i. 382 

Darling v. Boston, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 231 

u. Lewis i. 78 

v. March i. 210, 212 

Darmstaetter v. Moynahan i. 116 

Darrell v. Tibbitts ii. 563 

Darrol v. Quimby i. 76 

Darst v. Bates iii. 28 

u. Gale i. 155 

v. Roth i. 122 

Dart i'. Dart ii. 933 

Dartmouth College v. Woodward iii. 480, 

481, 482, 483, 485, 486, 500, 501, 502 

Dartnall v. Howard i. 91, 92, 476 

Dashiell v. Attorney-General ii. 089 

Daubignv v. Davallon i. 450 

v. Duval i. 60, 102 ; iii. 290 

Davenport v. Bishopp iii. 316 

v. Gear i. 184 

v. Karnes ii. 730 

a. Mason iii. 66 

c. Peoria Ins. Co. i. 42 

o. Rackstrow i. 24 

v. Woodbridge i. 258 

Davenport Nat. Bank v. Homeyer i. 276 

Davey v. Chamberlain ii. 131 

v. Mason ii. 194 

David v. Ransom ii. 897 

David Howes, Matter of iii. 460 

Davidson v. Bridgeport ii. 757 

v. Cooper ii. 853, 858, 862 

v. Delano iii. 82 

v. Geoghagan ii. 874 

r. Goodall ii. 70 

v. Graham ii. 259 

v. Little i. 466 

v. Weems i. 228 

v. Young ii. 944 

Davie v. Briggs ii. 612 

Davies v. Davies ii. 58 

v. Edwards iii. 82 

v. Games i. 167 

v. Humphreys i. 32, 36, 500 ; iii. 98 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



1XX1 



Davies i>. Mann 
v. Penton 

Davis r. Allen 
v. Anderson 
v. Bean 
t . Bechstein 
v. Boardman 
v. Bradford 
i. Bradley 
u. Brown 
v. Browslier 
v. Caldwell 
r. Carlisle 
v. Child 
v. Cilley 
v. Clemson 
v. Coburn 
v. Connop 
v. Cook 
v. Davis 



ii. 248, 250, 430 
iii. 168 

i. 192 
iii. 302 
ii. 880 

i. 252 
i. 65; ii. 474 

i. 500 
i. 579; ii. 938; iii. 280 

ii. 84 
iii. 281 

i. 336 
ii. 856 
ii. 385 
ii. 836 
ii. 713 

i. 256 

i. 544 

i. 208 
ii. 871, 944 



v. Detroit, &c. R. R. Co. 

„. Dodd 

v. Dudley 

v. Duke of Marlborough 

v. Emerson 

v. Fish ii. ! 

w. Freeman 

v. Garr 

v. Garrett 

v. Gillett 

v. Goodenow 

i'. Gowen 

v. Grow 

v. Hanly 

v, Hardacre 

v. Hedges 

v. Higgins 

r. Hill 

v. Holbrook 

v. Hone 

v. Hubbard 

v. Huggins 

v. Hunt 

u. Jacquin 

v. Jenny 

v. Jones 

v. Kendall 

v. Lane 

v. Leslie 

v. Lyman 

v. Mason 

v. Maxwell 

v. McCurdy 

o. Meeker 

v. Moore 

v. Morgan 

v. Morris 

v. M. S. & N. J. R. E. Co. ii. 276 

v. Newton "i- 437 

"■ N ey ,i- "^3 

v. Noafes "• 823 

v. Old Colony E. Co. i- 158 

v. Oswell iii- 215 

v. Palmer "■ 307, 314 

v. Petway i- 526 



ii. 48 

i. 331 

i. 367 

i. 253 

i. 33 

ii. 898 ; iii. 190 

iii. 169 

iii. 104, 123 

i. 92 ; ii. 406 

iii. 167 

ii.- 52 

i. 204 

iii. 218 

i. 318 

iii. 118 

iii. 219 

ii. 24 

i. 666 

ii. 897 

iii. 306, 373 

ii. 812 

ii. 27 

i. 615; ii. 863 

i. 334 

ii. 858 

i. 547 ; ii. 685 

ii. 353, 355, 371 

i. 76, 223, 298 

ii. 458 

iii. 244 

ii. 889 

i. 86. 39, 650, 657 

iii. 463 

i. 622 

iii. 40 

i. 473 

i. 538 



Davis v. Quincy Ins. 


Co. 


ii. 564 


o. Kowell 




iii. 12 


v. Russell 




iii. 274 


v. Sanders 




ii. 937 


v. Seneca, The 




ii. 388 


v. Sliapley 




iii. 478 



i'. Shields i, 583, 588 ; iii. 8, 220 

v. Smith i. 364 ; iii. 79, 242 

f. Smith Organ Co. i. 158, 4S'i 

v. Steiner iii. 75 

r. Symonds i. 522 ; iii. 337, 344, 045 

v. Tallcot ii. 685, 794, 866 ; iii. 190 

v. Thomas ii. 941 

v. Wells ii. 14 

v. West iii. 327 

v. Willan ii. 273 

v. Windsor Bank i. 76 

Davis Sewing Machine Co. o. Mills ii. 31 

Davis, &c. Co. v. Buckles ii. 762 

v. Maginnis i. 570 

Davison v. Seymour ii. 895 

Davoll v. Brown ii. 315 

Davoue v. Panning i. 94, 95, 150 

Davy's case iii. 425 

Dawes v. Boylston i. 255 ; iii. 409 

o. Cope i. 568 

v. Head iii. 409 

</. Howard i. 343, 347, 348 

v. Peck i. 574 

v. Pinner iii. 159 

Dawkes v. Lord De Loraine i. 280 

Dawn, The ii. 398, 461, 464 

Dawson v. Atty ii. 524 

v. Chanuiey ii. 156, 157 

o. Collis i- 037 

v. Ewing ii- 774 

v. Godfrey iii- 485 

v. King iji- 75 

v. Lawes •[• 25 

v. Morrison i- 48 

v. Real Estate Bank ii. 28 

v. Wilson ii- 766 

Day, Ex parte iii- 486 

v. Bassett i- 578 

v. Berkshire Woollen Co. ii. 170 

v. Binning ii. 362, 372 

v. Candee ii- 325 

v. Charter Oak Ins. Co. ii. 557 

v. Cloe iii- 26 

v. Cummings iii- 130, 136 

v. Elmore ii- 32 ; iii. 18 

v. Lafferty ii- 776 

v. Laflin iii- 426 

v. Lockwood i- 229 

d. Newman i. 523 ; iii. 316 

j;. Noble »• 456 

a. Pool ii»- 22:5 

v . Raguet i;. 628 

v. Ridgway .,«■ 27 

v. Trig ii- 680 

v. Union Rubber Co. ii-. 319 

v. Wamsley i- 80 , 

v. Woodworth iii- 176, 184 

Dayton v. Monroe ii- 922 

\. Wilkes ii- 361, 369 



lxxii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Dayton Ins. Co. v. McGookey ii. 543 

Deacon v. Gridley i. 474 

Deal v. Bogue i. 236 

v. Maxwell iii- 60 

Dean v. Allalley i- 547 

v. Allen ii. 873 

v. Am. Ins. Co. .ii- 604 

v. Anderson iii. 314 

u. Emerson ii. 802 

v. Hall i. 274 

v. Hewitt iii. 89, 92 

v. Hornby ii. 499 

v. James ii. 775 

v. Keate ii. 131 

v. Mason i. 492, 018, 627, 633 ; ii. 328 

v. M'Gliie ii. 400 

v. Morey i. 635 

v. Munroe iii. 101 

v. Newhall i. 27, 28 

v. Richmond ii. 93 

v. Skiff ii. 71 

u. Williams ii. 709 

Dean & Chapter ofWindsorw. Gover i. 153 

Deane v. Annis i. 342 

Dearborn v. Bowman i. 501 

o. Cross ii. 085 

c. Dearborn i. 120 

v. Turner i. 581 

Dearie v. Barrett ii. 771, 772 

Dease v. Jones iii. 103 

Deason v. Boyd i. 301, 3(18 

De Barante v. Gott ii. 730 

De Barnales v. Fuller iii. 112 

De Begnis v. Armistead i. 489 ; ii. 887 

De Beil ». Thompson iii. 4, 32 

Delienham v. Mellon i. 386 

De Berdt v. Atkinson i. 307, 316 

De Berkom v. Smith i. 213 

Deblois v. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 504, 607, 527, 

529, 535 
De Bolle" v. Pennsylvania Ins. Co. ii. 541, 

507 
Debolt v. The Ohio Life Ins. & 

Trust Co. iii. 497, 498 

De Boom v. Priestly ii. 02 

De Bouchout v. Goldsmid i. 60, 102 

De Bras v. Forbes i. 290 

De Briar v. Minturn ii. 37 

De Bussche v. Alt i. 97 

Decamp v. Feay iii. 342, 356 

De Camp v. Stevens ii. 41 
Decatur Bank v. St. Louis Bank ii. 028 

Decell v. Lewenthal i. 338 

Dechapeaurouge, Ex parte iii. 419, 420 

Dechanns v. Horwood i. 23 

Deckard v. Case i. 2(H) 

Decker v. Judson ii. 931 

v. Livingston i. 26 

v. Shaffer iii. 25 

Deckert, Re iii. 500 

De Cosse Brissac v. Kathbone ii. 872 

De Costa v. Jones ii. 897 

v. Mass. Mining Co. iii. 170 
Decouche v. Savetier ii. 721, 730 ; iii. 393 

Decreet v. Burt i. 35 



Dederick v. Leman u- 749 

Dedliam Bank v. Chickering i. 486 

Dee v. Downs m - 21 

Deeks v. Strutt i- 141 

Deering v. Chapman i. 486 

v. Winchelsea i. 36 

Deer Isle v. Eaton i- 500 

Deerly v. Mazarine i- 407 

Deey , Ex parte iii. 4;>2 

Deeze, Ex parte iii. 239, 269, 270, 272 

Defenbaugh v. Weaver iii. 222 

De Figaniere v. Young i. 129 

Deford ». Reynolds i. 189 

De Forest v. Fulton Ins. Co. ii. 474, 482, 

541, 565, 660, 876 

v. Oder ii. 876 

v. The Fire Ins. Co. i. 103 

De Forrest v. Bacon iii. 382 

v. Hunt iii. 69 

u. Leete iii. 244 

k Strong iii. 145 

v. Wright i. 116, 120 

Defrance v. Austin ii. 52 

Defreeze v. Trumper i. 616 

De Gaillon v. L'Aigle i. 407 

Degg v. M. Eigg Co. ii. 46 

Deghetoft v. London Ass. Co. i. 251 

De Gogorza t. Knickerbocker Life 

Ins. Co. ii. 603 

De Graff v. N. Y. Cent. B. Co. ii. 46 

De Hahn v. Hartley ii. 473, 518, 526 

De Havilland v. Bowerbank iii. 112 

De La Chaumette u. Bank of Eng- 
land i. 292 
Delafleld v. Illinois i. 51, 60, 61, 331 
Delahay v. Memphis Ins. Co. ii. 559 
Delamatyr v. Milwaukee, &c. R. R. 

Co. ii. 251 

Delameter r. Miller i. 321 

Delano v. Bartlett i. 282 

u. Blake i. 308 

c. Rood iii. 116, 117 

r. Scott ii. 316 

Delavan Bank r. Cotton iii. 91 

De La Vega v. Vienna ii, 719 

Delavergne i\ Norris iii. 244, 240 

Delaware, The, v. The Ospray ii. 431 

Del. Bank v. Jarvis i. 299 

v. Smith ii. 110 

Delaware Canal Co. u. Westchester 

Bank i. 498 

Delaware, &c. R. Co. !•. Napheys ii. 240 
Delhasse, Ex parte i. 17(3 

De Lisle v. Priestman ii. 129 

Delmonico r. Guillaume i. K8 

Deloach c. Turner iii. 72 

Delondre v. Shaw ii. 357 

Deloney r. Hutcheson i. 109 

l)e Long v. Stanton ii. 828 

De Longuemere v. N. Y. Fire Ins. 

Co. ii. 487, 688 

v. Tradesmen's Ins. Co. ii. 542, 554 

Deloret v. Rothschild iii. 320 

De Lovio v. Boit ii. 470 

Delver v. Barnes ii. 840, 842 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxxiii 



Demainbray v. Metealf iii. 256, 288, 291 

Demarest r. Willard iii. 424 

v. Wynkoop iii. 102, 103 

De Medeiros v. Hill i. 574, 607 

Demeritt v. Exchange Bank iii. 508 

Demi v. Bossier i. 544 

Deming v. Grand Trunk R. Co. iii. 207 

v. Kemp iii. 206 

Dcmmon r. Boylston Bank iii. 439 

De Mott v, Lara way ii. 181, 197 

v. MeMullen ' i. 411 

Demott v. Swain i. 211 

Dempsey v. Gardner i. 568; ii. 395 

Demuth r. American Institute i. 505, 506 

Den v. Ashmore i. 540 

v. Demarest ii. 933 

v. Farlee ii. 859 

v. Hammel i. 95 

d. University of North Carolina 

r. Foy iii. 481 

d. Wright 0. Wright ii. 856 

Dendy v. Powell ii. 882 

Denegre v. Hiriart i. 322 

Denew v. Daverell i. 92, 110 ; ii. 879 

Denison i\ Denison ii. 85 

v. Lee iii. Ill 

v. Seymour ii. 468 

Denman v. Bloomer i. 59 

Denmead v. Glass iii. 56 

Denn v. Chubb iii. 236 

o. Cornell ii. 940 

d. Burne v. Rawlins i. 549 
Dennett v. Atherton i. 531 

e. Cutts i. 129; ii. 60; iii. 285 
v. Dennett i. 433 
v . Short ii. 789 
v. Wyman i. 290 

Dennie v. Elliott ii. 874, 875 

v. Walker i. 300 

Dennis v. Alexander i. 566 

v. Barber iii. 212 

v. Clark i. 343, 352 

v. Ludlow ii. 473 

v. Morrice i. 316 

v. Sherman ii. 903 

Dennison v. Thomaston Ins. Co. ii. 523 

Denniston v. Cook ii- 897 

v. Imbrie iii- Ml 

v. Stewart i- 322 

Dennistoun v. Lillie ii 524 

Denny v. Cabot i. 180 

v. Conway Ins. Co. ii. 542 

v. Gilman ii- 914 

v. Lincoln i- 612 

v. Manhattan Co. i. 70 ; ii. 633 

v. Merrifleld iii- 411 

v. N. Y. Cent. R. R. iii- 194 

v. Palmer i- 306, 317 

v. Williams "i- 48 

Denoon v. Home, &c. Ass. Co. ii. 483, 491 

Densmore Oil Co. v. Densmore i- 187 

Denston v. Henderson i- 327 

v. Perkins iii- 439, 441 

Dent v. Turpin «■ 358 

Denton v. East Anglian Railway l. 154 



Denton v. Embury 




ii. 98, 99 


v. G. N. Ry. Co. 


ii 


260, 408 


v. Noyes 




i. 125 


v. Stewart 




iii. 359 


Denver v. Roane 




i. 228 


Denys v. Shuckburgh 




iii. 354 


Depau v. Humphreys 


ii 


714, 716 


v. Ocean Ins. Co. 


ii. 


508, 537 


De Pau v. Jones 




ii. 527 


De Peau v. Russell 




ii. 497 


Depeyster v. Clarkson 




i. 137 


v. Col. Ins. Co. 




ii. 506 


o. Sun Ins. Co. 


ii. 605, 


509, 532 


Depuy v. Swart 


i. 


463, 464 


Deraughn o. Heath 




iii. 183 


Derby, In re 




iii. 414 


v. Jacques 




ii. 870 


v. Johnson 




ii. 654 


v. Phelps 


ii. 68 ; iii. 41 


v. Thrall 




ii. 853 


De Ridder v. McKnight 




i. 507 


v. Schermerhorn 


i. 11 


; ii. 664 


De Rivafinoli v. Corsetti 




iii. 360 



Derocher v. Continental Mills i. 355 

De Rothschild v. R. M. Steam Packet 

Co. ii. 184, 499 

De Rouge v. Elliott ii. 608 

Derrickson v. Quimby i. 110 

Derry c. Derry i. 460 

De Rutte v. N. Y., Alb. & Buf. Tel. 

Co. ii. 279, 280, 281, 285, 290, 293 

Derwort v. Loomer ii. 233, 234, 236 

Descadillas v. Harris ii. 756 

Descharms, Ex parte iii. 464 

Deschler v. Beers ii. 675 

Desha v. Holland i. 188 

v. Pope iii- 279 

v. Sheppard i. 229 

Deshon v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 527, 

529, 684 
Des Moines Univ. v. Livingston i. 483 
De Sobry v. De Laistre ii. 700 

Despatch Linet, Bellamy Man. Co. i. 52, 

611 
De Sylva v. Henry ii. 881 

De Tasted, Ex parte iii. 419, 420, 468 

De Tastet v. Baring i. 327 

v. Sharpe iii. 466 

De Tastett v. Crousillat i- 93 

Detmold v. Reeves ii- 311 

De Tollenere v. Fuller ii. 137 

Detroit Bank v. Burkham i. 301 

Detroit, &c. R. R. Co. v. Farmers 

Bank ii. 231 

o. McKenzie ii- 226 

Detwiler ». Cox i. 552 

Deuxu.Jefferies ii. 849, 850 

Devaux v. I' Anson ii. 483, 497 

De Vaux v. I' Anson ii- 483 

De Vaux v. Salvador ii. 447, 499; iii. 192 
Devaynes v. Noble i. 228; ii. 766 

Devens v. Mechanics, &c. Co. ii. 587 

Deverell v. Bolton iii- 334 

Devereux v. Buckley iii- 207 

Deveron, The ii- 439 



lxxi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Devin v. Harris 




i. 230 


Devine v. Edwards 




i. 575 


Devlin v. Clark 




i. 331 


v. Mayor, &e. of N. Y. 




i. ^56 


Devon i\ Pawlett 




i. 145 


Devonshire v. Eglin 


iii 


327, 352 


Dewar r. Span 




ii. 710 


Dewiirt v. Clement 




i. 670 


Dewdney, Ex parte 




iii. 407 


Dewees /•. Morgan 




i. 027 


Dewey c. Alpena School Districl 


ii. 805 


v. Bell 




ii. 042 


r. Dewey 




i. 168 


t\ Field 


ii 


936, 939 


i: Humphrey 


ii 


771, 776 


v. Osborn 




iii. 237 


<-. School District 




ii. 170 


v. Watson 




iii. 310 


Devvint c. Wilste 




iii. 24S 


De Witt v. Morris 




iii. 218 


i-. Pierson 




i. 542 


c. The St. Lawrence 




ii. 392 


e. Walton 




i. 288 


Dewolf c. Pratt 




iii. 337 


De Wolf c. Archangel Ins. Co. 


ii. 532 


r. Johnson 


iii. 


123, 130 


v. Murray 




i. 322 


v. N. Y. Ins. Co. 




ii. 524 


v. Strader 




i. 127 


D'Wolfc. Harris 




ii. 395 


Dexter v. Blanchard 




iii. 31 


r. The Richmond 




ii. 439 


Dey v. Dox 




iii. 220 


v. Dunham 




iii. 15 1 


!'. Poughkeepsie Ins. Co. 


ii. 


477, 575 


Dezell v. Odell 


ii. 


936, 939 


Diamond v. Harris 




i. 537 


I lias r. The Revenge 




ii. 454 


Dibbin v. Marquis of Anglesea 


ii. 833 


Dibble v. Brown 




ii. 277 


v. Rogers 




ii. 939 


Diblin v. Murphy 




iii. 188 


Dicheno v. N. Y. Cent. R. R. 


Co. 


ii. 247 


Dickens v. Lee 




ii. 346 


v. Shepperd 




iii. 243 


Dickenson v. Conway 




12 


u. Hall 




ii. 309 


( . Lilwal 




i. 585 


v. Naule 


i. 


145, 528 


Dickerman r. Miner 




ii. 853 


Dickerson r. Brown 




ii. 84 


v. Derickson 




ii. 10 


v. Selyee 




ii. 410 


Dickey v. Am. Ins. Co. 




ii. 508 


v Brown 




iii. 144 


v. Linscott 


ij 


. 41, 792 


r. United Ins. Co. 




ii. 488 


Dickinson v. Boyle 


iii. 


195, 239 


r. Follett 




i. 035 


t'. Gay 




i. 628 


v. Grand Junction Canal Co. 


iii. 234 


v. Hatfield 




iii. 75 


v. Legare 




i. 201 


v. Shee 




ii. 77G 



i. 163, 165, 215 
ii. 161 
iii. 408 
ii. 725 

i. 218 
11, 632 

i. 409 
ii. 294 

iii. 68 

i. 634 



i. 562, 



Dickinson v. Valpy 

v. Winchester 
Dickson, E.e parte 

v. Dickson 

v. Indianapolis 

v. Jordan 

v. Miller 

v. Reuter's Telegraph Co 

v. Thompson 

v. Zizinia 

Didier v. Davison iii. 95, 96, 104 

Diehl v. Adams County Ins. Co. ii. 551 
Dietrich v. Penn. 11. Co. ii. 238, 273 

Dietriclisen r. Cabburn iii. 307 

Dietterich r. Heft i. 137, 151 

Dietz v. Mound City Ins. Co. ii. 582 

Differdorfer r. Jones i. 544 

Digby v. Atkinson iii. 248 

Diggle v. London & Blackwall R. R. 

Co. i. 154 

Dilk v. Keighley i. 353 

Dill v. O'Ferrell ii. 814 

v. South Carolina R. R. Co. ii. 212, 277 



I Dillard r. Manhattan Ins. Co. 
v. Moore 

Dillaye r. N. Y. Central R. R. Co. ii. 245, 

251 
I Dilleber v. Knickerbocker Ins. 
Diller v. Brubacker 
Dillon r. Coppin 

o. Union Pacific, &c. R. Co. 
Dilworth r. Sinderling 
| Dimmick v. Lockwood 
Dimsdale v. Robertson 
Dingle v. Hare 
Dingley v. Buffum 
Dinn v. Blake 
Dinsman c. Bradley 
Dinsmore v. Bradley 
v. Dinsmore 
v. Duncan 
Diplock v. Blackburn 



ii. 845 



ii. 601 
617 



Co. ii. 617 
ii. 120, 941 
iii. 315, 318 
ii. 45 
iii. Ill 
iii. 244 
iii. 333 
iii. 227 
i. 545 
ii. 841 
iii. 398 
iii. 508 
75,88 
i. 330 
i. 93, 97 



in. 



, Survivors of Bolds & Rhodes i. 177 



Directors B. & E. Ry. Co. v. Collins ii. 227 
Disborough r. Xeilson ii. 791 

Ditcham v. Worrall ii. 65 

i Ditchburn v. Goldsmith ii. 897 

Dittmar r. Norman i. 558 

Ditts v. Lonsdale i. 200 

Diversey r. Johnson i. 229 ; ii. 146 

Diversy v. Kellogg i. 573 

Divine r. McCormick 
Divoll v. Leadbetter 
Dix v. Cobb 

v. Otis 
Dixon, Ex parte 

v. Bell 

v. Broomfield 

v. Buck 

v. Clark 

v. Cyrus, The 

v. Dixon 

v. Dunham 

v. Green 

v. Hammond 

v. Hurrell 



i. 032 

ii. 941 

i. 251, 254, 255 

i. 165 

ii. 882 

ii. 52 

iii. 10 

i. 572 

ii. 773, 774, 779, 780 

ii. 461,466 

ii. 757, 820 

ii. 204, 209 

ii. 939 

ii. 218 

i. 402 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxxv 



Dixon v. Johnson i. 817 

v. Moyer ii. 307, 314, 315 

v. Myers i. 566 

v. Olmstead ii. 887 

v. Ramsay iii. 391 

v. Ranken ii. 40 

v. Sadler ii. 495, 527, 529 

v. Sinclair ii. 871 

v. Stansfield i. 107, 108 

v. Yates i. 562, 563, 640, 64G, 651, 

053 

Dixon Crucible Co. u. Guggenheim 

ii. 352, 358 



Doak v. Snapp 
Doake ;>. Dodsvvorth 
Doane v. Eddy 

«.'. Russell 

v. Walker 

v. "Willcutt 
Dob v. Halsey 
Dobell v . Hutchinson 

v. Stevens 
D'Obree, Ex parte 
Dobree v. Schroder 
Dobson v. Collis 

v. Harris 

w. Land 

v. Lockhart 

v. Pearce 

v. Sotheby 
Dockray v. Dockray 

v. Dunn 
Dod v. Herring 
Dodd v. Acklom 

v. Bishop 

v. Seymour 

v. Wakeman 
Doddington v. Hallet 
Dodge v. Adams 

v. Bank of Kentucky 

v. Brown 

v. Burdell 

v. Card 

v. Emerson 

v. Exchange Bank 

v. Lean 

v. Perkins 

v. Tileston 

v. Union Ins. Co. 
Dodgson v. Bell 
Dodsley v. Kinnersley 

v. Varley 
Dodson v. Harris 

o. Kayes 
Dodsworth v. Jones 
Doe v. Abernathy 

v. Acklom 

v. Adams 

v. Allen 

v. Barnard 

v. Barton 

v. Baytup 

v. Bevan 

v. Beynon 

v. Biggs 



iii. 123 

i. 172 

iii. 428 

iii. 253, 271 

ii. 873 

ii. 932 

i. 23, 208 

i. 525, 582; iii. 5 

ii. 920 

iii. 406, 460 

ii. 454 

iii. 43 

ii. 906 

ii. 564 

ii. 880 

ii. 741 

ii. 547, 548, 551 

iii. 382 

i. 309, 470 

iii. 427 

i. 544 ; ii. 940 

i. 193 

iii. 309 

i. 91 

ii. 387, 391 

i. 464 

i. 318 

i. 2'. in 

i. 457; ii. 

ii. 315 

i. 280 

i. 300 

iii. 19 

i. 97; iii. 110, 112 

i. 110; iii. 206 

ii. 317, 446, 464 

i. 383 

ii. 346 

iii. 46 

ii. 900 

ii. 643 

iii. 272 

i. 366 

ii. 940 

ii. 636 

ii. 689 

iii. 117 

i. 540, 541 ; ii. 940 

ii. 940 

iii. 449 

ii. 692 

ii. 644, 645 



Doe v. Birch 
v. Bliss 
v. Bower 
v. Brown 
v. Burt 
v. Carew 
v. Carpenter 
v. Carter 
v. Catamore 
v. Cawdor 
v. Chamberlaine 
v. Childress 
v. Clark 
v. Clarke 
v. Cooper 
v. Cox 
v. Cranstoun 
v. Crick 
v. Cuthell 
v. Davis 
v. Dixon 
v. Dodd 
v. Dunbar 
v. Eason 
v. Edgar 
v. Errington 
v. Evans 
u. Filliter 
v. Fleming 
v. Ford 
v. Foster 
v. Frowd 
v. Galloway 
o. Glenn 
v. Goldsmith 
v. Goldwin 
v. Gooch 
v. Grafton 
v. Green 
v. Groves 
v. Grubb 
u. Guy 
r. Hamilton 
v. Hare 
v. Hawke 
v. Heath 
v. Hiscocks 
v. Home 
v. Howells 
v. Hubbard 
v. Huddart 
v. Hughes 
v. Hulrae 
v. Jesson 
I/. Johnston 
v. Lambley 
v. Laming 
v. Lawder 
v. Lock 
v. Long 
v. Lucas 
v. Martin 
v. Meyrick 
v. Mills 
v. Morgan 



i. 539 

i. 539 

ii. 083 

i. 541 ; iii. 116, 119 

i. 530; ii. 680 

ii. 689 

ii. 682 

i. 538; iii. 449 

ii. 859, 860 

i. 451 

i. 549 

iii. 471 

iii. 432, 449 

i. 538, 549 

i. 541 

i. 594 

ii. 680 

i. 549 

i. 549 

iii. 236 

ii. 638 

ii. 639, 044 

i. 550 

ii. 669 

ii. 940 

ii. 929 

i. 540, 549 

iii. 175, 183 

ii. 645 

ii. 932 

ii. 940 

i. 540, 549 

i. 531; ii. 681, 682 

i. 147 

ii. 030 

i. 49, 549 

iii. 149 

i. 549 

i. 548 

ii. 936 

i. 549 

i. 141 

i. 22 

iii. 238 

i. 530 

i. 545 

ii. 681, 691, 691 

ii. 932 

ii. 933 

ii. 687 

iii. 239 

"i. 549 

i. 211, 542 

ii. 618 



i. 538 



ii. 945 
ii. 155, 549 
i. 542 
ii. 645 
i. 540; ii. 620 
i. 551 
i. 79; ii. 694 
ii. 630 
ii. 949 
ii. 687 



lxsvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Doe iv Needs 


ii. C89 


v. Palmer 


ii. 800 


a. Parkin 


ii. 682 


v. Parry 


ii. 081 


r. Pasquali 


i. 541, 549 


v. Pierce 


i. 549 


c. Pitcher 


i. 488 


v. Pittman 


i. 540 


v. Pole 


i. 543; ii. 941 


v. Porter 


i. 548 


v. Powell 


ii. 940 


v. Quigley 


i. 549 


v. Rees 


i. 539 


v. Eichardson 


ii. 831 


v. Roberts 


iii. 335 


r. Robinson 


i. 89, 90 


p. Rollings 


i. 549 


v. Salkeld 


ii. 635, 637, 080 


v. Sayer 


i. 549 


v. Seaton 


ii. 929 



v. Smith i. 548; ii. 794; iii. 430, 448 

iv Smythe i. 540 ; ii. 040 

r. Sommersett i. 549 

v. Stanion i. 541 

v. Taniere i. 499 

.v Thorp iii. 103 

v. Vardill ii. 730, 731 

v. Vickers ii. 940 

r. Walters i. 549 

v. Warren ii. 769; iii. 159, 161 

i . Watkins i. 550 

r. Watts i. 549 

v. Webster ii. 680 

v. Westlake ii. 690 

c. Whittick i. 540 

v. Wiggins ii. 940 

v. Williams ii. 638 

v. Wood i. 543 ; ii. 940 

v. Woodbridge i. 539 

Dogge iv North Western Ins. Co. ii. 477 

Dogget v. Vowell i. 47-5 

Doggett v, Emerson i. 621 ; ii. 927 

Doig v. Barkley iii. 161 

Dolan v. Scanlan i. 109 

v. Thompson i. 109 

Dold v. Geiger i. 382 

Dole v. Gold i. 322 

v. Lincoln i. 263, 205 

c. Stimpson i. 571 ; iii. 46 

v. Weeks i. 272, 298 

Dollirer iv St. Joseph Ins. Co. ii. 559 

Dolman iv Cook ii. 702 

Doloret v. Rothschild iii. 320, 325 

Dolph r. White i. 497 

Dolubdass v. Ramloll i. 49 

Domestic, &a. Co. r. Arthurhultz i. 579 

Dominick v. Michael iii. 339 

Dommett v. Bedford iii. 431, 449 

Don v. Lippman ii. 719, 721, 740 

Donahoe r. Emery iii. 244 

Donahue iv Cromartie i. 504 

Donaldson v. Beckett ii. 330 

r. Benton ii. 753 

v. Mississippi R. R. Co. ii. 47 

Donallen v. Lennox i. 480 



Donally v. Wilson _ ii. 768 

Donath v. Broomhead i. 645, 647 

v. N. A. Ins. Co. ii. 480 

Donnee v. Dow iii. 222 

Donnell v. Columbian Ins. Co. ii. 039, 773 

v. Donnell i. 264 

v. Jones iii. 183, 186, 197 

Donellan v. Read ii. 50; iii. 37, 43 

Donelly v. Corbett iii. 395, 396, 508 

i'. Harris iii. 185 

Donelson v. Colerain ii. 878 

v. Posey ii. 229, 231 

Doner i>. Staufler i. 234 

Donnington v. Mitchell i. 380, 383 

Donohoe r. Gamble ii. 129 

Doolan, In re iii. 323 

Dooley v. Gallagher i. 618 

Doolittle r. Malcom ii. 831, 833 

Doolubdass i: Ramloll i. 526; ii. 896, 897 

Doorman v. Jenkins i. 91, 476; ii. 100, 

101, 110, 168 

Doran v. Smith i. 356 

Dorchester v. Coventry iii. 239 

v. Webb ii. 852 

Dorchester & Milton Bank v: New 

England Bank i. 327 ; ii. 113, 669, 672 

Dore v. Sellers iii. 293 

Doremus v. McCormick i. 209 

Dorian ;;. Sammis ii. 925 

Dorman r. Bigelow ii. 28 

Dormer r. Williams ii. 90 

r. Knight ii. 633 

Dorothy Foster, The ii. 441 
Dorr v. N. J. Steam Nav. Co. ii. 254, 256, 

259, 207 

v. Pacific Ins. Co. ii. 398 

v. Swartwuut iii. 103, 106 

Dorrs v. Morewood ii. 221 

Dorsey v. Abrams ii. 113 

!•. Dorsey ii. 736 

r. Gassaway ii. 765 

v. Gilbert i. 149 

c. Goodenow i. 403 

v. Jackman i. 616 

v. Rockwood i. 479 

f. Watson i. 308 

v. Way man iii. 343 

Dorwin v. Potter iii. 190 

Dostal /•. JlcCaddon i. 545 

Doty v. Brown ii. 868, 870 

r. Miller i. 110 

v. Mitchell i. 409 

r. Wilder iii. 12 

v. Wilson i. 501 

Doub iv Mason ii. 941 

Doubleday v. Muskett i. 163, 164 

Dougal v. Cowles i. 207 

Dougherty r. Stamps ii. 881 

v Van Nostrand i. 173; ii. 369 

v. Western Bank of Georgia i. 309 

Doughty v. Doughty ii. 737 

?v West ii. 324 

Douglas, Ex parte iii. 256 

iv Forrest iii. 104 

iv McAllister iii. 220 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Ixxvii 



Douglas v. Moody ii. 


424, 447, 451, 456 


v. Neil 


i. 186 


v. Oldham 


ii. 71!) 


v. Patrick 


ii. 774, 775 


v. Scougal 


ii. 527 


v. Vincent 


ii. 77; iii. 33 


Douglass v. Elkins 


iii. 76 


v. Howland ii 


16, 31 : iii. 18. 31 


v. Mayor of New York ii. 708 


v. McChesney 


iii. 116, 118 


v. Reynolds 


ii. 32 


v. Spears 


iii. 1) 


v. White 


ii. 751, 823 


v. Winslow 


i. 231, 232 


Dounce v. Dow 


i. 627, 631 


Douville v. Sun Ins. Co. 


ii. 490 


Dove, The 


ii. 442 


Dow !». Drew 


iii. 160 


v. Eyster 


i. 388 


v. Greene 


iii. 279 


v. Humbert 


iii. 235 


v. Kansas, &c. E. Cc 


ii. 47 


v. Moore 


i. 200 


v. Sayward 


i. 232, 236 


v. Smith 


ii. 527, 536 


v. Tuttle 


ii. 850 


Dowd v. Faucett 


ii. 879 ; iii. 238 


Dowdall v. Lenox 


iii. 116 


Dowdle v. Camp 


iii. 63 


Dowell v. Dew 


iii. 363, 365 


v. Gen. S. N. Co. 


ii. 429 


Dowley v. Camp 


ii. 31 


Dowling v. Eggemann 


iii. 285 


v. Ford 


iii. 90 


v. McKenney 


iii. 19, 46 


Dowman, Ex parte 


iii. 462 


Down v. Hailing 


i. 293, 200 


v. Hatcher 


ii. 74!) 


v. Pinto 


ii. 37 


Downer v. Brackett 


iii. 459, 461, 478 


v. Garland 


ii. 865 


v. Rowell 


ii. 144 


v. Shaw 


ii. 740 


v. Sinclair 


ii. 781 


v. Smith 


ii. 815 


Downes v. Back 


iii. 220 


Downey v. Andrus 


ii. 747 


Downing v. Funk 


i. 471 


Downs v. Collins 


iii. 321, 361, 369 


v. Cooper 


ii. 826, 936, 044 


v. N. Y., &c. R. Co. 


ii. 246 


v. Planters Bank 


i. 318 


v. Ross 


iii. 60 


Dows v. Cobb i. 328, 651 


ii. 198, 199, 410 


o. Greene 


i. 47 


v. Griswold 


iii. 461 


Dowse v. Coxe 


ii. 849 


Dowset v. Sweet 


ii. 681 


Dowsland v. Thompson 


ii. 873 


Dowthwaite v. Tibbul 


iii. 69. 70 


Dowzelot v. Rawlings 


i. 225 


Dox v. Dey 


iii. 113 


Doyle v. Bailey 


i. 174 


v. Callow 


iii. 336 


v. Harris 


iii. 332 



Doyle f. Jessup 

o. Kiser 

v. Lord 
Doyley v. Burton 
Draco, The 
Drain v. Doggett 
Drais v. Hogan 
Drake v. Baker 

v. Beckham 

v. Elwyn 

v. Hill 

u. Mayor of Exeter 

v. Mayor of Exon 

v. Mitchell 

v. Ramey 

v. Ramsey 

v. Sear 

v. Taylor 

v. White 
Drakely v. Deforest 
Draper v. Charter-Oak Ins. Co, 



ii. 76 

ii. 277 

i. 531 

ii. 827 

ii. 401, 402, 403, 404 

ii. 747 

i. 388 

iii. 246 

iii. 455 

i. 175, 213 

i. 248 

iii. 435 

iii. 454 

ii. 852 

i. 180 

i. 177, 366 

iii. 219 



v. Com. Ins. Co. 

v. Glassop 

v. Pattina 

v. Romeyn 

v. Weld 

v. Wood 
Draughan v. Buntin 
Draxel v. Man 
Drayton v. Dale 
Drennen v. House 

u. Walker 
Dresser v. Ainsworth 

v. Brooks 

v. Dresser 
Dresser Manuf. Co. v. Waterston 
Drew v. Drew 

v. Nunn 

v. Power 

v. Towle i. 495 

v. Woolcock 
Drewe v. Corp 

v. Hanson 
Driesbach v. National Bank 
Driggs v. Dwight 
Drinan v. Nichols 



iii. 440 

ii. 791 

iii. 30 

ii. 542, 

657 

ii. 527 

iii. 108 

iii. 9 

ii. 30 

i. 283 

ii. 853 

iii. 25 

iii. 237 

i. 300 ; iii. 458 

i. 178, 213 

i. 51 

i. 616 

iii. 388, 461 

i. 2C5 

iii. 215 

iii. 106 

i. 76 

iii. 116 

ii. 875 

ii. 833 

iii. 357 

i. 523 

iii. 124 

iii. 195, 246 

ii. 745 



Drinkwater v. Goodwin i. 107 ; ii. 745, 
883; iii. 275, 276 



v. Tebbetts 

v. The Spartan 
Driscol v. Passmore 
Driscoll v. Bovil 
Drover's Bank v. Brown 
Drue v. Thome 
Druid, The 
Drummond v. Burrell 

v. Hopper 

v. Irish 

v. Wood 
Drumright v. Philpot 
Drury v. Connor 

v. Defontaine i. 

v. Drury 

v. Foster 



i. 315 

ii. 407 

ii. 524, 532 

ii. 533 

i. 271 

ii. 731 

i. 114 

iii. 41 

i. 435 

ii. 88 

i. 103 

i. 122 

iii. 309, 310, 349 

488 ; ii. 898, 899 

i. 371 

ii. 861 



ii. 49 ; 



lxxviii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Drury v. Hervey 
t. Hooke 
v. Macale 
v. Molins 
v. Shumway 
v Smith 

Dry v. Davy 



i. 579 
ii. 08 
iii. 310 
iii. 32H 
iii. 242 
i. 205 
ii. 5, 21 



Dryburg v. N. Y. & Wash Pr. Tel. Co. 

ii. 289, 290 
Dry Dock Bank r. Amer. Life Ins. 

& Trust Co. iii. 117, 158 

Drysdale v. Mace iii. 338, 371 

Dublin v. Wicklow R. R. v. Black i. 305, 

375 

Dubois, Ex parte iii. 472 

v. Baura iii. 311 

v. Del. & Hud. Canal Co. ii. 62, 813 

v. Hull iii. 2'JU 

„. Kelly i. 545,547; iii. .'57 

w. Mason i. 283 

Dubois' Appeal i. 128 

Dubose v. Wheddon i. 353 

Dubuisson v. Folkes ii. 27, 30 

Dubuque Bank v. Carpenter i. 210 

Ducat v. Chicago i. 155 

Duchess de Brabant, The ii. 454 

Duchess of Kingston's case ii. 800 

Duckett v. Williams ii. 590 

Duckworth v. Alison ii. 870 

Dudgeon v. Pembroke ii. 495, 498, 530 

r. Teass ii. 138 

Dudley v. Mallery ii. 820 

v. Mayhew ii. 330 

v. Nettlefold ii 830 

v. Smith ii. 230, 242 

v. Thomas ii. 831 

v. Warde i. 547 

Dufaur v. Professional Life Ass. Co. ii. 604 

Duff v. Budd ii. 224, 201, 203, 272 

v. Gardner i. 12 

v. Lawrence ii. 425 

v. Snider iii. 40 

v. The East India Co. ii. 740 

v. Wilson i. 541 

Duffee v. Mason i. 021! 

Duffell v. Wilson ii. 481 

Duffle v. Hayes ii. 423 

Duffield ». Brainerd i. 222 

v. Creed iii. 07 

Duffy v. Ins. Co. i. 410 

v. Patten ii. 770 ; iii. 41 

Dufolt v. Gorman ii. 221 

Dufour v. Morse i. 317 

Dugan v. Gittings iii. 102, 372 

v. Nichols i. 567 ; iii. 441 

Dugdale v. Lovering i. 36 

Duguet v. Rhinelander ii. 479 

Duhring v. Duhring i. 108 

Duignan v. Walker ii. 890 

Duke of Beaufort v. Neeld i. 41 

Duke of Bedford, The ii. 403, 404 

Duke of Manchester, The ii. 4f>8 

Duke of Dorset r. Lord Hawarden ii. 681 

Duke of Norfolk v. Worthy i. 65, 525, 

582 



Duke of Northumberland v. Erring- 
ton ii- 033, 642 
Duke of Queensbury v. Shebbeare ii. 330 
Duke of St. Albans v. Shore ii. 662, 663 
Duker o. Franz ii- 853 
Dula v. Cowles ii- 051 
Dulaney v. Payne ii- 769 
v. The Peragio ii. 439 
Dulany v. Rogers iii. 353 
Dullaghan v. Fitch iii. 172 
Dulles v. De Forest ii. 706 
Dulty v. Brownfield i. 361, 370 
Dumaresly v. Fishly ii. 720 
Dumas v. Jones ii. 491 
Dumont v. Ruepprecht i. 221 
Dumper r. Symras i. 153 
Dunbar r. Bonesteel ii. 917 
v. Brown ii. 31 
v. Garrity ii. 764 
v. Glenn ii. 353 
v. Marden ii. 809 
v. McFall ii. 909 
v. Tredennick i. 93 
v. Tyler i. 308 
v. Williams ii. 44 
Duncan v. Benson ii. 404 
v. Bloomstock ii. 874 
v Cafe ii. 700, 761 
v. Clark i. 207 
i'. Course i. 325 
v. Caiman ii. 713 
v. Duncan ii. 829 
17. Hodges ii. 861 
v. Holcomb ii. 869 
v. Kock ii. 512 
v. Lewis i. 556 
v. Maryland Savings Institution 

iii. 139, 143 

v. McCullough i. 308, 435 ; iii. 373 

v. Railroad Co. ii. 137 

v. Stone i. 578, 579 

17. Sun Ins. Co. ii. 482, 517, 542, 547 

e. Tombeckbee Bank i. 211 

v. Topham i. 515, 516 

Duncan's Appeal i. 410 

Duncklee v. Locke i. 129 ; ii. 60, 875 

Duncomb v. Tickridge i. 350 

Duncuft v. Albrecht i. 522 ; iii. 56, 324, 

325 
Dundas v. Dundas ii. 701 



v. Dutens 


ii. 77 


Dundee, The 


ii. 454 


Dunham v. Dodge 


iii. 89 


v. Gould 


iii. 158 


v. Pettee 


ii. 663 


v. Presby 


i. 175 


v. Rogers 


i. 180 



v. Greenfield Steam Mills Co. i. 265 

Dunkley ;•. Farris i. 79 

Dunlap v. Hales i. 364, 365 

v. Hunting ii. 103, 786 

v. International, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 275 

v. Thompson i. 319 

v. Watson i. 187, 228 

Dunlevy v. Talmadge iii. 292 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxxix 



Dunlop v. Gregory ii. 893 

v. Grote iii. 22a 

v. Higgins i. 514, 516; iii. 212, 221 

v. Munroe ii. 154 

v. Waugli i. G22 

Dunman v. Strother ii. 896 

Dunn v. Grand Trunk R. Co. ii. 245 

v. Johnson iii. 198 

v. Murray ii. 836 

v. Sayles ii. 49 

v. Slee i. 33 

v. Smith i. 301 

v. Snell i. 255, 257 

v. Sparks iii. 463 

v. Wade i. 35 

v. West ii. 838 ; iii. 24 

Dunnage v. Joliffe ii. 204 

Dunne v. Deery i. 142 

o. English i. 93, 187 

v, Ferguson iii. 35 

Dunnell v. Mason i. 101 

Dunning v. Chamberlain iii. 104 

v. Merrill iii. 129 

v. Roberts ii. 298 

Dunning's Appeal i. 243 

Dunscomb v. Dunscomb i. 137 

Dunseth v. Bank of United States iii. 239 

Dunton v. Brown i. 361 

Dupee v. Boston Water Power Co. i. 158 

Dupeyre v. Western Ins. Co. ii. 496, 529 

Duplanty v. Commercial Ins. Co. ii. 484 

Dupont v. McLaran i. 220 

Dupont de Nemours v. Vance ii. 442, 448 

Duport v. Wildgoose ii. 829 

Du Pratt v. Lick i. 115 

Dupuy v. United Ins. Co. ii- 515 

Durand v. Carrington ii. 866 

v. Thouron ii. 567 

Durant v. Essex Co. ii. 870 

v. Mass. Hospital Ins. Co. iii- 429 

v. Rogers i- 208 

v. Titley i. 399 

Durborrow's Appeal i. 232 

Durell v. Wendell i. 28 

Durfee v. Jones ii. 106 

Durgy, &c. Co. v. O'Brien i. 640, 641, 645 



Durham p. Arledge 

v. Bischoff 

v. Carbon Coal Co. 

v. Manrow 

v. Price 

v. Wadlington 
Durkee v. Vt. Central R. R. 
Durnford v. Lane 
Durrell v. Bederly 

u. Evans 
Durrum v. Hendrick 
Duryea v. Burt 
Duryeas v. Whitcomb 
Dusar v. Murgatroyd 
Dusenberry v. Ellis 
Dustan v, M'Andrew 
Dutcher v. Dutcher 

v. Marine Bank 

v. Wright 



ii. 11 

i. 248 

i. 155 

iii. 28 

i. 308 

i. 468 

ii. 299 

i. 481 

ii. 524 

i. 593 

i. 307 

i. 196 

i. 176, 184 

ii. 454 

i. 69, 72 

iii. 225 

ii. 737 

iii. 440 

ii. 797; iii. 460 



Dutchess Co. v. Davis 


ii. 942 


Dutton v. Dutton 


i. 411 


u. Gerrish 


i. 633 


o. Hutchinson 


iii. 95 


v. Marsh 


i. 58 


o. Morrison i. 224, 


234, 237 ; iii. 441 


v. Poole i 


496,498; iii. 353 


v. Solomonson 


i. 573 ; iii. 226 


v. Tilden 


ii. 686 


v. Willner 


i. 97 


Duvall v. Craig 


i. 68 


v. Farmers Bank i 


308, 382 ; iii. 139 


v. Farmers Bank of 


Maryland ii. 674 


Dwight v. Ames 


iii. 411, 421 


v. Appletons 


ii. 335 


v. Blackmar 


i. 95 


v. Brewster ii. 


175, 179, 246, 275 


v. Emerson 


i. 290, 315 


u. Newell 


i. 272 


v. Pease 


i. 273 


Dwyer v. Edie 


ii. 605 


Dye !'. Kerr 


ii. 52 


Dyer i\ Brannock 


ii. 84 


v. Burnham 


i. 69 


v. Cady 


ii. 936 


v. Clark 


i. 168, 170, 223 


v. Covington 


i. 280 


v. Dorsey 


iii. 246 


v. Gibson 


ii. 28, iii. 26 


v. Hargrave 


iii. 356 


v. Hunt 


ii. 700 


v. Lewis 


ii. 394 


a. Libby 


i. 564, 567 


v. Pearson 


ii. 938 


v. Rich 


ii. 802 


v. Shurtleff 


i. 93 


Dykers v. Allen 


ii. 126, 128 


Dykes v. Blake 


i. 523, 525, 582 


v. Leather M. Bank 


i. 297 


Dyott v. Letcher 


iii. 96 


Dyster, Ex parte 


iii. 465 



E. 



Eaden v. Titchmarsh 
Eades v. Booth 
Eadie v. Ashbaugh 
Eads v. H. D. Bacon, The 

v. Williams 
Eager v. Atlas Ins. Co. 

v. The Commonwealth 
Eagle ". Swayze 

v. White 
Eagle Bank v. Chapin 

v. Smith i. 298, 

Eagle Fire Co. a. Lent 
Eagle, &c. Co. v. Shattuck 
Eagleson v. Shotwell 
Eaken v. Thorn 
Eames, Ex parte 

v. Godfrey ' 

v. Home Ins. Co. 
Eardley v. Price 



i. 12 

i. 352 

i. 62, 75 

ii. 442 

ii. 843 

ii. 516 

iii. 103 

i. 533 

ii. 196, 212 

i. 321 

301, ii. 753 

i. 368 

iii. 28 

iii. 118 

ii. 461 

iii. 400 

ii. 315 

ii. 540, 543 

ii. 44 



lxxx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Earl v. Peck i. 466 

v. Shaw ii. 475, 479, 532 

v. Stacker ii. 832 

Earl of Bedford v. Bishop of Exeter 

ii. 863 

Earl of Bristol v. Wilsmore i. 664; ii. 914 

Earl of Buckinghamshire v. Drury i. 371 

Earl of Chesterfield v. Janssen iii. 147, 150 

Earl of Falmouth v. Thomas iii. 35, 30 

Earl of Granard v. Dunkin ii. 336 

Earl of Litchfield, In re iii. 421, 425 

Earl of Mansfield v. Ogle iii. 149 

Earl of Shrewsbury v. Gould ii. 640 

Earle v. Dickson iii. 107 

v. Harris ii. 520 

o. Peale i. 338 

v. Reed i. 353 

v. Rowcroft ii. 500 

v. Sawyer ii. 311, 315, 3'27 

Early v. Elannery ii. 765 

i'. Garrett i. 615, 635 

Earnest v. Parke i. 463 

East Carver Co. c. Manuf. Ins. Co. ii. 490 

East St. Louis v. St. Louis Gas, &c. 

Co. ii. 932 

East Tennessee B. R. Co. v. Nelson ii. 185 
Easterlin v. Rylander i. 561 

Easterly v. Cole iii. 110, 111 

Eastern Counties Bailway Co. v. 

Broom i. 153 

v. Philipson ii. 000 

Eastern R. R. Co. v. Benedict iii. 48 

v. Belief Ins. Co. ii. 687 

Eastern Star, The ii. 459 

Eastern Union R.R. Co. v. Cochrane ii. 18 
East Haddam Bank v. Scovil i. 91, ii. 113 
Eastham p. Anderson iii. 38 

East Hartford v. Hartford Bridge 

Company iii. 483 

East India Co., Ex parte iii. 401 

v. Henchman i. 95 

v Hensley i. 41 

v. Prince iii. 69 

v. Pullen ii. 189 

v. Vincent ii. 939 

Eastman v. Clark i. 183 

v. Coos Bank i. 120 

v. Foster iii. 408 

v. McAlpin iii. 382 

!>. Rapids ii. 770 

r. Wright i. 254, ii. 852 

Easton Bank i>. Commonwealth iii. 498 

v. Worthington i. 556 

East River Bank i>. Kennedy i. 132 

Eastwood v. Brown i. 570 

v. Kenyon i. 460, 465, iii. 21, 23, 28 

v. Suville iii. 84 

Eaton v. Bell i. 136, iii. 141, 159 

v. Benton ii. 52 

v. Boissonnault iii. 13 

v. Boston, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 248 

v. Eaton ii. 737 

v. Hill ■ i. 356 

v. Jacques iii. 424 

v. Lincoln ii. 751 



Eaton v. Lyon 


ii. 625 


v. McKown 


i. 297 


u. Smith 


ii. 624, 625 


v. Whitaker 


iii. 347 


Ebenezer, The 


ii. 440, 519 


Eberman v. Beitzell 


i. 489 



Ebert's Executors v. Ebert's Admin- 
istrators ii. 835 
Eccleston v. Clipsham i. 14, 15 
Echols v. Cheney i. 40 
Ecker v. Bohn iii. 463 
Eclectic Ins. Co. v. Fahrenkrg ii. 543 
Eclipse Windmill Co. u. Thorson ii. 745, 

747 

Edan i\ Dudfield ii. 772 

Eddie v. Davidson i. 234 

Eddins v. Buck ii. 79 

Eddowes v. Hopkins iii. 112 

Eddy, The ii. 407 

v. Badger iii. 144 

v. Clement ii. 880 

v. Herrin i. 444 

v. Livingston . ii. 110 

Edelen v. Gough iii. 17, 18, 31 

Edelston v. Edelston ii. 376 

Eden v. Parkinson ii. 519 

Edens v. Williams i. 222 

Edes v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 575, 577 

Edgar v. Boies ii. 660, iii. 231 

v. Knapp i. 31, 34 

Edgell v. Hart . i. 613 

v. McLaughlin ii. 896 

v. Stanford iii. 125 

Edgerly !•. Emerson ii. 6 

v. Farmers Ins. Co. ii. 586 

v. Whalan i. 387 

Edgerton v. Clark iii. 236 

' v. N. Y., &c. R. E. Co. ii. 245 

Edick v. Crim i. 616 

Edie v. East India Co. i. 278, 286, ii. 674 

Edinboro Acad. v. Dobinson i. 482 

Edington v. Pickle ii. 879 

Edis v. Bury ii. 640 

Edleston v. Edleston ii. 355, 373 

v. Vick ii. 364, 367, 369, 374 

Edmands v. Mutual Ins. Co. ii. 575 

Edmiston v. Wright iii. 206 

Edmond v. Caldwell ii. 757 

Edmonson v. Davis i. 209 

v. Dyson i. 376 

v. Stephenson ii. 48 

Edmunds v. Bushell i. 41 

v. Dowries iii. 77 

Edson v. Fuller i. 304, 474 

Edwards, Ex parte iii. 416, 419, 420 

v. Aberayon Ins. Co. ii. 846 

v. Baltimore Ins. Co. ii. 587 

v. Barrow ii. 698 

v. Baugh i. 472 

v. Beaird iii. 292 

v. Brewer i. 642, 645 

v. Burt i. 466 

v. Chapman ii. 815 

u. Child ii. 458 

v. Coleman iii. 426 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxxxi 



Edwards v. Coombe 
</. Cottrell 
v. Davis 
o. Etherington 
i: Footner 
v. Goldsmith 



iii. 411 

i. 557 

i. 343, 361 

i. 532, 633 

i. 79 ; ii. 524 

ii. 625, 684 



v. Grand Junction R. Co. iii. 315 
v. Great Western R. R. Co. ii. 185, 

187 

v. Harben i. 569 

v. Hart ii. 783 

v. Hodding i. 85; ii. 761 

v. Kearzey iii. 506 

v. Kelly iii. 31 

v. Lord ii 236 

v. Martin iii. 242 

v. McCaddon iii. 511 

v, McFall _ i. 189 

v. McLeay iii. 371 

c. Owen ii. 912 

.,. Parkhurst ii. 909 

a. Remington i. 185 

o. R. F. Stockton, The ii. 434 

r. Sherratt ii. 186, 217 

v. Skirving iii. 129 

v. St. Louis Ins. Co. ii. 400 

v. State, &c. ii. 934 

v. Temple ii. 882 

v. Todd ii. 414 

v. Towels i. 394 

a. Varick ii. 932 

v. Williams iii. 172 

Edwin, The ii. 409 

Eeles, In re iii. 417 

Egan v. Mut. F. Ins. Co. ii. 542, 554, 557 

Egbert v. Lippman ii. 306 

Egberts v. Wood i. 201, 238 

Egerton v. Furzeman ii. 897 

v. Mathews iii. 9, 16 

Eggleston v. Boardman i. 128 

Egleston v. Knickerbacker ii. 686 

Egremont v. Langdon ii. 940 

Ehle r. Judson i- 464 

v. Purdy _ i- H 

Ehringhaus v. Ford iii- 118 

E. I. Comp. v. Henchman i. 95 

Eiuhelberger ». Barnitz i. 620; ii. 918 

Eicke v. Nokes iii- 77 

Eighth Bank v. Fitch i. 232 

Eilenberger v. Protective Ins. Co. i. 79 ; 

6 ii. 543 

Eisdell v. Coningham 

Ekins v. East India Co. 

n. Marklish 
Ela v. Card 
Elam v. Carruth 
Eland v. Karr 
Elbers v. United Ins. Co. 
Elbinger Co. v. Armstrong 

v. Clave 
Elcox v. Hill 
Elder, Ex parte 
o. Littler 

v. True "'• 

v. Warfield 



in. ZSO 

ii. 716 

i. 103 

i. 406 

i. 52 

ii. 882 

ii. 479 

iii. 223 

i. 105 

ii. 158 

iii. 471 

i. 147 

242, 244 

ii. 8 



Elderkin v. Elderkin iii. 426 

Elderton v. Emmens ii. 49, 801 

Eldred v. Hawes i. 309 

Eldridge v. Uenson i. 581 

v. Long Island R. R. Co. ii. 236 

v. Rowe ii. 37, 657 

v. Wadleigh i. 616 

Electra, The ii. 435 

Elephanta, The ii. 404 

Elfe v. Gadsden iii. 12 

Elford v. Teed i. 303 

Elgar, Ex parte iii. 462 

o. Watson ii. 773 

Eliason v. Henshaw i. 505, 514 

Eliott v. Giese ii. 471 

Eliver v. Beste iii. 409 

Eli Whitney, The ii. 420 

Elizabeth, The ii. 439 

v. Rickers ii. 462 

Elizabeth & Jane, The ii. 442 

Eliza Jane, The ii. 383 

Elkin v. Janson ii. 522, 525 

v. Moore iii. Ill 

Elkington v. Holland i. 126 

Elkins v. Boston & Maine R. R. ii. 175, 

184 
v. Parkhurst i. 489 ; ii. 785, 789 

Ellen v. Topp ii. 56 

Ellershaw v. Magniac i. 650 ; ii. 411 

Ellery i\ Cunningham iii. 112 

v. New Eng. Ins. Co. ii. 497 

Ellett-o. Tyler iii. 295 
Ellicott v. Alliance Ins. Co. ii. 507, 508, 

512 

o. Martin i. 273 

v. Nichols iii- 72 

v. Peterson iii. 43 

v. White iii- 357 

Elliot v. Bradley i- 108 

„. Collier i. 380 

u. Cooper i. 279 

v. Davis i. 122, 124 

v. Hamilton InB. Co. ii. 545, 557 

v. Wilson ii- 532 

Elliott v. Bishop i- 545 

u. Bradbury iii- 275 

v. Cordell iii- 438 

u. Giese "■ 7; iii. 17 

v. Gurr ii. 87, 727 

v. Horn i- 355 

v. Minott iii- HI 

v. Rossell ii- 181 

u. Sleeper ii- 757 

v. Smith i-_641 

v, Swartwout i- 85 

v. Thomas iii- 49 

Ellis, Ex parte iii- 474 
v. Am. Tel. Co. u. 280, 281, 282, 286, 
287, 294 

v. Brown i- 274, 284 

v. Chinnock iii. 227 

v. Commercial Bank i. 306, 311 

v. Emmanuel ''• 6 
v. Essex Merrimack Bridge i. 149 
„. Hamlen i. 494; ii. 39, 655 



VOL. I. 



/ 



lxxxii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Ellis v. Higgins 
p. Hunt 
v. James 
i>. M'Henry 
v. Nimmo 
p. Paige 
p. Schmoeck 
v. Secor 



i. 575, 648 
ii. 220 
ii. 737 
iii. 318 
i. 549; ii. 794 
i. 163 
i. 265 



v. Sheffield Gas Consumers Co. i. 116 

v. Sisson i. 257 

p. Thompson i. 581 ; ii. 666, 704 

v. Turner i. 114; ii. 258 

r. Warnes iii. 129 

v. Wild i. 302 

». Willard ii. 412, 418 

Ellison v. Chapman i, 184 

v. Collingridge i. 281 

p. Ellison iii. 315 

u. Elwin iii. 438 

Ellsworth v. Lockwood ii. 6 

v. Tartt i. 176 

Elmendorf v. Harris ii. 843 

Elmore v. Kingscote iii. 14 

p. Naugatuck R. R. Co. ii. 231 

p. Sands ii. 246 

v. Stone i. 571 ; iii. 46, 47 

Elphick !•. Barnes i. 581 

Elsee v. Gatward ii. Ill 

Elston p. Jasper i. 434 

Eltham v. Kingsman i. 74; ii. 759 

Elting p. Seott ii. 524 

v. Vanderlyn i. 470 

Elton, Ex parte i. 238 

v. Brogden i. 635 ; ii. 500 

v. Jordan i. 635 

t*. Larkins ii. 912 

Elwell v. Chamberlin i. 66 

Grove, The ii. 440 

Elwes v. Maw i. 546, 547 

Ely p. Ely i. 537 ; ii. 589, 860 

v. James ii. 756 

v. McClung iii. 116 

p. Webster ii. 894 

Elysville Manuf. Co. «. Okisko Co. 

i. 154 ; iii. 295 

Emancipation, The ii. 402, 403 

Emanuel p. Bird i. 238 

Emblem, The ii. 440, 441 

Emblin v. Dartnell i. 309 

Embree v. Hanna ii. 738 

Emdin p. Darley ii. 875 

Emerick v Sanders iii. 25 

Emerson v. Baj lies ii. 877 

u. Brigliam i. 632 

v. Davies ii. 334, 335, 336, 341, 342, 

343 

v. Harmon i. 205 

p. Heelis i. 525 

".Hogg ii. 314, 315 

v. Ilowland ii. 38, 464 

p. Knower i. 210 

v. Partridge ii. 713 

v. Slater ii. 685; iii. 29 

Emery v. Chase i. 458 

v.Emery i. 393; ii. 834 



Emery v. Hersey 
v. Hitchcock 
v. Irving Bank 
u. Kempton 
v. Neighbour 
v. O wings 
v. Smitli 
v. Wase 
Ernes !>. Widowson 
Emily, The 
Emly r. Lye 
Emma Johnson, The 
Emmanuel, The 
Emmens v. Elderton 
Emmerson v. Helis 
Emmett v. Norton 

v. Tottenham 
Emmons v. Littlefleld 

v. Lord 

v. Murray 

r. Westfield Bank 
Emmott v. Kearns 
Emory v. Greenough 



ii. 195, 225, 456 

ii. 828 

i. 578 

i. 349 

i 402 

ii. 843 

iii. 43 

ii. 834; iii. 369 

ii. 821 

ii. 432 

i. 194, 203 

ii. 414 

ii. 519 

ii. 30 

i. 125 ; iii. 12, 35 

i. 43, 47, 393, 401, 

402 

i. 270 

i. 458 

ii. 44 

i. 364 

i. 177 

i. 472 

ii. 737 ; iii. 396, 

397 

Empire State, The ii. 435 

Empire Trans. Co. v. Wamsutta Oil 

Co. ii. 172, 270 

Empson v. Soden i. 646, 547 

Emulous, Schooner, and Cargo ii. 437 

Ender v. Scott i. 623 

Enderby v. Gilpin iii. 152 

Enfield Toll Bridge Co. v. Hartford 

&, New Haven R. R. Co. iii. 490, 492, 

494, 495 

England v. Curling iii. 321 

v. Davison ii. 831 

r. Lewis iii. 292 

English p. Blundell i. 11, 14, 23 

v. Harvey i. 137 

v. New Haven, &c. R. R. Co. iii. 484 

Enicks v. Powell i. 36 

Enlow v. Klein i. 578 

Ennis v. Walker iii. 12 

u. Williams i. 190 

Eno v. Crooke i. 259 

Enoch Morgan's Sons' Co. p. Troxell 

ii. 353 
Ensminger r. Marvin i. 204 

Enterprise, The ii. 458 

Enterprise Ins. Co. v. Parisot ii. 573 

Entwistle v. Ellis ii. 474, 490 

Entz v. Mills iii. 12 

Enys v. Donnithorne i. 12, 15, 30 

Episcopal Charitable Society v. Epis- 
copal Church i. 154 
Epler v. Funk i. 299 
Epley v. Witherow ii. 939 
Eppes v. Tucker ii. 446 
Epps p. Hinds ii. 159 
Equitable Ins. Co. p. Paterson ii. 598, 

605 
Erie Bank p. Gibson ii. 24 

Erie, &c. Trans. Co. v. Dater ii 265 

Erie Railway v. Union, &c. Co. i. 485 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxxxiii 



Erie R. Co. v. Wilcox 


ii. 257 


Evans v. Tweedy 




iii. 75 


Ernst v. Bartle 


i. 12 


v. Underwood 




i. 280 


v. Steckman 


i. 281 


v. Walshe 




iii. 323 


Errington v. Aynesley 


iii. 824 


v. Wells 




i. 56 


Krskine v. Adeane 


i. 632 


Evansville, &c. R. R. Co. v. Baum i. 114 


v. Plummer 


iii. 35 


v. Lowdermilk 




iii. 191 


Krwin i;. Bank of Kentucky 


i. 569 


v. Young 




ii. 270 


v. Blake i. 11 


131 ; ii. 746 


Eve v. Moseley 




ii. 823 


<.. Maxwell 


i. 623 


Evelyn v. Chichester 




i. 374 


v. Parhara 


iii. 316 


v. Radish 




iii. 248 


v. Saunders i 


. 463 ; ii. 685 


Everard v. Watson 




i. 322 


r. United States 


iii. 434 


Everett v. Collins 




ii. 755 


Ksilaile v. La Nauze 


i. 42 


v. Desborough i. 62 


; ii. 


597, 598, 


Kslileman v. Harnish 


iii. 26 






912 


Kskridge v. Glover 


i. 506 


a. Hall 




i. 579 


Esniay v. Fanning 


ii. 137 


v. London Ins. Co. 




ii. 570 


Esposito v. Bowden 


ii. 425 


v. Stone 




iii. 380 


Espy v. Cincinnati Bank 


i. 301 


Everhart v. Puckett 




ii. 93 


v. Jones 


ii. 75 


Everitt v. Chapman i. 175, 


176 


198, 213 


Ess v. Truscott 


i. 89 


Everman v. Robb 




iii. 302 


Essex Co. v. Edwards i. 


274, 275, 285 


Evernghim v. Ensworth i 


. 208 ; " : 


Estep v. Estep 


i. 532 


Everson v. Carpenter 




i. 364 


Estes v. Power 


i. 322 


Everth v. Hannam 




ii. 500 


Estis v. Rawlins 


iii. 104 


Evertson v. Newport Bank 




i. 330 


Estwick v. Caillaud 


iii. 382 


o. Tappen 




i. 136 


Esty v. Aldrich 


iii. 43 


Ewart v. Nagel 




i. 407 


Eten v. Luyster 


i. 538 


v. Stark 




ii. 162 


Etheridge v. Binney 


i. 204 


v. Street 




ii. 171 


Etherington v. Parrot i. 


387, 389, 394 


Ewbank v. Nutting 




ii. 466 


Etherinton o. Prospect Park 


, &c. R. 


Ewen v. Terry 




ii. 874 


Co. 


iii. 209 


Ewer v. Coffin 




ii. 743 


Etting v. Schuylkill Bank 


i. 306 


v. Jones 




i. 141 


Eubanks v. Banks 


ii. 699 


v. Washington Ins. Co. 


ii. 


473, 475 


v. Peak 


i. 370 


Ewers v. Hutton 




i. 402 


Eureka Co. v. Bailey 


i. 155 


Ewin, In re 




ii. 701 


Europa, The 


ii. 433 


Ewing r. Bailey 




ii. 797 


Evans v. Ashley 


iii. 12 


v. Blount 


iii 


210, 212 


v. Atlantic R. Co. 


ii. 47 


v. Ewing 




i. 460 


v. Bell 


ii. 3, 908 


v. French 




ii. 142 


v. Bidwell 


i. 540 


!'. Howard 




iii. 124 


v. Birch 


ii. 53 


u. Osbaldiston 




i. 175 


v. Bremmer 


i. 273 


v. Tees 




i. 46 


v. Davies 


iii. 83 


Exall v. Partridge 




i. 12, 500 


v. Drummond 


i. 189, 192 


Excelsior Ins. Co. v. Royal 


Ins. 


Co. 


v. Eaton ii. 307, 311, 315, 322 ; 


i. 49 


> 'i 


471, 564 




iii. 480 


Exchange Bank v. Hartford 




i. 330 


i7. Evans 


i. 68, 397 


v. Rice 


i 


303, 497 


v. Harris 


i. 570 


Exeter Bank v. Gordon 




ii. 119 


v. Hutton 


ii. 415 


v. Rogers 




ii. 17 


v. Jones 


ii. 897 


v. Sullivan 




iii. 90 


v. Keeland 


ii. 9 


Exeter, The 




ii. 403 


v. Lipscomb 


i. 263 


Exon v. Russell 


i 


309, 310 


v. Llewellyn 


i. 523 


Exposito v. Bowden 




ii. 806 


v. Mann 


iii. 426 


Exton v. Scott 




iii. 315 


v. Marlett 


ii. 410 


Eyles v. Ellis 




ii. 758 


v. Montgomery 


iii. 506 


Eyre, Ex parte 




iii. 462 


v. Negley 
v. Powis 


iii. 116 


v. Eyre 




iii. 348 


ii. 819 


v. Glover 


ii 


480, 483 


d. Pratt 


ii. 666 


v. Jackson 




iii. 425 


v. Prosser 


ii. 882 


v. Marine Ins. Co. 


ii 


488, 667 


v. Roberts 


iii. 35 


Eabens v. Mercantile Bank 


i. 74; ii. 113 


v. Sanders 


ii. 636 


Faber v. Faber 


ii 


373, 375 


v. Soule 


ii. 258 


Fackler v. Fackler 




iii. 107 


v. Spriggs 

v. The Charles 


iii. 397 


FRgin v. Coggin 




i. 355 
i. 103 


ii. 439 


Fahnestock v. Bailey 





lxxxiv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Fahy v. North ii 

Fair v. M'lver iii. 

Fail-bank v. Leary ii. 

Fairburn v. Eastwood iii. 
Fairchild v. Cal. Stage Co.ii. 240; iii. 

v. Fairchild i. 

v. Holly ii. 

v. Sloeum ii. 

Fairclough v. Pavia i. 

Fairfax v. Hunter i. 

Fairlee v. Herring i. 

Fairlie, Ex parte iii. 

v. Christie ii. 

v. Fenton i. 
Fairmount R. R. Co. *. Stutler ii. 

Fairtitle v. Gilbert ii. 

Faithorne v. Blaquire i. 

Fake v. Smith iii. 

Falconer v. Montgomery ii. 

Faler v. Jordan i. 

Fales v. Russel i. 

Falk, Ex parte i. 

Falkenburg v. Lucy ii. 

Falkland v. Cheney i. 

Falkner v. Case iii. 

Faller v. Faller ii 

Falley v. Giles i. 

Fallowes v. Taylor i 
Fall River Iron Works v. Croade 

iii. 409 : 

Fall River Union Bank Co. o. Stur- 

tevant i 
Fall River Wh. Co. v. Borden 
Falls v. Gaither 
Falmouth v. Roberts 
Falton v. Hood 
Falvey v. Northern Co. 
Fannin v. Anderson 
Fanning v. Chadwick 

v Consequa 

v. Dunham 
Fanny, The 
Fanny & Elmira, The 

Fanton v. Fairfield Co. Bank i. 

Farebrother v. Ansley i 

v. Simmons ii 

Fareira v. Gahell i. Ill; ii. 

Fargo v. Ames j. 

Farina t>. Hone ii 

v. Silverlock ii. 357, 373, 

Faris v. King iii. 

v. Newburyport Ins. Co. ii. 

Farish »•. Reigle ii. 234, 

Farlow, Ex parte i. 

Farmeloe v. Bain i. 639; iii. 

Farmer v. Francis i 

v. Legg 



i. 505, 



in. 

184, 185, 

ii. 713, 

iii. 136, 

ii. 

ii. 



v. Sewall 
v. Stewart 
v. Willard 
Farmers Bank i 



in. 
473 



153, 



Bowie 



u. Detroit, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 

v. Duvall i. 306, 

v. Ellis i. 

v. Green i. 



.41 
469 

888 
448 
178 
167 
766 
226 
273 
448 
304 
462 
474 
107 
245 
931 
407 
158 
842 
200 
332 
641 
352 
217 
288 
i.91 
532 
456 

436 

216 
167 
514 
857 
915 
233 
106 
186 
716 
157 
383 
396 
258 
.36 
. 11 
896 
232 
i."48 
375 
127 
484 
239 
238 
273 
i. 62 
496 
156 
843 
i. 80 
.322 
216 
318 
158 
191 



Farmers Bank u. Gunnell i. 318 

u. Maxwell i- 158 

v. McKee iii. 215 

v. Reynolds ii. 26, 28 

v. Waples i. 315 

v. Watson i. 158 

Farmers,' &c. Bank v. Erie R. Co. i. 651 
v. Logan i. 578 

Farmers & Mechanics Bank v. Cham- 
plain Trans. Co. ii. 194, 200, 
203, 228, 230, 231, 256, 259, 263 



^'. Kercheval 

v. Planters Bank 

v. Rathbone 

v. Smith 

v. Wilson 
Farmers' Ins. Co. v. Archer 

v. Chase 

v. Curry 

v. Fogelman 

c. Graybill 

v. Ross 

v. Snyder 

v. Taylor 
Farmers Loan Co. v. Walworth 
Farmington Academy v. Allen 



ii. 15, 20, 24, 31 

iii. 95 

i. 294 

iii. 394, 397 

iii. 92 



Co. 



Farnham v. Camden R. R 

v. Farnham 

r. Gilman 
Farnsworth v. Boardman 

v. Garrard 

v. Shepard 

v. Storrs 
Farnum v. Perry 
Farnworth v. Packwood 
Farquhar, Ex parte 
Farr v. Pearce 

r. Sumner 
Farrand v. Bouchell 
Farrar v. Adams 

a. Alston 

(j. Beswick 
Farrell v. French 

v. Higley 
Farrer v. Granard 

v. Nightingal 
Farrington v. Lee 

v. Payne 

t. Tennessee 

c. Woodward 
Farrow v. Respess 

v. Turner 
Farwell v. Boston & Worcester R 
Co. 

v. Mather 

v. Rogers 

v. Sully 
Fash i'. Ross 
Fassett v. Traher 
Fatman v. Leet 
Faugier v. Hallett 
Faulder v. Silk 
Faulkner v. Bailey 



ii. 476 
ii. 539 
ii. 556 
ii. 559 
ii. 575 

i. 183 

ii. 542, 544 

ii. 543 

i. 51 
i. 483 ; 

ii. 50 
ii. 270 

ii. 93 
iii. 464 

i. 458 



i. 494; ii. 879 

i. 569 

i. 452 

i. 564 

ii. 159 

iii. 460 

i. 173 

i. 361, 362 

iii. 187 

ii. 173, 174, 216 

ii. 913, 915 

i. 177 

ii. 464 

ii. 936 

i. 407 

ii. 522, 559 

iii. 94, 96 



ii. 751; 



iii. 426 

iii. 480 

i. 81 

ii. 31 

i. 498 

R. 

ii. 46 

iii. 15 

ii. 797 

ii. 14 

i. 68 

iii. 382 

i. 40 

536 

i. 438 

90 



n. 



ui 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxxxv 



Faulkner v. Delaware & Hudson Canal 

Co. iii. 105 

v. Hart ii. 210, 698 

v. Hunt i. 173 

v. Lowe ii. 807 

v. Wright ii. 172 

Faull y. Tinsman i. 254 

Fauntleroy's Case i. 209 

Favenc r. Bennett ii. 745 

Faviell v. Eastern Counties Ry. Co. 

i. 131 ; ii. 840 

Favor v. Philbrick Co. ii. 196 

Favorita, The ii. 435 

Fawcett v. Bigley i. 79 

u. Cash ii. 35 

v. Osborn i. 176 

v. Whitehouse i. 187 

Fawcus v. Sarsfield ii. 531 

Faxon v. Mansfield ii. 39 

Fay b. Bradley ii. 769 

v. Howe i. 137 

v. Jones i. 258 

v. Lovejoy iii. 123 

v. Parker iii. 183 

v. Richmond i. 62 

v. Steamer New World ii. 238 

v. Strawn ii. 677 

Fayle v. Bird i. 309 

Fear v. Dunlap i. 284 

Fearn v. Lewis iii. 72 

v. Mayers iii. 301 

Featherstonaugh v. Fenwick i. 229 

Feauhert v. Turst ii. 730 

Feeter v. Heath i. 67, 73 

Feigler v. Sponeberger i. 202 

Feigley v. Whitaker i. 225 

Feise v. Aguilar ii. 490, 491 

v. Parkinson ii. 481, 524 

v. Randall iii. 477 

v. Wray i. 644, 645 ; iii. 262 

Fejavary v. Broesch iii- 302 

Felch v. Allen ii. 47 

o. Bugbee iii- 396, 508 

Felichy v. Hamilton i. 199 

Felker v. Emerson i. 386 

Fell v. Goslin i. 12 

v. Knight ii. 161 

Fellowes v. Gordon ii. 114, 116 

v. Lord Gwyder iii. 308, 319 

Fellows v. Fellows ii. 91, 736 

w.Hartford ...i- 75 

v. Longyor iii. 116 

v. Mitchell i. 29 

v. Prentiss ii 24 

v. Wyman i- 218 

Fells v. Read iii- 329 

Felt v. School District ii- 140 

Feltham v. England ii- 47 

Felthouse v. Bindley i- 515 

Felton v. Dickinson i- 497 

v. Fuller i- 5 63 

v. Minot '"• 293 

Fenby v. Pritchard '• 292 

Fenelon v. Butts i»- 177 

Fenly v. Stewart i- 56 ; iii. 10 



Fenn v. Harrison i. 63, 68, 271 

Fennell v. Ridler ii. 899, 907 

Fenner v. Buffalo, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 197, 210 

v. Duplock i. 508 ; ii. 940 

v. Taylor i. 409 

Fenno v. Sayre iii. 127 

Fenton v. Browne i. 522 

v. Clark ii. 41, 792 

v. Dublin Steam Packet Co. i. 116 



v. Emblers 


iii. 42, 97 


v. Holloway 


i. 435 


v. Reed 


ii. 82, 83, 88 


v. White 


i. 353 


Fentum v. Pocock 


i. 294 ; iii. 451 


Fenwick v. Sears 


iii. 391 


Ferax, The 


ii. 383 


Fereby v. Gordon 


i. 621 


Fereday v, Hordern 


iii. 151, 152 


Feret v. Hill 


ii. 913 


Ferguson v. 


i. 535 ; ii. 136 


v. Bell 


i. 365 


u. Brooks 


i. 407 


v. Cappeau 


iii. 270 


v. Carrington 


ii. 914, 923 


v. Davol Mills 


ii. 352 


v. Hosier 


iii. 223 


v. Lothrop 


ii. 877 


u. Mahon 


ii. 738 


u. Northern Bank 


i. 565 


v. Oliver 


i. 636 


v. Porter 


i. 87; ii. 116 


v. Thomas 


i. 613 


v. Tucker 


ii. 57 


Fergusson v. Fyffe 


ii. 716 


v. Norman 


i. 489 ; iii. 261 


Ferrall v. Shaen 


iii. 125, 126 


Ferrara v. Tallent, The 


ii. 462 


Ferree v. Oxford Ins. Co 


ii. 575 


Ferrell v. Maxwell 


ii. 10 


Ferris v. Comstock 


iii. 228 


v. Irving 


i. 76 


v. Saxton 


i. 318 


Ferry v. Ferry 


ii. 769 ; iii. 161 


Person v. Monroe 


i. 231, 240 


Fessler w. Low 


iii 221 


Fetridge v. Merchant 


ii. 363 


v. Wells ii. 


352, 353, 363, 371 


Fetrow v. Wiseman 


i. 335 


Fettrech v. Leamy 


iii. 242 


Fewell v. Kessler 


i. 523 


Fewings v. Tisdall 


ii. 37, 44 


Fidgeon v. Sharpe 


iii. 441, 442 


Fiedler v. New York Ins. 


Co. ii. 505, 507, 




510, 515 


Field v. Boland 


iii. 365, 366 


v. Chase 


ii. 424 


v. Dickinson 


iii. 106 


v. Field 


i. 160 


v. Herrick 


i. 531 


v. Holland 


ii. 765 


v. Maghee 


i. 252 


v. Mayor, &c. of New York ii. 751 


v . Mills 


i. 53» 


v. Nickerson 


i. 290, 306 


u. Runk 


iii. 49 



lxxxvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Field o. Schieffelin 


i. 149 


Fish v. Kempton 


ii. 882 


v. Simco 


i. 669 


v. Thomas 


ii. 400 


Fielden v. Lahens 


i. 208 ; ii. 16 


Fisher v. Beasley 


iii. 132 


v. Starkin 


i. 606 


v. Clisbee 


ii. 181 


Fielding v. Kymer 


i. 102 


v. Cochran 


ii. 520 


v. Mills 


iii. 264, 271 


v. Currier 


iii. 478 


Fields v. Mallett 


i. 311 


v. Cutter 


ii. 5, 11 


Fifield r. Elmer 


i. 578, 579 


v. Dynes 


i. 110 


Fifth National Bank of Chicago v. 


v. Ellis 


i. 4b4 


Bayley 


i. 570 


v. Evans 


i. 311 


Figes p. Cutler 


i. 175, 176 


v. Hildreth 


ii. 759 


Figgins v. Ward 


i. 211 


v. Johnson 


iii. 296 


Filby v. Lawford 


iii. 462 


v. Kay 


iii. 246 


Fildes v. Hooker 


iii. 334, 357, 363 


v. Kuhn 


iii. 15 


Filer v. Peebles 


ii. 53 


v. Lackey 


iii. 504 


Files v. McLeod 


iii. 29 


v. Lane 


ii. 718 


Filkins v. Blackman 


ii. 368 


v. Leland 


i. 290 


Fillebrown v. Grand Trunk R. R. Co. 


v. May 


i. 468 




ii. 160 


v. Miller 


iii. 278, 


v. Hoar 


iii. 178 


v. Morris Canal & B. 


Co. i. 331 


Filley v. Fassett 


ii. 352, 370 


u. Mowbray 


i. 353 


v. Phelps 


i. 231 


i. Murray 


i. 201 


Fillieul v. Armstrong 


ii. 38 


v. Price 


i. 315 


Fillmer v. Delber 


i. 131 ; ii. 825 


v. Prince 


iii. 220 


o. Gott 


i. 458 


v. Pyne 


i. 503 


Fillyan v. Laverty 


i. 228 


v. Salmon 


i. 290; ii. 16 


Filsom v. Himes 


i. 486 


c Seltzer 


i. 510 


Finch v. Boning 


ii. 773 


v. Shattuek 


i. 444, 446 


v. Brook 


ii. 776, 777 


t: Tayler 


i. 203 



v. Brown iii. 196 

v. Finch i. 343, 347 

Findlay v. Smith i. 137 

Findon, Ex parte iii. 46 i 

v. Parker ii. 907 

Fink v. Hake ii. 877 

Finley v. Quirk ii. 901 

Finn v. Donahue ii- 904 

v. Western R. Co. i. 574 

Finney v. Apgar iii. 48 

c. Bedford Comm. Ins Co. i. 56, 57 

.'. Fairhaven Ins. Co. i. 49; ii. 474,480 

v. Warren Ins. Co. ii. 473, 485, 525 

Finnucane o. Small ii. 134 

Fire Ins. Co. v. Loomis i. 527 

Fireman's Ins. Co. », Crandall ii. 587 

i\ Holt ii. 493 

v. Powell ii. 489 

Firemen's Ins. Co., In re iii. 421 

v. Congregation, &c. ii. 569 

v. Ely iii. 123 

v. Sturges iii. 123 

Firman ». Blood i. 284 

First Bank v. Carpenter ii. 3 

v. Fourth Bank ii. 755 

v. Goodscll i. 289 

v. Leach ii. 755 

v. Marshall ii. 850 

v. Whitman i. 300, 303 

First Mass. Turnpike Corp. v. Field 

iii. 107 

First National Bank v. Bennett ii. 10 

v. Pettit i. 565 

Fischel v. Scott i. 699 

Fish v. Chapman ii. 170, 171, 178, 254, 259 

</. Dodge i. 120 ; iii. 176 



o. Val De Travers Asphalte Co. 

iii. 175 
v. Waltham ii. 896 

Fishli v. Fishli ii. 91 

Fishmonger's Company v. Robert- 
son i. 479, 499 ; ii. 663 
Fisk v. Comm. Ins. Co. ii. 496 
v. Copeland i. 211 
v. Cushman i. 410 
v. Gray iii. 169 
u. Herrick i. 233 
u. Masterman ii. 480 
v. Newton ii. 196, 198, 416 
v. Tank i. 630 
Fiske v. Eldridge i. 282 
v. Foster iii. 397 
Fitch v. Burk i. 566 
v. Hamlin iii. 121 
v. Jones i. 273, 329 ; ii. 857 
v. Livingston ii. 431 ; iii. 196 
v. Newbury ii. 222, 223; iii. 268, 269 
i>. Pacific R. R. Co. ii. 249 
v. Peckham ii. 51 
v. Reading i. 282, 307 
v. Sutton i. 249; ii. 749 
Fitchburg Ins. Co. v. Davis i. 315 
Fitchburg Sav. Bank u. Amazon 

Ins. Co. ii. 476 

Fits v. Cook ii. 940 

Fitt v. Cassanet ii. 812, 815 

Fitts v. Hall i. 357, 360 

Fitzgerald v. Lord Portarlington iii. 314 
v. Reed i. 434 

v. Vicars iii. 309 

Fitzherbert v. Mather i. 62, 78, 80; 

ii. 625 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxxxvii 



Fitzherbert v. Shaw i. 647 

Fitzhugh v. Wilcox i. 437 

Fitzpatrick v. Apperson iii. 129 

v. School Coram. i. 301 

Fitzroy v. Gwillim ii. 887 ; iii. 137, 290 
Fitzsimmons v. Joslin i. 04, 78, 039 ; 

ii. 920, 921 
Fivaz v. Nichols 
Flad Oyen, The 
Flagg r. Dryden 



K.Ely 

v. Mann 

v. Millbury 

v. Stowe 
Flanagan v. Meyer 
Flanagin v. Hambleton 
Flanders v. Barstow 

v. Clarke 

v. Crolius 

v. Maynard 

v. Sherman 
Flanigan v. Lampman 
Flanigen v. Turner 

v. Wash. Ins. Co. 
Flannagan v. Kilcome 
Flarty v. Odium 



it. 8SB 

ii. 399 

ii. 783 

i. 136 

i. 661 

ii. 901 

i. 176 

ii. 903 

i. 248 

i. 611 

i. 146 

ii. 12 

i. 564 

i. 132 

i. 252 

ii. 936 

ii. 527 

i. 468 

i. 253 

Flavel v. Harrison ii. 363, 364, 372, 377 

Fleckner v. V. S. Bank i. 49; iii. 127, 

143 

Fleeee, The ii. 439 

Fleet v. Murton i. 58 ; ii. 668 

Fleetwood v. Green iii. 334 

v. Mayor, &c. of N. Y. i. 446 

Fleming v. Beck iii. 199 

Flemming v. Gilbert ii. 685 

v. Gooding i. 540; ii. 940 

v. Hayne i. 463, 464 

v. Potter ii. 785 

v. Sloeura ii. 918 

v. Smith ii. 506 

Flemington v. Smithers iii. 177 

Flemyng v. Hector i. 41, 47, 63 

Fletcher v. Bowsher i. 034 ; ii. 394 

v. Braddick ii. 422, 430 

v. Button ii. 790; iii. 245, 246, 247 

v. Cole i. 572 

v. Commonwealth Ins. Co ii. 555, 

556, 559, 561, 565, 919 

v. Daingerfield i. 125 

v. Davis iii. 476 

v. Dyche ii. 876 ; iii. 168, 174 

v. Fletcher iii. 315 

v. Grover i. 32, 34 

v. Gushee i. 288 

v. Harcot ii. 886 

v. Herring i. 545 

v. Howard i. 568 

v. Inglis ii. 497 

v. Jackson i. 33, 34, 35 

v. Morey iii. 424 

v. Peck iii. 481,502 

v. Pynsett ii. 804 

v. Reed i. 219 

v. Rutland, &c. R. R. iii- 481 

v. Webster ii. 830 



Flewellin v. Rave ii. 119 
Flight v. Bolland iii. 9, 364 
v. Booth i. 582 
v. Leman ii. 907 
v. McLean i. 277 
Flindt v. Waters ii. 481 
Flinn v. Headlam ii. 523, 524 
v. Philadelphia R. R. ii. 238, 246 
Flint v. Brandon iii. 306, 319, 326 
v. Clark iii. 236 
v. Day i. 274, 284 
v. Flemyng ii. 483 
v. Lyon i. 587 
v. Norwich Transportation Co. ii. 246 
v. Ohio Ins. Co. ii. 471, 541 
v. Pattee i. 266 
v. Rogers i. 303 
v. Steadman iii. 242 
v. Woodin i. 526 
Flint River Steamboat Co. v. Rob- 
erts ii. 392 
Flintum, Ex parte i. 238 
Flood v. Finlay iii. 429, 435, 454 
Flook v. Jones iii. 442 
Florence, The ii. 438, 440 
Flory v. Denny i. 611 ; ii. 128 
Flower, Ex parte iii. 424 
u. Young ii. 395 
Floyd v. Calvert ii. 85 
v. Miller i. 225 
Floyer v. Edwards iii. 116, 126, 135, 142, 

171 

v. Sherard i. 466; iii. 149 

Fluck v. Tollemache i. 340 

Flureau v. Thornhill iii. 245, 246 

Flynn v. Allen i. 257 

(.-. No. American Ins. Co. i. 498 

v. Williams ii. 923 

Foard v. Womack i. 307 

Fobes v. Cantfield iii. 189 

Foden t>. Sharp i. 309 ; ii. 716 

Fogerty v. Jordan ii. 909 

Fogg v. Johnston i. 230 

v. Middlesex Ins. Co. ii. 475, 476 

v. Sawyer i. 302; ii. 754 

Foggart v. Blackweller i. 623 

Foland v. Bovd i. 323 

Foley v. Addenbrooke i. 14, 16, 23 

v. Cowgill ii. 920 

v. Mason i. 563; ii. 677, 777 

v. Moline ii. 525 

v. Robards i. 168, 174, 204 

Folk v. Russell i- 225 

Follansbee v. Adams iii. 224 

Foil's Appeal iii- 374 

Folsom v. Belknap Co. Ins. Co. ii. 475 

v. Marsh ii. 336, 341, 344, 345, 349 

v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 485, 632 

Foltz v. Mey iii. 127 

Fonda v. Van Home i. 335 

Fonner v. Duplock i- 541 

Fontaine v. Col. Ins. Co. ii. 404, 456 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 397, 507, 527 

Fooks v. Waples ij- 917 

Foorde v. Hoskins i- 133 



lxxxviii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Foot, In re iii. 421 

v. N. H. & Northampton Co. iii. 87 

v. Tewksbury i. 435 ; iii. 280 

Foote v. Blanchard iii. Ill 

v. Burnet i. 144; iii. 242, 244 

v. Emerson ii. 887 ; iii. 41 

v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 575 

v. Sabin i. 210 

v. Silsby ii. 304, 307, 311 

v. Storrs ii. 134, 149, 153 

Foquet v. Moore i. 486 

Forbes v. Appleton i. 496 

v. Aspinall ii. 480, 491 

v. Boston, &c. R. Co. iii. 206 

v. Church ii. 479 

v. Davison i. 198 

v. Foot iii. 106 

i: Hannah, The ii. 401 

v. Manuf. Ins. Co. ii. 502, 508, 509 

v. Parker i. 612, 013 

v. Parsons ii. 465 

v. Phipps iii. 437 

v. Rice ii. 419 

r. Skelton iii. 95 

Forbush v. Bradford ii. 325 

Force v. Dutcher i. 62 

v. Elizabeth i. 330 

Ford v. Adams i. 247, 254 

v. Bronaugh i. 13 

v. Chambers i. 566 

v. Cotesworth ii. 805 

v. Ford ii. 730 

v. Jones ii. 844 

v. Mitchell ii. 194 

v. Monroe i. 352 

v. Phillips i. 363, 364, 365 

v. Rehman i. 470 

v. Stuart i. 257 ; iii. 308, 316 

v. Tiley ii. 800, 809 

v. Williams iii. 381, 382 

v. Yates ii. 675 

Forde v. Herron i. 172 

Fordley's Case ii. 776 

Foreign Merchants v. British, &c. 

Ins. Co. ii. 531 

Foreman v. Hardwick ii. 897 

Fores v. Johnes ii. 337 

Forkner v. Stuart i. 202 

Forman v Marsh i. 150 

v. Walker i. 41 

Fornshill v. Murray ii. 726 

Forrer v. Forrer i. 187 

Forrest, The ii. 463 

v. Elwes iii. 120 

i: Warrington iii. 437 

Forrestier v. Boardman i. 87, 103 

Forsaith v. Clogston ii. 869 

Forshaw v. Chabert ii. 474, 527 

Forster v. Fuller i. 68, 142, 152, 282, 459 

«. Hale iii. 66, 343 

v. Macreth i. 204 

v. Surtees iii. 466 

!». Taylor i. 12 

v. Wilson iii. 439, 469 

Forsyth v. Day i. 64; ii. 942 



Forsyth v. Milne 
Forsythe v. Ellis 
Fort v. Coker 

v. Cortes 
Fortescue v. Barnett 

v. Hannah 
Forth v. Simpson 
Fortitude, The 
Forward v. Dehoney 



i. 342 

i. 615 

i. 49 

i. 307 

ii. 610 ; iii. 315 

iii. 362, 473 

ii. 148, 221 

i. 78; ii. 404,453 

i. 255 



v. Pittard ii. 150, 169, 170, 172 

Forwood I'. No. Wales Ins. Co. ii. 504 

Fosdick v. Car Co. i. 57!) 

v. Van Husen ii. 753 

Foshay v. Ferguson i. 445 

Foss v. Crisp i. 448 
Foster, Ex parte, i. 251 ; iii. 292, 410, 431 

In re iii. 463 

v. Bates i. 49, 146 

v. Boston i. 82 

v. Caldwell i. 623 

v. Charles ii. 916 

v. Dawber iii. 80 

v. Drew ii. 779 

v. Elliott iii. 233 

v. Equitable Ins. Co. ii. 475, 577 
v. Essex Bank i. 114, 155 ; ii. 99, 134 

v. Frampton i. 648 

v. Gile ii. 608 

v. Hale iii. 18 

v. Hall iii. 297 

v. Hilliard i. 150 

v. Hodgson iii. 96 

v. Hooper i. 29 

u. Hudson iii. 431 

v. Jack iii. 101 

u. Jackson ii. 874 

v. Jolly ii. 685 

v. Julien i. 308 

v. McDivit ii. 870 

v. McGraw ii. 765 

v. McO'Blenis iii. 43 

i'. Mentor Life Ins. Co. ii. 611 

v, Minnesota, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 46 

v. Miranda, The ii. 431 

v. Moore ii. 314, 317, 324, 325 

v. Paulk i. 296, 297 

u. Pettibone ii. 143 

o. Peyser i. 633 

o. Pugh i. 570 

v. Remick iii. 472 

v. Ropes i. 563, 564, 567 

v. Saco Manuf. Co. iii. 382 

v. Sampson ii. 462 

v. Schoffleld ii. 75 

v. Sineath i. 319 

v. Stewart ii. 56 

u. Swasey i. 626 

v. Trull ii. 821 

v. U. S. Ins. Co. ii. 389, 473, 474 
480, 567 

v. Warner i. 678 

v. Wilcox i. 406 

v. Wilmer ii. 533 

Fothergill v. Fotliergill iii. 329 

v. Walton ii. 663 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



lxxxix 



Foubert v. Turst iii. 809 

Fouch v, Wilson i. 52 

Follicles v. Willoughby ii. 136 

Foulkes v. Sellway ii. 70 

Fountain v. Grymes iii. 149 

Fournier v. Faggott iii. 176 

Fourth Bank, &c. v. Henselien i. 225 
Fourth School District in Rumfbrdu. 

Wood i. 154 

Fowke v. Bowie ii. 763, 764 

Fowle v. Freeman iii. 9 

o. Harrington i. 218 

v. Spear ii. 363 
v. Springfield Ins. Co. ii. 559, 561 

Fowler v. iEtna Ins. Co. ii. 544 

u. Bott i. 536, 537 

v. Brooks ii. 20 

v. Down iii. 424, 446 

o. Garlike ii. 689 

v. Garret iii. 130 

v. Gilman iii. 210 

v. Hollenbeck ii. 54 

v. Hunt iii. 103 

v. Kymer i. 650 

v. Lock ii. 45, 135 

v. Ludwig ii. 757 

v. Morrill iii. 286 

v. Poling i. 260 

v. Richardson i. 219 

v. Shearer i. 406 ; ii. 933 

u. Stuart i. 460 

v. Trebein ii. 79 
Fowles </. Great Western Railway 

Co. ii. 231 

Fox v. Abel ii. 905 

v. Adams iii. 409, 436 

v. Clifton i. 63, 162, 213 

v. Davis i. 399 

v. Fisk iii. 95 

v. Glastenbury ii. 248, 250 

v. Han bury i. 224, 225, 234 

a. Harding iii. 198 

v. Mackreth i. 95, 631 ; iii. 422 

v. McGregor ii. 167, 221 ; iii. 253, 

266 

v, Mensch ii. 900 

». Smith ii. 827, 831, 835, 836 

v. Southack i. 448 

v. Wilcocks i. 137 

v. Woodruff iii. 478 

Foxcroft i'. Devonshire iii. 276 

Foxcroft Academy v. Favor i. 482 

Fraley v. Bispham i. 624 

Frame v. Dawson iii. 66, 348, 349, 350 

Frances, The ii- 519 

Franchot v. Leach iii. 248 

Francis, The ;;• 519 

v. Dodsworth ii- 881 

v. Felmit i- 355 

4j. Francis iii- 287 

v. Kerker i- 49 

v. Ocean Ins. Co. ii- 525, 587 

v. Wigzell iii- 368, 369 

Franco v. Bolton iii. 465 

Frank v. Edwards ii- 18 



Frank v. Wessels 


i. 279 


Frankland v. Nicholson 


ii. 89 


Franklin, The 


i. 226 


v. Beatty 


i. 463, 465 


v. Ezell 


i. 59, 62, 80 


v. Lord Brownlow 


iii. 364 



v. Miller i. 493; ii. 663, 813 

v. Neate i. 253 ; ii. 127 

v. Osgood iii. 378 

v. Vanderpool ii. 755 

Franklin Bank v. Cooper ii. 9 

v. Hooper ii. 762 
Franklin Ins. Co. v. Chicago Ins. Co. 

ii. 551 
v. Coates ii. 556, 566, 587 
v. Hazzard ii. 609 
... Hewitt ii. 471 
v. Lord ii. 404 
v. Martin ii. 547 
v. Sefton ii. 609 
v. Taylor ii. 471 
Franklin Savings Institution v. Cen- 
tral Ins. Co. ii. 577 
Franklyn v. Laniond i. 68, 527 
v. Tuton iii. 331 
Franks, Ex parte i. 407, 409, 415 
v. Weaver ii. 370, 371, 372 
Frary v. Booth i. 392 
v. Frary ii. 732, 736 
Fraser v. Berkeley iii. 191 
v. Hopkins ii. 396 
v. Pendleberry i. 446 
a. Pigott ii. 633 
v. Wyckoff i. 109 
Frasher v. State iii. 499 
Fraternal Ins. Co. v. Applegate ii. 608 
Fray v. Voules i. 130 
Frazer v. Boss ii. 756 
v. Bunn ii. 764 
v. Gervais ii. 918 
v. Ililliard i. 648 
v. Marsh ii. 195 
v. Ross i. 558 
Frazier v. Dick i. 32-3 
v. Rowan i. 354 
Freake v. Cranefeldt iii. 75 
Freakeley v. Fox ii. 852 
Frear v. Evertson ii. 577 
v. Hardenbergh i. 462, 475 ; iii. 36 
Fredd v. Eves i. 393, 394 
Frederick v. Coxwell iii. 361, 369 
Fredericks v. Fasnacht i. 506 
Free v. Hawkins i. 315 
Freeborn ». Denman ii. 847, 849 
Freely v. Barnhast iii. 334 
Freeman v. Baker i. 635; ii. 408, 
463, 466, 916 
v. Baldwin i- 611 
v. Baspoule ii. 828, 831 
v. Bass ii- 870 
v Boynton i- 467 
v. Brittin iii- 127, 156 
v. Buckingham ii. 409 
v. Oasliart i- 212 
v. Chute i- 637 



xc 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Freeman v. Clute 


iii 


196, 227 


Fromont v. Coupland i. 


184, 185, 186j 


v. Cooke 


ii. 


936, 938 




ii. 


220, 24B 


v. East India Co. 




ii. 466 


Frontier Bank v. Morse 


i. 30i 


; ii. 754 


v. Fenton 




i. 463 


Frontin v. Small 


: 


. 65, 156 


e. Freeman ii 


736 


; iii. 314 


Frost v. Bengough 


iii. 69, 75 


v. Holmes 




i. 388 


v. Brisbin 




ii. 710 


v. Hyett 




ii. 873 


v. Carter 




iii. 464 


r. Nichols 


i. 


568, 580 


v. Hill 




iii. 12 


v. Perry 




i. 254 


!■. Johnson 




ii. 818 


v. Robinson 




i. 460 


i . Kellogg 




i. 183 


v. Kosher 




i. 51 


r. Knight 


ii. 


809, 810 


t>. Taylor 




ii. 406 


v. Koon 




ii. 941 


Freeman's Bank v. Rollins 


i. 323; ii. 28 


v. Lowry 




ii. 922 


Freemoult v. Dedire ii 


730 


; iii. 299 


t\ Saratoga Ins. Co. 




ii. 553 


Freer v. Hesse 




iii. 335 


v. Tarr 




iii. 41 


Freese v. Brownell 




ii. 714 


i'. Vought 




ii. 66 


v. Tripp 




iii. 184 


r. Willis 


i. 


391, 401 


Freestone v. Butcher 




i. 388 


Frothingham v. Ererton 


i. 74, 


92, 108 ; 


Freeth v. Burr 




iii. 224 


iii. 204, 


205, 235 


Freiberg v. Branigan 




i. 387 


v. Haley 




ii. 827 


Freleigh r. The State 




iii. 511 


v. Jenkins 




ii. 413 


Freme v. Wright 




iii. 334 


i . Seymour 




ii. 791 


French v. Andrade 




iii. 409 


Frow, &c. Co.'s Appeal 




iii. 440 


i. Backhouse 


ii 


389, 473 


Fry v. Evans 




ii. 877 


v. Carr iii. 


429, 


431, 430 


r. Hill 




i. 302 


v. Chase 




i. 233 


v. Rousseau 




i. 280 


r. French 


i 


245, 247 


Fryatt v. The Sullivan Co. 


ii 


138, 145 


v. Grindle 


iii 


153, 156 


Frye v. Barker 


ii 


. 88, 125 


v. Kennedy 




ii. 769 


!>. Shepler 




iii. 348 


v. Macale iii. 


304, 


305. 328 


Fryer v. Roe 




iii. 97 


i . Marsh 




ii. 32 


Fulham v. Down 




i. 496 


c Merrill 




iii. 426 


Fullam !•. Valentine 




ii. 30 


v. New 




ii. 837 


v. West Brookfield 




i. 135 


r. Price 




ii. 387 


Fuller, Ex parte 


iii. 


424, 430 


it. Reed 




ii. 108 


v. Abbott 




i. 488 


v. Rogers 




ii. 312 


v. Abrahams 




i. 527 


r. Styring 




i. 18G 


v. Bennett 




i. 81, 82 


v. Teschemaker 




i. 161 


< . Boston Ins. Co. 




ii. 580 


Frentress v. Markle 




ii. 818 


i . Bradley 




ii. 220 


Freto v. Brown 


i. 


348, 349 


v. Brown 


ii. 4i .-.'2 


Fretz v. Stover 




i. 78 


!■. Crittenden 




ii. 686 


Freund v. Importers and 


Traders 


r. Dame 




ii. 895 


Bank 




i. 297 


i\ Dingman 




i. 310 


Freundschaft, The 




i. 220 


v. Fenwick 




ii. 840 


Frey v. Kirk 




iii. 394 


v. Hodgdon 




ii. 913 


Freyman ?'. Knecht 




iii. 223 


* . Jocelyn 




i. 77 


Frichette v. State Ins. Co. 




ii. 497 


v. Kennebec Ins. Co. 




ii. 506 


Frick v. Trustees of Schools 




ii. 941 


r. Little 




ii. 776 


Fricker r. Thomlinson 




iii. 6 


v. McDonald 




i. 315 


Fridge t: The State 




i. 335 


v. M'Call 




ii 511 


Fridley i>. Bowen 




ii. 707 


i'. Milford 




ii. 28 


Friedly r. Scheetz 




i. 015 


r. Naugatuck Railroad Co. ii 


233, 234 


Friend v. Woods 


ii. 


169, 172 


< . Ruby 




i. 532 


Friends, The 




ii. 433 


c. Russell 




ii. 486 


Frink v. King 




ii. iT.i'2 


v. Smith 




i. 298 


<-. Potter 




ii. 234 


v. Wilson i. 


64,80 


; ii. 921 


r. Tatman 




iii. 221 


v. Wright 




ii. 878 


Frisbie v. Fayette Ins. Co. 




ii. 524 


Fuller's Case 




iii. 149 


!'. Larned 




ii. 757 


Fullerton v. Sturges 




i. 272 


r. McCarty 




i. 400 


Fulmer v. Seitz 




ii. 19 


Frissel v. Haile 




iii. 287 


Fulton v. Fulton 




ii. 91 


Fritchey v. Bosley 




i. 130 


Fulton's Case 




ii. 861 


Frith c. Barker 


ii. 


409, 414 


Fulton Bank v. Beach 




iii. 136 


v. Sprague 




i. 32 


v. N. Y. & S. Canal Co 




i. S3 


Frizzle c. Veach 




ii. 909 


v. Phoenix Bank 




i. 290 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XC1 



Funk's Lessee v. Kincaid 


i. 540 


Furber v. Carter 


i. 178 


Furillio v. Crowther 


i. 351 


Furlong v. Hysora 


i. 3S7 


v. Polleys 


iii. 188 


Furman v. Elmore 


iii. 242 


v. Haskin 


i. 295 


Ftirneaux r. Bradley 


ii. 489 


Furnes v. Smith 


i. 358 


Furnis v. Hallon 


ii. 831, 834 


Furniss r. Gilchrist 


i. 288 


v. Magoun, The 


ii. 403 


Furnival v. Crew 


i. 532 ; iii. 323 


v. Prowd 


ii. 834 


v. Weston 


i. 210 ; ii. 852 


Furtado ;-. Rogers 


ii. 481 


Furze v. Sherwood 


i. 322 


Fussel v. Daniel 


iii. 143 


Fusselman v. Worthington 


i. 540 


Fussil v. Brookes 


iii. 126 


Futrell v. Vann 


ii. 55 


Fyson v. Kitton 


iii. 5 



G. 



Gaar v. Louisville Bank 


i. 279 


Gabarron v. Kreeft 


i. 574 


Gabay v. Lloyd 


ii. 672, 675 


Gabriel v. Dresser 


ii. 815 


Gaby r. Griver 


i. 527 


Gadd v. Houghton 


i. 55, 58, 590 


Gaddis v. Leesnn 


iii. 58 


Gaff v. Sims 


ii. 31 


Gaffield v. Hapgood 


i. 547 


Gaffney v. Hayden 


i. 355 


Gage r. Gage 


i. 123 


o. Lewis 


ii. 31 


v. Mechanics' Bank 


ii. 31, 32 


v. Stimson 


i. 65 


v. Tirrell 


ii. 427 


Gahn v. Niemcewicz 


i. 323 


Gaillard v. Le Seigneur 


iii. 127 


Gaillon r. L'Aigle 


i. 105 


Gail3 v. The Osceola 


i. 247 


Gaines v. Dorsett 


i. 281 


v. McKinley 


i. 62 


v. Union Trans. Co. 


ii. 257 


Gainsford r. Carroll 


iii. 220 


v. Grammar 


iii. 69 


Gairdner v. Sen house 


ii. 535 


Gaither v. Farmers & 


Mechanics 


Bank 


iii. 125, 127 


v. My rick 


ii. 535 


Galbraith v. Gedge 


i. 168 


v. Neville 


ii. 739, 740 


Galbreath r. Galbreath 


iii. 349 


Gale v. Capern 


iii. 92 


u, Eastman 


iii. 123 


v. Halfknight 


iii. 416 


v. Kemper's Heirs 


i. 310 


v. Laurie 


ii. 454, 483 


v. Leckie 


i. 184 


u. Lindo 


ii. 78 


v. Mottram 


ii. 826 



Gale v. Nixon iii. 4 

v. Parrott i. 349 

v. Keed ii. 889 

v. Walsh i. 325 

0. Ward i. 547 

u. Wells i. 151 
Galena & Chicago Union R. Co. 0. 

Yarwood ii. 248 

Gall v. Comber i. 101 

Gallagher 1;. Fayette Co. R. R. iii. 307 

v. Nichols iii. 23 

v. Waring i. 626, 628 

Gallaher v. Thompson ii. 60 

Gallego v. Gallego i. 382; iii. 437 

Gallin v. London, &c. R. Co. ii. 238 

Gallini v. Laborie ii. 887 

Gallison, Re iii. 471 

Galloway >;. Garland iii. 348 

u. Hughes ii. 416 

v. Webb ii. 834 

Galpin v. Hard i. 306 

Galsworthy v. Strutt iii. 170, 172 

Gait's Ex'rs v. Swain i. 482 

Galusha v. Cobleigh iii. 106 

Galvin v. Thompson ii. S27 

Galway v. Matthew i. 202 

Gambart v. Sumner ii. 342 

Gamble v. Grimes i. 486 

Gambling v. Read i. 578 

Gambril v. Rose iii. 126 

Gambs ;•. Covenant Life Ins. Co. ii. 606 

Game v. Harvie ii. 109 

Games v. Manning i. 309 ; ii. 785, 787 

Gammel r. Skinner iii. Ill 

Gammell v. Parramore ii. 32 

Gammon v. Chandler i. 129 ; it 60 ; iii. 288 

v. Freeman ii. 685 

v. Howe iii. 174 

Gamwell v. Merch. Ins. Co. ii. 556 

Gandell v. Pontigny ii. 37, 44 

Gandy v. Adelaide Ins. Co. ii. 526 

Ganguere's Estate, In re i. 437 ; ii. 902 

Ganly v. Ledwidge i. 556 

Gannard v. Eslava i. 264 

Gansevoort v. Williams i. 208 

Garbutt v. Watson iii. 60, 61 

Garcelon v. Hampden Ins. Co. ii. 522 

Gardiner v. Childs i. 196 

e. Davis ii. 745 

v. Gray i. 626 

v. Hopkins ii- 812 

v. Shannon iii- 466 

Gardner, Ex parte iii. 471 

v. Adams i- 253 

v. Allen ii- 883 

i.-. Baillie i. 42 

u. Bibbins ii. 465, 466 

v. Boston, &c. R. Co. i- 48 

Buckbee 



v. Col. Ins. Co. 
v. Flagg 
v. Gardner 
v. Grout 
v. Hazelton 
v. Heartt 



ii. 860 

ii. 487, 491, 512 

iii. 125, 135 

i. 124, 388, 409 

iii. 49 

iii. 15 

i. 120 



XC11 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Gardner v. Rowland 


i. 594; ii. 395 


Gatehill's ease 


i. 161 


v. Joy 


iii. 60, 61 


Gatehouse v. Gatehouse 


ii. 92 


r. Lane 


i. 5(54 


Gates o. Beecher 


i. 224, 225 


i'. McCutcheon 


i. Ill 


u. Madeley 


i. 382 


v. M'Mahon 


iii. 70, 77 


f. Madison Ins. Co. ii. 


542, 540, 553, 


v. New Jersey, The 


ii. 401 


056, 558 


559, 560, 573 


v. Nolen 


ii. 897 


Gathings v. Williams 


ii. 727 


v. Rowe 


iii. 435 


Gatliffe v. Bourne 


ii. 208 


v. Salvador 


ii. 506 


Gauger v. Pautz 


i. 185 


v. Walsh 


ii. 804 


Gaulden v. McPhaul 


iii. 184 


v. Watson 


ii. 29 


Gault v. Brown 


iii. 40 


Gardom, Ex parte 


i. 209; iii. 15 


Gaunt v. Hill 


i. 509 


Garfield v. Paris 


iii. 49 


Gauntlet, The 


ii. 404 


Gariss v. Gariss 


iii. 372 


Gauss v. Hobbs 


i. 193 


Garland, Ex parte 


i. 226 


Gaussen v. Morton 


i. 74, 77 


v. Chambers 


i. 570 


Gavigan v. Evans 


ii. 685 


v. Jacomb 


i. 204 


Gawtry r. Doane 


i. 319 


v. Noble 


ii. 828 


Gay v. Lander 


i. 278 


v. Pamplin 


i. 408 


v. Parpart 


ii. 76 


Garlick ;;. Ward 


ii. 895 


u. Rainey 


ii. 716 


Garlinghouse v. Whitvvell 


ii. 944 


v. Union Ins. Co. 


ii. 603 


Garment v. Barrs 


i. 635 


v. Waltman 


i. 206 


Garner v. Garner 


i. 129 


Gayford v. Nicholls 


i. 116 


Garnett v. Garnett 


ii. 93 


Gayler v. Wilder 


ii. 304, 318 



v. Macon ii. 849 ; iii. 335, 330, 340 
u. Willan ii. 261, 203, 272 
v. Woodcock i. 303 
Garnham v. Finney i. 539 
Gamier v. Poydras ii. 731 
Garrard v. Frankol ii. 928 
v. Grinling iii. 344 
v. Haddan ii. 862 
o, Hartley i. 162 
v. Zachariah ii. 787 
Garrells c Kensington ii. 520 
Garret v. Malone i. 478 
v. Taylor ii. 748 
Garretson v. Selby i. 574 
Garrett o. Foot iii. 120, 147 
v. Handley i. 65 
v. Malone iii. 36 
v. Muller i. 189 
Garrigues v. Coxe ii. 428, 486 
Garrison v. Memphis Ins. Co. ii- 427 
Garron v. Galbraith ii. 536 
Garrow v. Carpenter ii. 881 
Garside i. Trent & Mersey Naviga- 
tion ii. 100, 227, 230 
Gartoni'. Bristol & Exeter R. K. Co. i 440 
Garvin c. Williams i. 263 
Garwood v. Garwood ii. 868 
Gascoyne r. Smith i. 295 
Gashwiler v. Willis i. 107 
Gaskartli v. Lowther iii. 366 
Gaskell v. King i. 488 
v. Morris iii. 220 
Gaskill v. Dudley i. 161 
Gaslight Co. a. Turner ii. 886 
Gasque v. Small i. 466 
Gass v. New York, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 231 
v. Stinson ii. 766 
Gassett v. Godfrey i. 573 ; ii. 700 
v. Grout iii. 437 
Gaston r. Am. Exchange Bank i. 329 
v. Frank urn iii. 334, 369 



Gaylord Man. Co. v. Allen i. 624, 620, 628 
Gaylord v. Gaylord ii. 832 

Garner v. Wilkinson iii. 437 

Gaynorw. Old Colony, &c. R.R. Co. ii. 251 
Gazelle, The ii. 431, 458 

Gazinsky et ux. u. Colburn i. 20 

Gazley v. Price ii. 663, 790 

Gazrara v. Ohio Ins. Co. ii. 532 

Geach v. Ingall ii. 695 

Geary v. Physic iii. 9 

Geddes v. Pennington ii. 911 

Gee v. Cheshire Ins. Co. ii. 493, 583 

c. Pearse iii. 339, 342 

!■. Pritchard ii. 330, 335, 336 

Geer v. Archer i. 464 

v. Putnam ii. 900 

Geiger v. Eighth, &c. Assoc. iii. 117 

v. Green iii. 367 

Geill i>. Jeremy i. 320 

Geiser v. Kershner ii. 749 

Gelley v. Clerk ii. 165 

Gelston v. Hoyt ii. 931 

Gem, Ex parte iii. 416 

Gen. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sherwood 

ii. 499 • iii. 192 

General Smith, The ii. 381,'382, 385 

Gen. Steam Nav. v. Gillon ii. 434 

Gen. Steam Nav. Co. t . Mann ii. 429 

i.'. Rolt ii. 19 

f. Tonkin ii. 429 

General Trust Co. v. Chapman i. 129 

General Worth, The v. Hopkins ii. 392 

Gennings v. Lake i. 520 

Gentleman, The ii. 423 

George, The ii. 463 

v. Clagett i. 66 ; ii. 883, 884, 938 

t. Elliott ii. 138 

v. Gillespie ii. 867 

v. Harris i. 482, 484 

v. Johnson ii. 918 

v. Norris i. 569 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XC111 



George v. Sandel i. 47 

v. Skeates ii. 392 

v. Skivington iii. 219 

v. Tate i. 205 ; ii. 875 

v. Van Horn ii. 76 

George Dean, The ii. 441 

George Home, The i. 442 

Geralopulo v. Wieler i. 326 

Gerhard v. Bates ii. 921 

Gerhauser v. No. Brit. Ins. Co. ii. 592 

Germain v. The Indiana ii. 392 

Germaine v. Burton i. 636 

German Lutheran Trustees v. Heise ii. 766 



Germnn Mining Co., In re 
Germania Ins. Co. v. McICee 

v. Sherlock 
Gerrish v. Glines 
Gerst v. Jones 
Gervais v. Edwards 
Getchell v. Clark 

v. Heald 
Gether v. Capper 
Getty v. Rountree 

v. Shearer 
Gettys v. Gettys 
Gheen v. Johnson 

v. Osborn 
Gibbens v. Buisson 
Gibbes v. Mitchell 
Gibbins v. Phillips 
Gibbon v. Baddall 

v. Paynton 
Gibbons v. Hoag 
Gibbs v. Benjamin 

v. Bryant 

v. Chisholm 

v. Fremont 

u. Gray 

v. Guild 

v. Merrill 

v. Potter 

v. Smith 
Gibert v. Fetcher 
Gibson v. Bell 

v. Boyd 

v. Bruce 

«., Carruthers 



i. 229 

ii. 543 

ii. 573 

ii. 853 

i. 627, 631 

iii. 360, 366 

iii. 286 

iii. 88 

i. 508 

i. 631 

ii. 861 

ii. 737 

i. 91 

i. 551 

ii. 424 

ii. 873 

iii. 442 

iii. 295 

ii. 274 

iii. 338 

i. 564 

iii. Ill 

iii. 161 

i. 314; iii. 113 

ii. 417, 418 

iii. 107 

i. 369 

ii. 454 

ii. 886 

iii. 295 

iii. 439, 469 

ii. 119 

iii. 477 

i. 639, 642 ; iii. 426 



v. Colt 

v. Connor 

v. Cook 

v. Cooke 

v. Courthorpe 

i7. Cranage 

v. Culver 

o. Dickie 

v. East India Co. 

v. Erie R. Co. 

v. Gibson 

v. Goldsmid 

v. Ingo 

v. King 

v. Livesey 

v. Love 

v. Lupton 



429, 435 

i. 62 

i. 292 

ii. 319 

i. 245, 248, 249 

iii. 447 

ii. 63 

ii. 196, 199, 203 

ii. 79 

i. 154 

ii. 46 

ii. 850 

iii. 306 

ii. 454 

iii. 416 

iii. 143 

i. 570 

I 12, 212 



Gibson v. Minet 

v. Moore 

v. Norway Bank 

v. Overbury 

v. Powell 

v. Small 

u. Spurrier 

u. Stearns 

v. Stevens 

v. Stone 

v. Van Dresar 

v. Wells 

v. Winter 
Giddens v. Byers Heirs 
Giddings v. Coleman 
Giese v. Schultz 
Giffert v. West 
Gifford, Ex parte 

v. Allen 

v. Carvill 

v. Kolsch 

v. Thompson 

v. Whitaker 
Gihon v. Fryatt 
Gilbach's Appeal 
Gilbert v. Danforth 

v. Dennis 

v. Guptill 

u. Hohnes 

v. Lynes 

v. McEachen 

v. N. Amer. Ins. Co. 

v. Schwencle 

v. Sykes 

o. Whidden 

v. Wiman 
Gilbertson v. Richardson 
Gilby v. Singleton 
Gilchrist v. Donwell 

u. Leonard 

o. McGee 

v. Williams 
Gildart v. Gladstone 
Gildersleeve v. U. S. Tel. 

Giles v. Ackles 

v. Cynthia, The 

v. Eagle Ins. Co. 

v. Grover 

v. Hart 

v. O'Toole 

;;. Perkins 
Gilfert v. Hallet 
Gilham v. Locke 
Gilhooley v. Washington 
Gilkyson v. Larue 
Gill v. Cole 

v. Cubitt 

u. Kuhn 

v. Kymer 

v. McAttee 

v. Shelley 

v. Wells 

v. Woods 
Gillespie ti. Battle 



.26; 



.74; 



i. 248 ; ii. 627 

i. 185, 186 

i. 48 

ii. 610 

ii. 8H2 

ii. 527, 531 

i. 525 

iii. 129, 138 

i. 235 ; iii. 49 

i. 178 

ii. 325 

i. 535 

ii. 748 

i. 55 

i. 246 

iii. 193 

i. 272 

i. 36, 325 

ii. 29 

i. 622 

ii. 467 

i. 159 

ii. 819 

ii. 875 

i. 355 

ii. 784 

i. 308, 322 

i. 151 

i. 75 

i. 351 

i. 151 

ii. 586 

i. 152 

ii. 897 ; iii. 43 

•i. 198 

ii. 200 

iii. 195 

i. 211 

i. 319 

ii. 873 

ii. 939 

ii. 881 

ii. 638 

Co. ii. 286, 288, 

301 

i. 470 

ii. 460 

ii. 447 

ii. 103 

ii. 771, 772 

iii. 195, 196 

i. 571 ; iii. 451 

ii. 534 

iii. 465 

i. 541 

iii. 72 

iii. 236 

i. 288, 289 

i. 178 

iii. 258 

iii. 309 

ii. 633 

fii. 335 

i. 380 

iii. 38 



XC1V 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Gillespie v. Carpenter 




ii. 944 


v. Cresswell 




iii. 98 


i: Edmonston 




i. 514 


i>. Forsyth 


ii 


527, 628 


v. Hamilton 




i. 226 


v. Hannahan 




i. 311 


o. Moon 




iii. 354 


v. Thompson 




ii. 416 


Gillet, Ex parte 




iii. 435 


v. Averill 




i. 307 


Gillett v. Bowman 




ii. 802 


;;. Fairchild 




i. 250 


p. Ellis ii. 216 


448, 


451, 456 


i'. Hill 




i. 566 


(.. Mawman 




ii. 140 


i. Phelps 




ii. 913 


v. Rippon 




i. 33 


Gilligan v. Boardman 


ii. 


7; iii. 17 


Gillingliam r. Gillingham 




ii. 72, 92 


v. Waskett 




ii. 879 


Gillis v. Bailey 




i. 53, 90 


v. Hall 




iii. 309 


Gillott v. Esterbrook ii. 


353, 


355, 357, 


371 


372, 


376, 378 


v. Kettle 




ii. 375 


Gilman v. Brown 


iii. 


203, 2H7 


u. Cutts 




iii. 106 


u. Eastern R. R. Co. 




ii. 46 


u. Hall 


ii. 43, 703 


v. Hunnewell ii 


353 


362, 370 


n. Kibler 


i. 470; iii. 17 


v. Moore 




ii. 785 


v. Peck 


i. 302 ; i ■ , 


Gilmore v. Black 




i. 173 


u. Bussey 




ii. 757 


v. Carman 




ii. 172 


<■. Holt 


ii. 


777, 780 


v. Spies 


i 


311, 312 


Gilpin r. Enderby 




i. 188 


v. Temple i 


175, 


178, 198 


Gilpins v. Consequa i. 490 


574 


; ii. 806 ; 
iii. 220 


Gilreath v. Allen 




iii. 184 


Gilson v. Bingham 




i. 638 


v. Gwinn 




iii. 258 


v. Spc'in- 




i. 356 


Ginesi «. Cooper 


i. 175 


; ii. 893 


Girard t>. Taggart i 


674 


; iii. 224 


Girard Ins. Co. v. Marr 




ii. 127 


Giraud v. Richmond 




iii. 41 


Gisbourn v. Hurst 




ii. 175 


Gist v. Lybrand 




i. 30S 


Gittings v. Mahew 




i. 482 


v. Nelson 


i. 


560, 613 


Givens v. Calder 


iii. 


346, 347 


Gladding v. Constant 




ii. 457 


Glade v. Germania Ins. Co. 




ii. 654 


Gladwell v. Turner 




i. 318 


Glahohn n. Hays 


ii. 


408, 657 


Glaholme v. Rowntree 




iii. 260 


Glaister v. Hewer 




ii. 875 


Glascock v. Glascock 


iii. 


298, 299 


Glasfurd v. Laing 




iii. 138 


Glasgow, The 




ii. 396 


v. Sands 




i. 380 



Glass v. Glass 
Glasscock v. Nelson 

v. Smith 
Glasscott v. Day 
Glassington v. Rawlins 
Glazebrook v. Woodrow 
Gleason v. Dodd 

v. Dyke 

v. Gleason 

v. Goodrich Trans. Co. 

>'. Sykes 
Gleim v. Belmont, The 
Glen v. Hope Ins. Co. 

v. Lewis 

v. Whitaker 
Glen Cove Mut. Ins. Co. v. 



ii. 88 

iii. 372 

i. 218 

ii. 776, 778 

ii. 797 

iii. 217 

ii. 7-12 

i. 501 

ii. 92 

ii. 212, 213 

i. 667 

ii. 384 

ii. 494 

ii. 548 

i. 573 

Harrold 



i. 458 
Glendale Woollen Co v. Protection 

Ins. Co. ii. 521, 546, 553 

Glendenning, Ex parte i. 325 

Glenn v. Gill i. 231 

v. McCullough iii. 69 

v. Thompson i. 548 

Glenny v. Smith ii. 372 

Glezen v. Rood iii. 235 

Globe Ins. Co. v. Cleveland Ins. Co. 

iii. 442 
Glory, The ii. 439 

Glossop v. Colman i. 24 

Gloucester Bank v. Salem Bank i. 301 ; 

ii. 754 

Gloucester Ins. Co. v. Younger ii. 508 

Glover v. Austin " ii. 380, 387 

v. Barrie ii. 834 

v. Dowagic Universalist Parish ii. 791 

u. Glover i. 151 

v. Ott i. 338 

v. Proprietors of Drury Lane i. 385 

v. Robbins ii. 853 

Glyn v. East & West India Dock Co. 

iii. 274 



Glvn Mills & Co. o. East, &c. Dock 


Co. 


ii. 411 


Glynn v. Baker 


i. 330 


Goate v. Goate 


iii. 77 


Goblet v. Beechey 


ii. 686 


Godard v. Benjamin 


ii. 749 


v. Gray 


ii. 738 


Godchaux v. Mulford 


iii. 49 


Goddard v. Binney i. 


563, 564 ; iii. 60 


... Cox 


ii. 762, 764 


v. Hodges 


i. 184; ii. 764 


(,'. Ingram 


iii. 90 


u. Merchants Bank 


i. 300 


v. O'Brien 


ii. 82 1 


v. Pratt 


i. 189 


v. Sawyer 


ii. 702 


v. Tangier, The 


ii. 416 


v. Vanderheyden 


iii. 461 


Godefroy v. Dalton 


i. 126 


Godfrey v. Forrest 


ii. 883 


v. Eurzo 


i. 573; iii. 438 


Godillot i'. Harris 


ii. 352 


Godin v. Lond. Ass. Co. i 


107; iii. 260,276 


v. Royal Ass. Co. 


ii. 493 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XCV 



Godwin v. Francis 


iii. 14 


Goede Hoope, The 


ii. 481 


Godts v. Rose 


i. 589 ; iii. 49 


Goesele v. Brimeler 


i. 165 


Goetz v. Foos 


ii. 11 ; iii. 23 


Goffc. Clinkard 


ii. 182 


v. Rehoboth i; 


. 773; iii. Ill 


Goicoeoliea v. La. State Ins. 


Co. ii. 518, 




648 


Goings v. Mills 


ii. 749 


Goit v. National Ins. Co. 


ii. 575 


Goix v. Knox 


ii. 495, 497 


v. Low ii 


495, 648, 739 


v. National Ins. Co. 


ii. 477 


Goldbeck v. Goldbeck 


ii. 85 


Golden v. Manning 


ii. 196, 415 


v. Prince 


iii. 391, 502 


Golder v. Ogden 


i. 586 


Gold Hunter, The 


ii. 407 



Golding, Davis, & Co., Ex parte i. 645 

Goldman v. Davis i. 315 
Gold Mining Co. u. National Bank 

i. 51 
Goldney, Ex parte iii. 431 
Goldsborough v. Orr ii. 660 
Goldsbury v. May i. 569 
Gold-Separating Co. v. U. S. Disin- 
tegrating Ore Co. ii. 313 
Goldshede v. Swan ii. 694; iii. 17 
Goldsmith v. Guild iii. 340 
Goldstone v. Osbom ii. 844 
Golightly v. Jellicoe ii. 836 
Gomez v. Garr ii. 827 
Gompertz v. Bartlett i. 298 
v. Denton i. 637 
Gondolier, The ii. 458 
Gonzales v. Broad i. 110 
v. Minor ii. 458 
v. Sladen i. 105 
Gooch v. Bryant ii. 859 
v. Sullivan iii. 66 
Good, Ex parte i. 2]0 
v. Cheeseman ii. 819 
v. Elliott ii. 896 
v. Good ii. 885 
v. Martin ii. 8 
v. Mylin iii. 176 
Goodall, Ex parte iii. 435 
v. Marshall iii. 409 
v. New England Ins. Co. ii. 565, 584 
v. Polhill i. 326 
v. Richardson ii. 119 
v. Thurman ii. 74, 75 
Goodall's case ii. 646 
Goodburn v. Stevens i. 168, 170 
Goode v. Harrison i. 354 
v. Jones i. 274 
v. M'Cartney i. 180 
v. Waters ii. 833 
Goodenow v. Buttrick ii. 874 
v. Dunn i. 612 
v. Tyler i. 104, 105 
Gooding v. Morgan ii- 757 
Goodinge v. Goodinge ii. 692 
Goodisson v. Nunn iii. 247 



Goodlead v. Blewith 
Goodloe v. Clay 

v. Rogers 
Goodman, Ex parte 

In re 

v. Chase 

a. Griffin 

o. Hannibal 

v. Harvey 

v. Kennell 

r. Pocock 

v. White 
Goodnow v. Parsons 

v. Smith 

v. Warren 
Goodrich ;;. City, &c. 

o. Downs 

v. Gordon 

r. Jones 

v. Lafflin 

v. Norris 

v. Reynolds 

u. Rogers 

v. Willard 
Goodridge v. Lord 

v. Ross 



ii. 773 

iii. Ill 

iii. 198 

iii. 468 

iii. 415 

iii. 25 

ii. 26 

i. 545 

i. 289 ; ii. 97 

i. 114 

ii. 38, 44, 634 

i. 207 

ii. 675, 823 

i. 210 

i. 316 

ii. 867 

iii. 403 

i. 303 

i. 545 

ii. 812 

ii. 410 

i. 161 

iii. 152 

iii. 267 

ii. 422 

.365 



Goodright d. Hall v. Richardson i. 540 
d. Walter v. Davids i. 539 

Goodsall v. Boldero ii. 606, 607 

v. Webb ii. 609 

Goodsell v. Benson ii. 712 

v. Myers i. 363 

Goodson v. Brooke i. 59 

Goodspeed v. East Haddam Bank i. 164 

Goodtitle v. Bailey ii. 635, 931 

o. North iii. 237, 465 

v. Southern i. 531 ; ii. 680, 681 

v. Toombs iii. 237 

v. Woodward i. 211 

Goodwin v. Blackburne ii. 109 

v. Clark i. 487 

v. Cremer ii. 749, 750 

v. Cunningham i. 258 

v. Davenport i. 305 

v. Hardy i. 158 

„. Holbrook i. 575, 786, 810 

p. Jones iii. 407, 409 

' v. Lightbody iii. 366, 429, 435 

v. Mass. Life Ins. Co. ii. 606, 618 
v. Richardson i. 168 

v. Robarts i. 276, 330; ii. 936 

v, Willoughby i. 471 

Goodyear v. Bishop ii. 327, 328 

v. Day ii 304, 325 

v. Housinger ii. 3*^4 

v. Mullee ii. 324 

v. N. J. Cent. R. R. ii. 324 

v. Providence Rubber Co. ii. 316 
„. Railroads ii. 312, 316 

v. Wait ". 312 

v. Watson "■ 6 

Gookin v. Graham i. 616 

v. N. E. Ins. Co. ii- 488 

Goold v. Chapin ii. 211, 213, 232 

Goom v. Aflalo i. 585, 586; iii. 13 



XCV1 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Gordon v. Appeal Tax Court iii. 497 

v. Baltimore iii. 498 

v. Bankard i. 194 
v. Bowne ii. 428, 498, 505, 879 

v. Brewster iii- 187 

v. Buchanan i. 88; ii. 181, 183 

v. Bulkeley i. 46 

v. Cannon iii. 440 

v. Church ii. 882 

v. Dalby i. 459 

v. East India Co. ii. 380 

v. Freeman i. 221 

v. Gordon iii. 36 

v. Grand St. R. R. Co. ii. 238 

v. Haywood i. 406 

v. Hutchinson ii. 179 

v. Jenney iii. 217 

v. Jones iii. 184 

v. Mass. Ins. Co. ii. 476, 505, 506 

v. Norris iii. 219, 224 

v. Parker iii. 233 

v. Potter i. 344, 351 

v. Price i. 326 

v. Rimmington ii. 498, 571 

v. Rolt i. 114 

v. Strange ii. 753 

v. Torrey iii. 293 

v. Tucker ii. 827, 832, 835 

Gore v. Brazier iii. 239, 242 
v. Gibson i. 434, 436; iii. 373, 414 

v. White ii. 915 

v. Wright ii. 941 

Gorgier v. Mieville i. 329, 330 

Gorham v. Stearns iii. 441, 442 
Gorrison v. Perrin i. 599, 603, 604, 606, 

673 

Gorst v. Lowndes ii. 797 

Gorton v. Dyson i. 141 

Gosbell v. Archer iii. 8 

Goslin v. Hodson ii. 58 

Gosling v. Birnie ii. 152 

v. Higgins ii. 215, 415 

Gosman v. Cruger i. 408 

Goss v. Lord Nugent ii. 425, 685 

v. Turner ii. 789 

v. Whitney ii. 905 

Goswiler's Estate ii. 797 

Gott v. Gandy i. 532 

Gottsman v. Ins. Co. ii. 557 

Goudy v. Gebhart ii. 924 

v. Gillam iii. 88 

Gough, In re iii. 448 

v. Crane iii. 354 

v. Farr ii. 74 

v. Findon i. 265 

v. Howard i. 537 

v. Staats ii. 755 

Gould v . Armstrong i. 470 

v. Banks ii. 776 

v. Emerson ii. 608 

v. Gould i. 35, 177, 229 

v. Hill ii. 253, 254, 255, 256 

v. Oliver ii. 448 

v. Parlin ii. 874 

v. Stanton ii. 388, 389, 391 



Gould v. Webb «• 663, 738 

Gouldsworth v. Knights i. 541 ; ii. 940 

Goupy v. Harden }■ 299 

Gourdine v. Graham iii. 102 

Gourdon v. Ins. Co. ii. 475, 476 

Gourlay v. Duke of Somerset ii. 845; 
iii. 310, 360 

Gouthwaite v. Duckworth i. 195-198 

Gove v. Wining i. 315 

Gover v. Christie }• 251 

Governeur v. United Ins. Co. ii. 533 

Governor, The v. Gordon iii. 99 
Governor & Company of the Cast 

Plate Manufacturers v. Meredith iii. 493 
Governor, &c. of Copper Mines v. 

Fox i. 158, 479 

Governor, &c. v. Petch i. 506 

Govett v. Richmond ii. 826 

Govier v. Hancock i. 395 

Gowan r. Jackson i. 212 

v. Jeffries i. 224 

v. Forster iii. 80 

Gower v. Capper i. 478 

u. Mainwaring i. 134 

v. Moore i. 306, 307 

v. Saltmarsh iii. 173 

Gowing v. Knowles i. 505 

Grabenhorst v. Nicodemus i. 542 

Grable v. Margrave iii. 184 

Grabtree v. May i. 354 

Grace v. American Ins. Co. i. 54 

v. Denison iii. 344 

v. Hale i. 336, 338 

v. Morgan iii. 175 

v. Smith i. 178 

Graddon v. Price ii. 804 

Grady v. Am. Cent. Ins. Co. i. 90 

Graeff v. Hitchman i. 194, 203, 206 

Graff v. Bloomer ii. 197 

v. Foster i. 629 

Grafton, The ii. 209, 407 

Graham v. Ackroyd i. 101 

v. Barras ii. 521 

v. Bickham iii. 174 

v. Brettle i. 404 

v. Chapman iii. 441 

v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. ii. 220 

v. Dyster iii. 258, 278 

v. Fireman's Ins. Co. ii. 555 

v. Gracie i. 254, 474 

v. Graham ii. 843 

v. Halloway ii. 811 

v. Hendren iii. 371 

v. Hope i. 75, 192 

v. Hoskins ii. 459 

v. Hunt i. 463, 464 

v. Jackson iii. 225 

v. Kinder i. 256 

o. Martin ii. 65 

v. Mayer i. 209 

u. Musson i. 123; iii. 10, 14 

v. O'Neil ii. 8, 12 

t>. Pacific R. Co. iii. 181 

v. Pierson iii. 478 

v. Robertson i. 25, 34 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XCV11 



Graham v. Sangston i. 322, 826 

v. Thompson ii. 760 

v. West. Un. Tel. Co. ii. 280, 282, 288 

v. Whicholo i. 543 

Gram v. Cadwell i. 26 

v. Seton i. 122, 212 

Grammar School v. Burt iii. 486 

Granby v. Amherst i. 149 ; ii. 709 

Grandy v. McCleese ii. 810 

Grand Bank v. Blanchard i. 318 

Grandin v. Le Boy i. 292 

Grand Turk, The ii. 454 

Granger, Ex parte iii. 471 

v. Collins i. 502, 536 

v. George iii. 99 

v. Howard Ins. Co. ii. 574 

Grangiac v. Arden i. 460 

Granite Railway Co. v. Bacon ii. 857 

Grant, Ex parte 418 

In re i. 345; iii. 456, 468 

v. Cole i. 82 

v. Da Costa i. 281 

v. Ellicott i. 293, 294 ; iii. 451 

v. Fletcher iii. 13 ; i. 583, 585, 586 

v. Green i. 390 

v. Hamilton ii. 896 

v. Healey i. 328 

v. Howard Ins. Co. ii. 545, 551, 556 

v. Johnson ii. 661, 663 

v. King ii. 144 

v. Law ii. 813 

v. Maddox ii. 667, 677 

v. M'Lachlin ii. 398 

v. Mills iii. 424 

v. Nat. Bank iii. 421 

v. Naylor ii. 4 

v . Norway i. 44 ; ii. 190, 409 

e. Paxton ii. 484 

v. Raymond ii. 303, 315, 322 

v. Ridsdale ii. 23 

v. Royal Exchange Company ii. 877, 

879 

v. Smith ii. 16, 18 

</. Thompson i. 434, 438 

v. Vaughan i. 272, 330 

Grantham v. Hawley i. 558, 560 

Grasselli v. Lowden ii. 891 

Gratitudine, The i. 78 ; ii. 404, 405, 456 

Gratz v. Bayard i. 226 

v. Gratz ii. 829 

v. Redd iii. 354 

Gravenor v. Woodhouse i. 540 

Graves v. Bemis iii. 293 

v. Berdan i. 537 

v. Boston Mar. Ins. Co. i. 56 ; ii. 475, 

478, 479 

v. Dale ii. 863 

v. Dash i. 327 

v. Hartford, &c. Co. ii- 210 

v. Harwood ii. 686 

v. Legg ii- 663 

v. Merry i- 191 

v. Sawcer ii- 387 

v. Tucker ii- 9 

v. Weeks iii- 104 



Graves v. Woodbury 




ii. 874 


Gravett v. Mugge 




i. 564 


Gray v. Agnew 




i. 102 


v. Bartlett 




ii. 939 


v. Belden 




iii. 116 


v. Bell 




i. 317 


v. Bennett 


iii. 426 


429, 437 


v. Bompas 




i. 542 


v. Brackenridge 




i. 128 


v. Briscoe 


iii 


241, 243 


v. Brown 


ii. 28; iii. 12, 132 


0. Clark 


ii 


633, 644 


v. Coffin 




i. 161 


v. Cox 




i. 632 


v. Crosby 




iii. 170 


v. Davis 




iii. 48 


v. Donahoe 




i. 280 


v. Fowler 




iii. 125 


v. Gardner 




ii. 488 


v. Gutteridge 




ii. 761 


v. Handkinson 




i.457 


v. Holdship 




i. 547 


v. James 




ii. 315 


v. Mendez 




iii. 102 


u. Munroe 




iii. 504 


v. Portland Bank 


iii. 


212, 220 


v. Russell ii 


336, 337, 


344, 346 


v. Sims 




ii. 496 


v. Thomas 




i. 255 


v. Wain 


ii. 419, 44 


v. Wass 




ii. 746 


u. Waterman 




iii. 196 


v. White 




ii. 756 


v. Wilson 




ii. 844 



Gray De Wilton v. Saxon iii. 328 

Gray's Ex'rs v. Brown ii. 28 

Graysbrook v. Fox i. 147 

Greathead v. Walton ii. 907 

Great Northern R. Co. v. Shepherd ii. 275, 

277 
v. Witham i. 479 

Great Western R. R. Co. v. McComas 

ii. 217 

Greaves v. Ashlin i. 564 ; ii. 666 

v . Key ii. 936 

Grebill's Appeal i. 382 

Greeley v. Stilson iii. 37 

Greely v. Bartlett i. 60 

v. Dow i. 324 ; ii. 28 

u. Hunt i. 315 

u . Smith ii. 871 

v. Tremont Ins. Co. ii. 444, 447, 506 

v. Waterhouse ii. 402, 404 

Green, Ex parte i. 347 

In re ii. 896 

v. Armstrong iii. 35 

v. Barrett i. 229 

v. Beatty ii. 749 

v. Beesley ii. 246 

v. Bicknell iii. 462, 465 

v. Biddle iii. 238, 502, 505 

u. Bradfleld iii. 381 

v. Briggs ii. 387 

v. Brown ii. 498 

v. Button iii. 194 



XCV111 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Green v. Clark ii. 866, 871 

v. Clarke iii. 207 

v. Cope i. 67 

v. Cresswell iii. 24 

v. Disbrow iii- 93 

v. Eales iii. 249 

v. Farley i. 319, 320 

v. Farmer iii. 210, 215, 272 

v. Fouley i. 319 

v . Fox iii. 293 

v. Goings i. 309 

v. Gonzales i. 80 

v. Gosden ii. 912 

v. Green ii. 035 

v. Hatch i. 258 

i'. Hinkley i. 47 

v. Homestead Ins. Co. ii. 552 

v. Home i. 65 

v. Hulett ii. 38 

v. Kemp iii. 132 

v. Kopka i. 105 

v. Lowell ii. 746 

i-. Mann ii. 191, 199, 249 

v. Milwaukee, &c. E. Co. ii. 188 

v. Pole ii. 847 

v. Price ii. 890 

v. Rivett iii. 70 

v. Sargeant i. 05 

v. Sarmiento iii. 301, 398 

v. Shurtliff ii. 772 

v. Sperry i. 350, 385 

v. State iii. 499 

v. Stuart ii. 814 

v. Tanner i. 69, 194, 206 

v. VanBuskirk ii. 699 

v. Winter i. 136, 150 

v. Young ii. 501, 581 

Greenaway v. Adams i. 538; iii. 359 
Green Bay Bank v. Dearborn i. 565, 568, 

570 

Greenby e. Wilcocks i. 144, 200 

Greene v. Bateman i 505; iii. 224 

v. Bishop ii. 335, 336, 341, 344, 349 

v. Brooking ii. 11; iii. 21, 56 

v. Darling i. 254 

v. Dingley ii. 794 

v. Dodge ii. 32 

v. First Parish in Maiden i. 547 

v. Greene i. 108, 170 

v. Harris iii. 41 

v. Lycoming Ins. Co. ii. 616 

Greenfield Bank v. Leavitt iii. 210 

Greenfield Savings Bank v. Stowell ii. 862 

Greenhow's Adm's v. Harris iii. 117 

Greening, Ex parte iii. 427, 452 

v. Wilkinson ii. 212, 220 

Greenland v. Chaplin ii. 250; iii. 192 

Gree.nlaw v. Greenlaw ii. 730 

Greenleaf v. Kellogg ii. 709 

v. Quiney iii. 88 

Greeno v. Munson i. 540 

Greenough v. Rolfe ii. 840 

r. Smead i. 274, 284 

v. Wigginton i. 409 

Greenslade v. Dower i. 203 



Greentree v. Rosenstock _ i. 81 

Greenup v. Vernon i. 552 

Greenville R. R. Co. v. Partlow iii. 184 " 

Greenwald v. Ins. Co. ii- 572 

v. Raster i- 210 

Greenway, Ex parte i. 331 

w. Fisher iii. 478 

Greenwood, In re ii. 844 

v. Bishop of London i. 488 

v. Brodhead i. 240 

v. Curtis ii. 726, 727 

v. Freight Co. iii. 486, 491 

o. Lidbetter ii. 823 

Gregg v. George i. 296 

v. James ii. 746 

v. Wells ii. 936, 938 

v. Wyman ii. 902, 904 

Gregg's case iii. 167 

Gregory v. Christie ii. 532, 534 

v. Frazer i. 435 

v. Harm an i. 141 

v. Hurrill iii. 103 

v. King ii. 897 

v. McDowell iii. 222 

v. Mighill iii. 310, 349, 352, 360 

v. Morris iii. 273 

a. Pierce i. 407 

v. Piper i. 114, 115 

v. Siryker ii. 141 

v. Tliomas i. 612 

v. Wendell i. 569; ii. 886 

v. AVest Midland R. Co. ii. 272 

u. Wilson iii. 363 

Gregson v. Ruck i. 586; iii. 13 

Greignier, Ex parte iii. 418, 419 

Gremere v. Le Clerk Bois Valon i. 488 

Grendell v. Godmond i. 392 

Greneaux v. Wheeler i. 289, 292 

Grenfell r. Dean and Canons of 

Windsor i. 253 

I-. Girdlestone iii. 92 

Grew v. Burditt ii. 877 

Grey, Ex parte iii. 420 

v. Cooper i. 370 

v. Frier ii. 603 

Grice r. Richardson i. 575 

Griclley v. Dole i. 184 

Grieff v. Bondousquie i. 178 

Grier r. Grier ii. 831 

v. Hood i. 216 

Grierson i'. Eyre ii. 349 

Griffin v. Banks i. 397 

v. Doe i. 175 

v. Eyles iii. 286 

v. Had ley ii. 827 

v. Kemp i. 296 

v. Macaulay i. 29 

v. McKenzie iii. 511 

v. Ransdell i. 387 

Griffith v. Buffum i. 176 

v. Burden i. 330 

v. Cave ii. 181 

v. Griffith iii. 300 

w. Ins. Co. of N. A. ii. 519 

v. Wells i. 489 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



XC1X 



Griffiths v. Owen ii. 819, 820 ; iii. 81 

v. Puleston i. 644 

Griggs v. State ii. 100 

Grill v. Iron Screw Steamer Co. ii. 428 

Grim v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 669, 573 

Grimaldi v. White i. 638 

Grimes v. Hamilton Co. iii. 15 

v. Reese ii. 876 

Grimman v. Legge i. 643 ; ii. 792, 940 

Grimshaw v. Bender i. 327 

v. Walker iii. 403 

Grindell u. Godmond i. 403 

Grinnan v. Baton Rouge Mills Co. 

i. 191 

Grinnell v. Cook ii. 156, 164, 165, 167 

v. West. Un. Tel. Co. ii. 287 

Grinoldby v. Wells i. 628 

Grisby v. Nance i. 186 

Grissell v. Robinson i. 500 

Griswold v. McMillan iii. 424 

v. N. Y. Ins. Co. ii. 418, 510, 513 

v. Pratt iii. 401, 434 

v. Sabin iii. 224 

v. Sheldon i. 560 

v. Waddington i. 173, 219, 223, 224, 

226, 316 

Groat v. Gile i. 564 

Grocer's Bank v. Kingman ii. 20 

v. Penfield i. 292 

Groffu. Belche i. 565 

Grome, Ex parte iii. 462 

Groning v. Mendham i. 638 

Groom v. Mealey iii. 469 

v. Thomas iii. 414 

v. West iii. 439, 469 

Gross v. Criss ii. 668 

v. Kierski i. 016 

Grosvenor v. Atl. F. Ins. Co. ii. 475, 

577 
v. Flax & Hemp Manuf. Co. iii. 117, 

118 
v. Henry i. 548 

v. Lloyd i. 189 

v. N. Y. &c. R. R. Co. ii. 190 

Grote v. The C. & H. R. Co. ii. 243, 245 
Groton v. Dalheim i. 306 

Groton Co. v. Gardner i. 552 

Grove v. Bastard iii. 334, 335 

v. Brien ii. 

v, Dubois i. 100 

Grover v. Wakeman iii. 382 

Grover, &c. Co. v. Clinton iii. 433 

Grover & Baker S. M. Co. v. Wil- 
liams ii. 324 
Groves v. Buck iii. 62 
v Graves iii. 126 
v. Perkins i. 523 
v. Smith i. 176 
Grow v. Seligman ii. 370 
Grubb v. Suit ii. 74 
Grugeon v. Smith i. 322 
Grymes v. Boweren i. 547 
Grysiel v. Whiehcott iii. 141 
Guaranty Co. u. Board of Liquida- 
tion iii- 506 



Guard v. Whiteside ii. 850 
Guardian Ins. Co. v. Hogan ii. 606, 609 
Guardians of the Poor u. Isathans ii. 85 

Guardians, &e. v. Franklin i. 153 

Guerlain v. Col. Ins. Co. ii. 473 

Guernsey v. Carver iii. 202 

v. Cook i. 68 

Guerreiro v. Peile i. 60, 102, 529 

Guerry v. Perryman i. 254 

Guest v. Smythe i. 93 

Guggenheimer v. Geiszler iii. 123 

Guichard v. Superveile iii. 96 

Guidon v. Robson 1. 22 

Guier v. O'Daniel ii. 712 

Guier's case ii. 644 

Guild v. Belcher i. 215 
u. Butler i. 324 ; ii. 6; iii. 411 

v. Guild ii. 51 

v. Rogers i. 554 

Guille v. Swan iii. 195 

Guillod v. Nock ii. 772 
Gulick v. Gulick i. 185, 186; ii. 71 

v. Grover i. 46, 411 

Gulledge v. Howard ii. 99 

Gullett v. Lamberton i. 370 

v. Lewis ii. 746 

Gulliver v. Drinkwater iii. 466 

Gully v. Bishop of Exeter i. 460 

v. Gully ii. 645 

Gunderson ;\ Richardson ii. 904 

Gunn v. Barry iii. 505 
v. Bolckow i. 639; iii. 274 

Gunnis v. Erhart i. 524 

Gunter v. Astor ii. 52 

v. Halsey iii. 66 

Gunther v. Atwill i. 628 
Gurley v. Hiteshue iii. 314, 330, 371 

Gurney v. Atlantic R. Co. iii. 222 

i'. Behrend i. 052 

v. Crockett ii. 385 

v. Sharp iii. 276 

v. Womersley i. 272, 298 

Gurnsey v. Gardner i. 257 

Gustavia, The ii. 385 

Guth v. Guth i. 397 

Guthrie v . Jones i. 546 

v. Murphy i. 350 

v. Pugsley iii. 243 

Gutteridge v. Munyard iii. 249 

Guy v. Butler i. 254 

o. Sharp ii. 691 

v. Tams iii. 75 

Gwathney v. Cason iii. 10, 15 

Gwilliam v. Daniel ii. 422 

u. Stone iii. 359 
Gwin v. Whitaker ii. 765; iii. Ill 

Gwinnell v. Herbert i. 299 

Gwynn, Ex parte iii. 143, 274 

i/. McCauley iii. 314 

v. Lee i- 288 

Gwynne, Ex parte i. 643 

v. Heaton i. 523 
Gylbert v. Fletcher i. 354 ; ii. 54 

Gyles v. Wilcox ii. 345 

Gynes v. Kemsley ii. 681 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



H. 



Haak v. Lindermann 


i. 568 


Haas v. Flint 


iii. 143 


Hacker v. Johnson 


i. 232 


v. Storer 


i. 144 


Hacket v. Glorer 


i. 531 


v. Tilley 


1.487 



Eackett v. B. C. & M. Rd. Co. ii. 188 

u. King i. 444 

v. Martin i. 254 ; ii. 188, 577 

v. McNamara iii. 312, 323, 367 

Hackitt v. Reynolds iii. 297 

Hackley v. Headley i. 443 

v. Hoskins ii. 52 

v. Sprague iii. 127, 128 

Hackwood v. Lyall ii. 396, 400 

Hadd v. U. S., &c. Co. ii. 227 

Hadden v. Knickerbocker i. 552 

Haddock v. Bury i. 308 

v. Murray i. 318 

v. Woods i. 279 

Haddon v. Chambers iii. 464 

Hadduck v. Wilmarth ii. 909 

Hadfield v. Mayor, &c. New York iii. 484 

Hadley v. Baxendale ii. 198 ; iii. 196 

v. Clarke ii. 198, 415, 425, 808 

v. N. H. Ins. Co. ii. 543 

v. Prather i. 618 

Haffey v. Birchetts iii. 242 

Hafford v. New Bedford i. 118 

Hafner v. Irwin iii. 382 

Hagard v. Raymond iii. 464 

Hagedorn v. Bell ii. 482 

v. Oliverson i. 49 ; ii. 389, 474, 480 

Hagar v. Hagar iii. 352 

Hager v. Nolan ii. 58 

Hagebush v. Ragland ii. 117 

Hagey v. Hill i. 323 

Haggartu. Morgan ii. 844 

Haggertston v. Hanbury ii. 635 

Haggerty v. Palmer i. 579 

v. Porter i. 242 

Habn v. Doolittle i. 621 

u. Fredericks i. 565 

v. Horstman iii. 172 

Haigh v. Brooks i. 473; ii. 694 ; iii. 17 

v. De La Cour ii. 491, 536 

Haight v. Badgeley ii. 52 

Hailey v. Franks ii. 944 

Haille v. Smith ii. 411 ; iii. 278 

Haine v. Tarrant i. 338 

Haines t'. Busk i. Ill 

u. Corliss i. 383 

v. Dubois i. 271 

v. East Tennessee R. R. Co. ii. 47 

v. Haines i. 459 ; iii. 314, 316 

v. Pearce ii. 756 

a. Tucker ii. 810 ; iii. 224 

Hains v. Jeffel i. 377 

Hair v. Bell ii. 41, 792 

Hairston v. Hairston ii. 709 

Hakes v. Hotchkiss i. 471 ; ii. 679 

Haldane v. Johnson i. 534 ; ii. 770 

Haldeman v. Michael iii. 442 



Hale, Ex parte iii. 469 

v. Baldwin iii- 508 

v. City of London, &c. Co. i. 631 

v. Gerrish i. 364, 365 

v. Hale iii. 161 

v. Henderson i. 489 

v. Huse ii- 828 

v. James iii. 239 

v. Lawrence ii. 722 
v. Mechanics Ins. Co. ii. 475, 493, 577, 

583 

v. Mercantile Ins. Co. ii. 535 

c. Milwaukee Dock Co. i. 328 

v. Morse iii. 81 

v. N. J. Steam NaT. Co. ii. 172 

v. Omaha Bank i. 552 

v. Rawson i. 605 

v. Rice i. 463 

v. Small iii. 416 

v. Smith i. 616 

v. Washington Ins. Co. ii. 499 

Hale's Exec. v. Ard's Exec. iii. 101 

Haley v. Dorchester Ins. Co. ii. 580 

v. Manuf. Ins. Co. ii. 562 

Half hed v. Jenning ii. 845 

Half hide v. Fenning ii. 845 

Halford v. Kymer ii. 606 

Halhead v. Young ii. 483 

Haliday, Ex parte iii. 420 

Halifax v. Chambers i. 537 

Halifax Union v. Wheelwright ii. 861 

Hall, Ex parte iii 427, 452 

v. Ashhurst i. 129 ; ii. 32 

v. Barrows ii. 355, 360, 367, 368 

v, Barnard iii. 450 

v. Belknap iii. 219 

v. Bird ii. 305 

v. Boardman iii. 439 

v. Brinkloy iii. 287 

v. Buffalo, The ii. 431 

v. Campbell ii. 698 

i-. Cannon ii. 58 

v. Cazenove ii. 685 

v. Clagett i. 231 ; iii. 354 

v. Conn. River Steam Co. ii. 234 

v. Cook ii. 885 

v. Crowley iii. 174 

v. Cushing iii. 127 

v. Daggett iii. 143 

v . Dean iii. 244 

v. De Cuir ii. 242 

v. Denison iii. 382 

v. Dewey i. 540 

(>. Dyson i. 486 

(,-. Farmer ii. 12 

v. Fisher ii. 939 

v. Flockton ii. 325 

v . Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 397, 398, 

508, 532 

v. Fuller i. 300 

v. Gardner i. 256 

v. Gaylor i. 574 

v. Hale i. 289 

a. Hall i. 221, 238, 395 ; iii. 347 

u. Hardy iii. 310, 369 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CI 



Hall v. Hill 


ii. 684 


Halwerson v. Cole 




ii. 216 


v. Ilinks 


i. 557 


Haly v. Lane 




i. 287 


v. Hoxsie 


ii. 6 


Ham v. Goodrich 




iii. 38 


v. Huffam 


i. 30 


v. Ham 




ii. 932 


v. Janson 


ti. 447, 677 


v. Hamburgh, The 




ii. 392 


v. Lanning 


i. 206 


v. Van Orden 




i. 263 


u. Law 


iii. 99 


Hamaker v. Blanchard 




ii. 106 


u. Leigh 


i. 24 


v. Eberley i. 470, 471 ; ii. 849 


v. Little 


iii. 104 


Hamar v. Medsker 




i. 406 


v. Marston 


i. 248, 497 


Hambidge v. De la Croute 




i. 216 


v. May hew 
v. McDuff 


ii. 634 


Hambleton v. Veere 




iii. 201 


iii. 297 


Hamer v. Dipple 




i. 335 


v. Mollineaux 


ii. 484 


Hamil v. Stokes 




i. 229 


v. North Eastern E. Co. 


ii. 238 


Hamill v. Purvis 




i. 210 


v. Ocean Ins. Co. 


ii. 483, 507 


Hamilton v. Benbury 




ii. 762 


v. Odber 


ii. 740, 743 


v. Cunningham 




i. 91, 92 


v. Ody 


ii. 874, 875 


v. Denny 




iii. 299 


v. Parker 


ii. 903 


v, Hamilton 




ii. 939 


v. People's Ins. Co. 


ii. 472, 560 


«.•. Hooper 




ii. 18 


v. Potter 


ii. 80 


v. Lycoming Mutual Ins. Cc 


. i. 514; 


v. Power 


ii. 246 




ii 


. 470, 540 


v. Reed 


iii. 355 


v. Marsden 




i. 540 


v. Renfro 


i. 126 ; ii. 174 


v. McDonald 




i. 252 


v. Richardson 


ii. 197 


v. McPherson 


iii 


. 199, 209 


v. Robinson i. 


250, 253, 563 


v. Mendes 




ii. 504 


v. Rupley 


ii. 654 


v. Mutual Ins. Co. 




ii. 601 


v. Savage 


i. 406 


v. Pearson 




i. 300 


v. Seabright 


ii. 818 


v. Phoenix Ins. Co. 




ii. 389 


v. Smallwood 


ii. 824 


v. Royse 




i. 89 


v. Smith 


i. 11; ii. 819 


v. Russell 




i. 569 


v. Snowhill 


i. 612 


v. Seaman 




i. 219 


v. Southmayd 


i. 552 


». Sheddon 




ii. 532 


v. Surtees 


ii. 940 


v. Summers 




i. 204 


v. Timmons 


i. 358 


v. Terry 




i. 505 


v. Tuttle 


iii. 265 


v. Watson 




ii. 9 


v. Warren 


iii. 305, 414 


Hamilton College v. Stewart 




i. 482 


v. Whittier ii 


783 ; iii. 332 


Hamlin, Ex parte 




iii. 411 


v. Wiles 


ii. 308, 327 


v. Stevenson 




i. 334 


v. Williams 


ii. 740 


Hammat v. Emerson i 


495; 


v. Wilson i. 271, 288; ii. 71 


Hammer v. McEldowney 




iii. 310 


v. Wisconsin 


iii. 483 


Hammersley v. De Beil 




iii. 32 


v. Wright 


ii. 71 


v. Knowlys 




ii. 765 


Hall and Hinds, In re 


ii. 97 


Hammett v. Linneman 




i. 580 


Hallen v. Runder 


i. 545; iii. 36 


v. Yea 


iii 


116, 143 


Haller v. Williamowitz 


i. 186, 187 


Hammon v. Roll 




i. 210 


Hallett v. Dowdall 


i. 216 


Hammond, Ex parte 




iii. 416 


Halley v. Troester 


i. 437 


v. Allen 




ii. 486 


v. Wigram 


ii. 447 


u. Am. Mut. Life Ins. Co 




ii. 616. 


Halliday v, McDougall 


i. 326 






799 


v. St. Louis, &c. R. Co. 


ii. 227 


v. Anderson 


i. 


564, 646 ; 


v. Ward 


iii. 92 




iii. 49, 273 


Hallock v. Ins. Co. 


ii. 567 


v. Chamberlin 




i. 274 


Halloway v. Davis 


ii. 663 


o. Douglas i. 173, 


229; ii 


Hallowell v. Curry 


i. 311 


v. Essex Ins. Co. 




ii. 513 


v. Fawcett 


i. 108 


v. Hopping 


iii. 


121, 130 


v. Howard 


ii. 779 


v. Hussey 




i. 476 


v. Saco 


ii. 709 


v. McClures 


ii. 


217, 414 


Hallowell Bank v. Howard 


ii. 879 


v. Messenger 


i. 


251, 252 


Halsey v. Brown 


ii. 669 


u. Reid 




ii. 535 


v. Grant 


iii. 357, 358 


v. Rogers 




ii. 468 


v. Norton 


i. 224 


v. Roll 




i. 471 


v. Whitney i 


210; iii. 382 


v. Smith 


iii. 


125, 126 


v. Woodruff 


i. 28 


v. Toulmin 


iii. 


462, 466 


Halstead v. Seamen 


ii. 843 


Hammonds v. Barkley 


iii. 


275, 288 


v. Shepard 


i. 201, 208 


Hamond v. Holiday 


i. 


109, 110 



Cll 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Hampden v. Walsh ii. 760 

Hamper, Ex parte i. 176, 180 

Hampshire v. Peirce ii. 695 

Hampstead v. Plaistow ii. 88 

Hampton v. M'Connell ii. 740, 741 

Hamson v. Harrison iii. 410 

Hamrick v. Hogg ii. 918 

Hanauer v. Bartels i. 5Uo 

v. Doane i. 486 

Hanbury v. Hanbury ii. 01 

Hanchet v. Whitney i. 548 

Hancock v. American Ins. Co. ii. 612 

v. Caffyn iii. 426, 454 

v. Entwisle iii. 462 

v. Fairfield i. 55, G8 

v. Hodgson i. 69 ; iii. 116 

v. New York Ins. Co. ii. 001 

v. Reede ii. 833 

b. Wilhoite iii. 100 

Hancock's Appeal ii. 925 

Hancox v. Dunning ii. 383 

v. Fishing Ins. Co. ii. 489 

Hand v. Armstrong iii. 113 

v. Baynes ii. 196, 199, 400 

v. Elvira, The ii. 430, 439 

Handford v. Palmer ii. 136 

!'. Rogers ii. 685 

Handley v. Chambers iii. 246 

Hands v. London, &e. R. R. Co. ii. 249 

b. Slaney i. 337 
Handy v. Foley i. 407 
Hanford v. Robertson ii. 767 

v. Rogers iii. 18 

Hanliam v. Sherman i. 543 

Hankey v. Becht i. 170 

r. Garratt i. 234 

v. Jones iii. 416 

Hankins v. Shoup i. 290 

Hankinson v. Hankinson ii. 92 

v. Sandilaus i. 12 

Hanks v. Deal i. 353, 356 

v. McKee i. 620 

v. Naglee ii. 72 

v. Palling i. 581 

Hanna v. Flint i. 182 

I/. Barter iii. 221 

u. Mills iii. 226 

c. Phelps iii. 221, 270 
v. Wilson iii. 313 

Hannah v. Carrington iii. 376, 378 

v. Fife ii. 886 

Hannan v. Hannan i. 458 

v. Johnson i. 207 

Hannay v. Eve ii. 894 

Hannibal R. R. Co. v. Swift ii. 213 

Hanover v. Turner ii. 736 

Hansard v. Robinson i. 331 

Hansbrough v. Baylor iii. 153, 154 

v. Gray i. 294 

Hansell v. Erickson ii. 40, 657 

Hansen v. Rounsavell ii. 767 

Hanson, Ex parte iii. 424 

v. Armitage iii. 51, 53, 55 

v. Buckner i. 264; iii. 242 

v. Crawley ii. 853 



Hanson v. Meyer i. 564, 575, 645 ; iii. 273 

v. Roberdeau i- 527 

v. Bowe i- 124; iii. 10 

v. Rowell ii- 466 

v. Stetson i- 482 

v. Stevenson iii. 447 

Hantz v. The York Bank iii. Ill 

Hapgood, Re iii. 421 

Harbeck v. Southwell iii. 293 

Harbert's case i. 31 ; iii. 379 

Harbin v. Levi ii. 877 

Harbold v. Kuntz iii. 75 

Harcourt v. Ramsbottom iii. 333 

Hard v, Seeley ii. 816 

v. Vt. & Canada R. R. Co. ii. 46 

Hardcastle v. Netherwood ii. 879 

Hardell v. McClure iii. 62 

Harden, Ex parte iii. 467 

v. Gordon i. 441 ; ii. 463 

v. Harden ii. 831 

Hardenburg v. Hardenburg ii. S2 

Harder v. Harder iii. 362 

Hardesty v. Richardson iii. 352 

Hardey v. Coe ii. 823 

Hardie v. Grant i. 394, 395 

Hardin v. Forsyth i. 540 

v. Ho-yo-po-Nubby's Lessee i. 125 

Harding, Ex parte i. 205 

u. Alden ii. 732, 736 

v. Ambler ii. 931 

v. Commercial Loan Co. ii. 753 

v. Davies ii. 773, 777 

v. Foxcroft i. 176, 184 ; ii. 387 

v. Souther ii. 421 

„. Tifft ii. 702, 767 

v. Wilson i. 631 

Hardman v. Bellhouse ii. 822 

v. Hardman ii. 645 

v. Wilcock ii. 218 

Hardtmann v. Tegart i. 396 

Hardwicke v. Vernon i. 96 

Hardy v. Carolina R. Co. ii. 46 

o. Coe ii. 823 

17. Corlis ii. 882 

17. Innes ii. 516, 832 

v. Jandon ii. 126 

v. Mitchell iii. 440 

17. Nelson iii. 175, 242 

v. Ryle ii. 797 

v. Union Ins. Co. ii. 493, 557, 583 

v. Waltham iii. 499 

Hare v. Henty i. 306 

t7. Horton ii. 646, 647 

v. Travis ii. 531, 533 

Harford v. Morris ii. 729 

Harger v. M'Mains iii. 212 

Hargous v. Ablon iii. 194 

i>. Stone i. 603, 628 

Hargrave v. Dusenbury ii. 753 

17. Hargrave iii. 364 

v. Smee ii. 626, 641 

Hargreaves v. Hutchinson iii. 118, 137 

!7. Parsons iii. 23, 24, 28 

v. Rothwell i. 81 

Hargroves v. Cooke ii. 762; iii. 17 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



cm 



Harker v. Dement ii. 127 
Harkins v. Standard Sugar Refinery 

ii. 47 

Harlan v. Harlan i. 466 

Harland's case ii. 137 

Harless v. Petty iii. 832, 352 

Harley v. King iii. 424 

v. State i. 448 

Harlow v. Curtis i. 605 

v . Putnam ii. 320 

u. Thomas iii. 244 

Harman v. Anderson i. 648 ; ii. 152 ; 

iii. 48, 444 

v. Fisher i. 654; iii. 441 

v. Gandolph ii. 425 

v. Goodrich iii. 218 

v. Johnson i. 203 

v. Kingston ii. 484 

v. Reeve iii. 19 

t*. Vanhatton ii. 403 

Harmer v. Bell ii. 434 

v. Killing i. 364 

Harmony v. Bingham i. 446 ; ii. 198, 

805, 806 

Ham v. Kiehl ii. 822 

Harnett v. Yielding iii. 305, 309, 361 

Harney v. Owen i. 355, 360 

Harnor v. Groves ii. 679 

Harper i\ Albany Ins. Co. ii. 545, 648 

v. Calhoun ii. 879 

v. Dotson i. 616 

v. Fairley iii. 86 

v. Gilbert i. 355; ii. 54 

v. Hampton ii. 824 

v. Little i. 72 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 602 

Harratt v. Wise ii. 520 

Harrell v. Kelly iii. 107 

v. Owens ii. 198 

Harrencourt v. Merritt iii. 82 

Harriman v. Harriman ii. 823 

v. Queen Ins. Co. i. 83; ii. 587 

Harrington v. Brown i. 95 

v. Hingham i. 216 

v. Kloprogee ii. 632 

v. Long ii. 907 

v. Lyles ii. 182 

v. McShane ii- 225 

v. Snyder ii. 131, 134, 137, 138 

v. Stratton i. 495 

v. Victoria Graving Dock Co. ii. 886 

Harriot, The ii. 441 

Harris's case ii. 540 

Harris v. Boston iii. 143, 144 

v. Campbell i. 12 

v. Carraody i. 446 

v. Carter ii. 467 

v. Clark i. 312 

v. Clarke i. 266, 312, 321 

v. Costar ii. 234 

v. Curnow ii- 832 

v. Delamar ii- 921 

v. Eagle Ins. Co. ii. 473, 578 

«. Farwell i ; . 192 

v. Fawcett ii- 33 



Harris v. Great Western R. Co. ii. 267 

v. Harris i. 409; ii. 91 

v. Hillegasa i. 176 

v. Huntbach ii. 4 

v. Jones iii. 240 

v. Knickerbocker , iii. 309 

v. Lee i. 392 

v. McGovern iii. 102 

v. Mills iii. 108 

v. Mitchell ii. 844 

v. Moody ii. 448 

v. Morris i. 393, 395 

v. Mott iii. 369 

v. Mullins i. 622 

v. Murray i. 243 

v. Newell ii. 24, 31 

v. Nickerson i. 510, 527 

v. Ohio Ins. Co. ii. 582 

v. Osbourn iii. 101 
v. Packwood ii. 187, 261, 272 

v. Palmer ii. 875 

v. Porter iii. 41 

v. Rand ii. 215 

v. Reynolds ii. 819, 844 

v. Roof ii. 895 

v. Royal Ins. Co. ii. 549 

v. Runnells i. 488 

t>. Scaramanga ii. 537 

v. Simmerman ii. 745, 747 

v. Venables i. 466 

v. Waite i. 627 
v. Wall i. 363, 364, 365 

v. Warner i. 35, 37 
v. Watson i. 467 ; ii. 467 

v . White ii. 758 
v. Wilson i. 198 ; ii. 828 

v. Woodruff iii. 266 

v. Young ii. 11 

Harris Manuf. Co. v. Marsh iii. 224 
Harrison, Ex parte ii. 387, 391 ; iii. 462 

v. Bainbridge ii. 875 

v. Berkley iii. 193 
v. Cage ii. 65, 68, 69, 71 

v. Central R. R. Co. ii. 249 

v. Clifton i. 333 

v . Close i. 27, 211 

v, Colton ii. 905 

v. Crowder i. 303 

v. Fane i. 336, 338 

v. Gardner i. 173 

v. Hall i. 402 

v. Harnel iii. 132 

k. Harrison iii. 212, 220 

i>. Heathorn i. 162, 163 

v. Jackson i. 122 

v. Knight |. 474 

v. Lemon i- 485 

v. London, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 271 

v. Lord North i. 537 

v. McClelland i. 58 

v. McConkey ii. 610 

v. McHenry i- 94 

v. Murrell ii- 138 

v. Roscoe i- 66 

v. Roy ii- 178 



CIV 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Harrison v. Shanks 


i. 62 


Harvey, Ex parte ii. 20 ; 


iii. 416, 432 


u. Sterry i. 200; 


in. 391, 408, 


v. Aruhbold ii. 


716; iii. 122 




409 


o. Ashley 


iii. 308 


v. Taylor 


ii. 355 


v. Brydges 


i. 550 


v. Young 


iii. 490 


v. Childs 


i. 183 




i. 43, 70, 75 


v. Connecticut, &c. R. Co 


iii. 196 


Harrod v. McDaniels 


i. 49 


v. Crickett 


i. 225, 226 


Han-old v. Whitaker 


i. 25 


v. Epes 


ii. 137 


Harrop v. Fisher 


i. 64, 288 


v. Farnie 


ii. 734 


Harsh v. Klepper 


ii. 853 


v. Gibbons 


i. 492 


v. Morgan 


ii. 293 


v. Harris 


i. 562 


Harshberger v. Alger 


ii. 61 


v. Harvey 


i. 547 


Harshraan v. Lowe 


iii. 382 


v. Richards 


ii. 701, 867 


Harson v. Pike 


i. 509 


v. Smith 


ii. 862 


Hart v. Aldridge 


ii. 52 


v. Snow 


iii. 236 


v. Crane 


iii. 403 


v. Troupe 


i. 308 


v. Davis 


ii. 885 


v. Turner 


iii. 206 


v. Deamer 


i. 438 


v. Varney 


i. 190 


v. Direct, &c. Cable Co. 


ii. 284 


Harvie v. Oswel 


i. 539 


o. Dorman 


ii. 769 


Harwood v. Bartlett 


iii. 434 


v. Granger 


ii. 864 


v. Bland 


i. 525 


v. Hammett 


i. 024 


„. G. N. R. R. 


ii. 308 


v. Hart's Adm'x 


i. 351 


v. Heffer 


i. 393 


v. Hayden 


iii. 131 


Hashrook v. Paddock 


ii. 691 


v. Nash 


iii. 80 


v. Palmer 


i. 280 


v. Otis 


ii. 466 


Hasbrouck v. Vandervoort 


ii. 126 


v. Prater 


i. 338 


Hascall v. Whitmore 


i. 287, 289 


v. Prendergast 


iii. 72, 74 


Haselington v. Gill 


iii. 455 


u. R. & S. R. R. Co. 


ii. 232 


Haskell r. Adams 


i. 184 


v. Sattley 


iii. 53, 54 


v. Boardman 


i. 315 


v. Stephens 


i. 381, 382 


v. Hilton 


i. 251 


v. Tallmadge 


ii. 916 


v. Hunter 


iii. 224 



v. Ten Eyck i. 96 ; ii. 129 

v. Windsor i. 532, 533, 537, 633 

v. Woods iii. 12 

v. Wright i. 631, 632 

Harteau v. Harteau ii. 732, 736 

Harten v. Gibson i. 377 

Harter v. Moore ii. 26 

Hartfleld v. Roper i. 356; ii. 248 

Hartford Bank v. Stedman i. 311, 318 

Hartford Ins. Co. v. Davenport ii. 610 

y. Farrish ii. 471 

v. Olcott ii. 586 

v. Ross ii. 478 

Hartland v. Chace i. 242 

Hartley, Ex parte iii. 427 

v. Buggin ii. 531, 532 

v. Case i. 322 

v. Cummings ii. 37, 890 

v. Harman ii. 37, 44 

v. Herring iii. 189 

v. Rice ii. 69, 79, 897 

v. Wharton i. 333, 363 

Hartley's Appeal i. 78 

Hartman v. Dowdel i. 381 

v. Keystone Ins. Co. ii. 596, 605 

Hartop v. Hoare ii. 103 ; iii. 270 

Hartnell v. Hill ii. 833 

Hartshorn v. S. & L. Dealers Ins. Co. 

ii. 490 

v. Shoe, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 490 

Hartshorn v. Slodden iii. 442 

Hartwig v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. ii. 251 

Harvard College v. Gore ii. 709 



v. Rice i. 564 

Hasket v. Wootan ii. 896, 897 

Haskins v. Burr i. 174 

v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 560, 680 

v. Lombard ii. 863, 866 

v. Kelly ii. 120 

u. Patterson ii. 122 

v. Warren i. 563 

Haslet v. Haslet iii. 348 

v. Street i. 211 

Hassam v. St. Louis Perpet. Ins. Co. 

ii. 446 

ILissard v. Rowe i. 151 

Hassel v. Simpson iii. 441, 442 

Hassell c. Long ii. 34 

Hassinger v. Diver ii. 59 

Hastelow v. Jackson ii. 769 

Hastie v. Couturier i. 559 

v. De Peyster ii. 494 

Hastings v. Bangor House i. 51 

v. Dolarhide i. 368 

v. Johnson iii. 231 

v. Lovering i. 624 

v. Pepper ii. 174, 181, 414 

v. Westchester Ins. Co. ii. 686 

v. Whitley ii. 890 

i/. Wilson iii. 447 

v. Wiswall ii. 769 ; iii. 159, 161 

Hatch v. Bates i. 457 

v. Bayley i. 671 ; ii. 926 

v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. i. 155 

v. Cobb iii. 342, 360 

v. Coddington i. 61, 75 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CV 



Hatch v. Dennis 

v. Douglas ii. 

p. Hobbs 

v. Lincoln 

v. Mut. Ins. Co. 

v. Purcell 

w. Searles 

p. Smith 

v. Stamper 

v. Taylor 

p. Trayes 
Hatchell v. Odom 
Hatcher p. Hatcher 

v. McMorine 
Hatchett v. Gibson 
Hathaway p. Brady 

p. National Ins. Co. 

p. Payne 

p. Trenton Ins. Co. 



ii. 577 

i; iii. 123, 159 

ii. 23 

i. 571 

ii. 601, mi 

i. 500 

i. 272 

iii. 381, 382 

i. 538 

i. 40, 50 

i. 281 

i. 464 

iii. 348 

i. 314 

ii. 149 

i. 132 

ii. 603 

ii. 932 

ii. 600 



Hatsall v. Griffith i. 11, 22, 24 ; ii. 748 

Hattin p. Chapman ii. 75 

Hatton v. Bragg iii. 262 

v. Gray iii. 9 

v. Kean ii. 338 

Hatzfield v. Gulden ii. 895 

Hauberger p. Boot iii. 356 

Hauenstein p. Lynham i. 448 

Haughey p. Strickler i. 198 

Haughton p. Bayley i. 21 

p. Ewbank i. 47, 48 

Haughwout p. Murphy iii. 313 

Haule p. Hemying ii. 803, 804 

Hausman p. Nye iii. 53 

Havana, The ii. 458 

Havelock p. Geddes ii. 422, 663 

p. Bockwood ii. 399 

Haven p. Grand Junction E. Co. i. 330 

v. Low i. 569 

v. Bichardson iii. 382 

v. Wakefield iii. 197 

Havens, Ex parte iii. 419 

p. Bush ii. 660 

p. Hussey i. 201 

Haverley p. Leighton ii. 804 

Haviland v. Haviland ii. 72 

Havre, The ii. 435 

Hawcroft p. Great Northern Eailway 

Co. ii. 186 

Hawes p. Armstrong iii. 17 

p.Foster i. 685, 588; iii. 13 

p. Humble i. 596, 602 

p. Knowles i. 113 ; iii. 185 

p. Lawrence i. 596, 601 

v. Marchant ii. 936, 937 

p. Tillinghast i. 183 

Hawke p. Bidgeway iii- 184 

Hawkes v. Eastern By. Co. iii. 306, 309, 

363, 374 

p. Phillips i- 283 

p. Salter i- 321 

p. Saunders >• 463 

Hawkeye, &c. Assoc, v. Blackburn 

iii. 117 

Hawkins, Ex parte iii. 419, 420 

v. Appleby i- 209 



Hawkins p. Barney 




iii. 502 


p. Berry 




i. 623 


o. Cardy 


i. 


297, 298 


v. Chace 




iii. 10 


p. Colclough 




ii. 829 


v. Cooper 




ii. 247 


u. Craig 




i. 385 


u. Great Western Co 




ii. 271 


v. Gilbert 




ii. 39 


v. Hoffman 


ii. 274, 27 


v. Holmes 




iii. 6 


p. Kemp 




iii. 245 


v. Moffit 




i. 264 


p. Pemberton 


i. 617, 


618, 625 


p. Providence, &c. E. 


Co. 


i. 385 


p. Pythian 




ii. 131 


p. Butt 




ii. 753 


Hawks v. Hinchcliff 




ii. 128 


Hawkyns v. Obyn 




iii. 437 


Hawley v. Beverley 




iii. 477 


p. Farrar 




i. 462 


v. Foote 


ii. 


757, 820 


v. Hodge 




ii. 848 


v. James 




i. 150 


p. Smith 


i. 77 


; ii. 166 


Hawralty p. Warren 




iii. 308 


Hawtayne p. Bourne 




i. 42, 60 


Hawthorn v. Hammond 




ii. 161 


Hawthorne p. Calef 




iii. 507 


Haxall p. Shippen 




ii. 477 


Haxtun v. Bishop 




i. 309 


i/. Corse 




iii. 388 


Hay, Re 




iii. 452 


v. Ayling 




i. 488 


p. Bloomer, Brig 




ii. 458 


v. Cohoes Co., The 




iii. 178 


p. Fairbairn 




ii. 395 


Haycraft v. Creasy 




ii. 916 


Hayden p. Cabot 




iii. 199 


v. Demets 


i. 568 


; iii. 224 


p. Johnson 




iii. 72 



p. Madison i. 500 ; ii. 39, 655 

Haydon, Ex parte i. 238 

v. Williams i. 382 ; iii. 72, 77, 92 

Hayes p. Bement i. 243 

p. Heyer i. 201, 243 

v. Kershaw iii- 318 

p. Matthews i. 58 

p. Nash iii. 478 

p. Biddle ii. 128 ; iii. 216, 254 

v. Warren i. 475 

Hayford v. Cunningham ii. 384 

Hayman p. Molton ii. 397 

Hayner p. Smith i. 542 

Haynes v. Birks i. 321 

p. Carter i. 190 

p. Covington ii- 28 

v. Holliday ii. 667 

u. Knowles i- 232 

v. Nice ii- 764 

v. Bowe ii. 482 

Hays p. Borders ii- 52 

p. Carr iii. 332 

v. Kennedy ii. 170, 233 

„. Mouille i. 640, 645, 648 



CV1 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Hays v. Stone 

v. Sulzor 
Hay ward v. Barker 

v. Cuthburt 

v. Hayward 

v. Leonard 

v. Middleton 

v. National Ins. Co. 

v. Seougall 



i. 51, 87 

ii. 809, 327 

i. 465 

iii. 238 

i. 382 ; iii. 437 

ii. (155 

ii. 220, 672 

ii. 543 

i. 547, 607 



v. The Pilgrim Society i. 155 

v. Young ii. 889 

Haywood v. Rodgers ii. 698 

Hazard v. Day ii. 902 ; iii. 14 

v. Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 576 

v. Hazard i. 188 

v. Irwin ii. 925 

v. New Eng. Mar. Ins. Co. i. 505 ; 

ii. 428, 478, 611, 529, 530 

v. Smith iii. 129 

v. Treadwell i. 75 

Hazeltine v. Weld ii. 153 

Hazel ton r. Balehelder i. 53; ii. 941 

Hazen v. Addis ii. 829 

v. Union Bank of Tennessee iii. 483 

Hazlebaker v. Reeves iii. 75 

Hazlett v. Gill i. 131 

Head v. Goodwin i. 560 

Hendley v. Kirby i. 265 

Headriek v. Brattain i. 613 

Heald v. Builder's Ins. Co. i. 545 

v. Kenworthy i. 66 

Healey v. Gray ii. 161 

v. Spence ii. 824 

Health v. Hall i. 475 

Heane v. Rogers ii. 936, 937 ; iii. 416 

Heaney v. Heeney iii. 191 

Heanny v. Birch iii. 416 

Heaphy r. Hill iii. 372 

Heapy v. Parris i. 77 

Heard v. Bowers iii. 170, 173 

v. Eldredge i. 159 

v. Rogers ii. 457 

o. Stamford i. 380, 383 

Hearle v. Greenbank i. 122 

Hearne v. Chadbourne iii. 40 

Hearsey v. Pruyn i. 85 

Hearshy v. Ilickox i. 107 

Heartt v. Chipmaa i. 129 

Heath, In re iii. 474 

„. Chilton i. 143 

v. Derry Bank ii. 911 

v. Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 586, 013 

v. Hall i. 257 

v. Heath iii. 41 

v. Sansom i. 222 

v. Waters i. 187 

v. West i. 361 

Heathcoate v. Crookshanks i. 219 

v. Hulme i. 229 

Heatheock v. Pennington ii. 133 

Heatherly v. Record ii. 684 

Heaton v. Angier i. 245 

Heavilow v. Heavilow i. 184 

Hebb's case i. 514 

Hebbard v. Haughian i. 458 



Hebden v. Rutter 
Hebdon v. West 
Heck v . Shener 
Heckers v. Fowler 
Heckliard v. Sayre 
Hecksher v. McCrea 
Hector, The 
Hedderley, Exparte 
Hedger v. Steavenson 



i. 477 ; ii. 65 

ii. 606 
ii. 879 
ii. 827 
iii. 339 
ii. 423 ; iii. 208 
ii. 440 
iii. 468 
i. 322 



Hedges o. Hudson K. R. R. Co. ii. 210 

v. Riker i. 149 

v. Sealy i. 254 

t>. Strong iii. 40 

Hedgley v. Holt i. 338, 352; ii. 45 

Hedwig, The ii. 439 

Heebner v. Eagle Ins. Co. ii. 505, 511, 

515 

Heermance v. Vernoy i. 616 

Heermans v. Ellsworth i. 258 

Heffer v. Heffer ii. 89 

Hefferman v. Benkard i. 116 

Heffner v. Lewis i. 546 

Hefner v. Vandolah i. 279 

Hegeman v. W. R. R. Co. ii. 233, 234, 

283 

Hegleru. Eddv i. 579 
Heilbutt v. Hickson i. 628, 629; iii. 219 

Heimstreet i>. Howland i. 182 

Heine v. Appletons ii. 338 

Heinecke v Earle i. 653 

Heinlin v. Castro iii. 85 

Heinrichs v. Kerchner ii. 76 

Ileintz ;>. Cahn ii. 762 

Helena, The ii. 398 

Hellaby v. Weaver ii. 179, 231 

Hellawell v. Eastwood i. 547 

Helm v. Bryant ii. 678 

v. Wilson ii. 655 

Helme «. Smith ii. 387, 390 

Helms i". Kearns i. 497 

Helmsley v. Loader i. 125 

Helps v. Hereford ii. 933 

i>. Winterbottom iii. 97 

Helsby v. Mears ii. 226 

Ilelsey v. Fairbanks i- 26 

Heltzell b. Hynes iii. 293 

Helyear v. Hawke i. 59, 63 

Hemans v. Picciotto ii. 658 

Hemenway, Ex parte i. 545 

Hemingway v. Hamilton ii. 913 

Hemmenway v. Stone i. 11 

Hemp i'. Garland iii. 100 

Hemphill v. Chenie ii. 199, 203, 206 

Henbach v. llollman i. 101 

Henchman v. Offley ii. 484 

Henck v. Todhunter i. 125 

Henderson, Exparte iii. 414 
v. Australian Royal Mail Steam 

Nav. Co. i. 154 

v. Barnewall i. 89, 588; iii. 11 

v. Blanchard iii. Ill 

v. Buckley ii. 837 

v. Clarke i. 333 

v. Henderson ii. 737; iii. 244 

v. Hicks iii. 311 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CVll 



Henderson v. Hudson 

v. Johnson 

v. Lauck 

v. Lewis 

v. Mayhew 

v. McDuffee 

v. Moore 

v. Stevenson 

v. Stringer 

i\ Western Ins. Co. 
Hendren v. Colgin 
Hendrick v. Whittemore 
Hendricks t>. Franklin 

v. Judah 

v. Mount 

v. Robinson 



i. 175 

iii. 17 

i. 563 

ii. 878 

ii. 391 

i. 34 

ii. 749 

ii. 257 

i. 396 

ii. 573 

i. 380 

ii. 10 

i. 327 

i. 295; iii. 478 

iii. 381 

iii. 382 



Hendrickson v. Hendrickson ii. 922 

v. Kingsburg iii. 184 

Henen v. Munro ii. 447 

Henfree v. Bromley ii. 837, 855 
Hening v. United States Ins. Co. ii. 471 

Henisler v. Freedman ii. 284 
Henkel v. Pape i. 515 ; ii. 299 
Henkle v. Royal Exch. Ins. Co. ii. 47o 

Henley v. Bank ii. 940 

v. Soper ii. 825 

Henman v. Dickinson ii. 860 

Hennell v. Fairlamb ii. 885 

Hennequin v. Clews iii. 434 

Henniker v. Wigg ii. 706 

Henning's case ii. 803 

Henop v. Tucker ii. 464 

Henrickson v. Margetson ii. 511 
Henry, The ii. 397, 410, 442, 

443, 533 

v. Butler ii. 876 

v. Goldney i. 33 ; ii. 863 

v. Lee i. 312 

v. Means iii. 102 

v. Root i. 366 

v. Sargeant ii- 722 

v. Staniforth ii. 481 

Henry Ewbank, The ii. 438, 439, 440, 441 

Hensel v. Noble iii. 271 

Henshaw v. Hunting ii. 865 

o. Robins i. 624, 625 

Henslee v. Cannefax i. 208 

Hensly v. Baker i- 615 

Henson, Ex parte iii. 143, 465 

v. Blackwell ii. 607 

Hentig v. Staniforth ii. 481 

Hepburn v. Auld i. 525 

v. Dunlop iii. 355 

v. Sewell iii. 211 

Heran v. Hall i. 167 

Herbert, Ex parte iii. 416 

v. Cook ii. 740 

v. Hallett ii. 418, 510 

v. Herbert ii. 726 

<.-. Pigott ii. 852 

v. Turball i- 334 

Hercules, The }}■ 467 

Hercy v. Birch ">• 321 

Herdman v. Pace . i- 405 

Herefordshire Co., In re iii- HI 



Hergman v. Dettlebach 


i. 235 


Heridia v. Ay res 


ii. 469 


Herkenrath v. Atner. Ins. Co. 


ii. 585 


Herlakenden's case 


i. 646 


Herlihy v. Smith 


i. 113 


Hern v. Nichols 


i. 79 


Hernaman v. Bawden 


ii. 460 


Heroine, The 


ii. 435 


Herrick v. Borst 


ii. 24, 25 


v. Carman 


i. 284, 290 


v. Dean 


iii. 137 


v. Herrick 


ii. 837 


!>. Moore 


iii. 244 


v. Randolph 


iii. 498 


v. Wolverton 


i. 295 


Herries v. Jamieson 


ii. 769 



Herrin v. Butters ii. 50 ; iii. 42 

v. Libbey ii. 923 

Herring v. Boston Iron Co. ii. 678 

v. Hoppock i. 578 

v. Hottendorf i. 61 

v. Pollard iii. 238 

v. Wickham ii. 76 

Herrison v. Guthrie iii. 469 

Herrman v. Adriatic Ins. Co. ii. 546 

v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 632 

Hersey v. Merrimack Co. Ins. Co. ii. 491 

Hersfield v. Adams ii. 178 

Hersom v. Henderson i. 634 

Ilervey v. Hervey ii. 82 

Heseltine v. Siggers iii. 56 

Hesketh v. Blanchard i. 176, 178 

v. Fawcett ii. 780 

Hess v. Werts i. 241 

Hesse v. Stevenson ii. 634 ; iii. 435 

Hessian v. Edward Howard, The ii. 490 

Heth's Ex'r v. Wooldridge's Ex'r iii. 347 

Heudebourck v. Langton i. 140 

Ileugh v. London, &c. Co. ii. 108 

Hewes v. Hansom ii. 758 

v. Rand iii. 411 

Hewett v. Buck ii. 389 

He win v. Libbey ii. 925 

Hewins v. Cargill ii. 853 

Hewison v. Guthrie iii. 262, 439 

Hewit v. Flexney ii- 530 

v. Mantell iii- 426 

Hewitt v. Anderson i- 513 

v. Charier U- 60 

o. Rankin i- 172 

v. Watertown Ins. Co. ii- 628 

v. Wilcox ii- 60 

Hey v. Moorhouse i- 469 

Heydon v. Heydon i. 233 ; iii. 298 

v. Williams iii. 431 

Heydon's case i- 28 

Heydon & Smith's case iii- 216 

Heyhoe v. Burge i- 180 

Heyliger v. N. Y. Ins. Co. ii. 447, 448 

Hey man v. Neale i. 584, 586 ; iii. 13 

Heytle v. Logan iii- 116 

Heywood v. Hildreth iii- 459 

v. Perrin ii- 633 

o. Pickering i. 296, 312 

o. Watson i- 292 



cvm 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Heywood v. Wingate i. 287 

Heywood's case ii- 640 

Hiatt v. Gilmer ii. 54 

v. Williams iii. 352 

Hibbard v. N. Y. & E. R. M. Co. ii. 246 

v. West. Un. Tel. Co. ii. 286 ; iii. 235 

Hibbert v. Shee i. 525 

Hibblewhite v. McMorine i. 123, 331, 560, 

598 ; ii. 861 

Hibernia, The ii. 454, 404 

Hibernia Ins. Co. v. Meyer ii. 586 

i'. O'Connor ii. 587 

Hibsliman v. Dulleban ii. 807 

Hickerson v. Benson ii. 897 

Hickey v. Burt i. 254; ii. 749 

Hickley v. F. & M. Bank iii. 382 

Hickman v. Cox i- 174 

v. Haynes iii. 57 

v. Thomas iii. 266 

Hickok v. Buck ii. 135, 137 ; iii. 216 

v. Hickok iii. 98 

Hicks v. Branton iii. 293 

v. Brown iii. 397 

t>. Cram ii. 936, 938 

v. Gleason ii. 865 

r. Hankins i. 42; iii. 12 

u. Hannibal, &c. R. Co. ii. 273 

v. Hinde i. 288 

v. Hotchkiss iii. 393, 507, 508 

v. Palington ii. 444 

v . Stone ii. 928 

v. Walker ii. 458 

Hidden v. Slater Ins. Co. ii. 561 

Hide v. Petit ii. 826 

Hier v. Abrahams ii. 352 

Higden v. Williamson iii. 427, 431 

Higert v. Trustees, &c. Univ. i. 482 

Higgins v. Aguilar ii. 487 

v. Breen ii. 50 

v. Emmons ii. 103, 785 

v. Kusterer iii. 35 

v. Livingstone i. 139 

v. Moore i. 103 

v. Morrison i. 326 

e. Murray i. 564, 574 ; iii. 60 

t>. Scott iii. 108 

v. Senior i. 56, 57, 65, 66, 67 

v. Turner i. 540 

v. Watson i. 274 

Higginson v. Clowes iii. 354, 371 

v. Dall ii. 473, 485, 491 

v. Kelly iii. 449 

r. Pomeroy ii. 496 

v. Weld " i. 605 

Highland, &c. Co. v. Matthews i. 572 

Highlander, The ii. 457, 459 

Highmore v. Molloy iii. 416 

Hight v. Bacon i. 630, 631 

v. Ripley iii. 60 

Hightstown Banlc v. Christopher i. 83 

Higinbolham v. Holme iii. 449, 472 

Hilarity, The ii. 403 

Hildebrand v. Fogle ii. 691 

Hildreth v. Pinkerton Academy i. 459 

Hill, Ex parte iii. 428, 457, 462, 472 



Hill v. Anderson 




i. 362 


u. Andrus 




ii. 454 


i). Barclay 




iii. 327 


v. Barner 




i. 130 


v. Bellows 




iii. 104 


v. Buckley 


iii. 


337, 356 


v. Buckminster 


i. 290 


; ii. 685 


v. Calvin 


ii 


14, 858 


v. Chapman 




i. 266 


v. Corcoran 




ii. 904 


o. DeRochemont 




i. 545 


v. Dobie 




iii. 447 


v. Dunham 




ii. 905 


v. Dunlap 




ii. 866 


v. Ely 




i. 290 



v. Featherstonhaugh i. 110, 128 

v. Golden Gate, The ii. 386, 420 

v. Gomme iii. 308, 314, 374 

v. Grange ii. 639 

v. Gray i. 620, 621 

v . Green ii. 43, 812 

v. Heap i- 316 

v. Henry iii. 98 

v. Hobart i. 581 ; ii. 666, 790, 794 ; 

iii. 245 

v. Hooper iii. 41 

v. Humphreys ii. 197 

v. Idle ii- 425 

v. Kendall iii. 72, 76, 92 

v. Lafayette Ins. Co. ii. 558 

v. Manchester & S. W. Co. ii. 931 

v. Meeker iii. 160 

v. Miller ii. 647 

v. More ii- 844 

v. Patten ii. 484 

v. Robbins ii. 763, 766 

v, Robinson i. 543 

v. Smith i. 489; iii. 426, 435, 438, 452 

u. Southwick iii. 224 

v. Thompson ii. 309, 324 

r. Thorn ii. 827 

v. Tucker i. 11, 23 

c. Voorhies i. 188 

u. West i. 466 ; ii. 933 

v. Wiggin i. 230 

Hill Manufacturing Co. v. Boston, &c. 

R. R. Co. ii. 186 

v. Morris iii. 429 

Hillebrant v. Brewer i. 264 

I-Iiller v. English ii. 808, 905 

Hilliard v. Greenleaf iii. 391 

Hilliard v. Noyes ii. 749 

z>. Richardson i. 117 

Hillier v. Alleghany Co. Ins. Co. ii. 571 

Hilliker v. Francisco i. 208 

Hillman v. Wilcox i. 623 

Hills v. Bannister i. 636 

u. Barnes i. 130 ; ii. 860 

</. Croll iii. 364, 366 

!>. Lynch i. 573 

v. Miller ii. 635 

v. Place i. 309 

v. Snell i. 556, 562 

v. Street i. 496 

v. Univ. of Oxford ii. 348 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



C1X 



Hillyard v. Mutual Benefit Life Ins. 

Co. ii. 615 

Hilly er v. Bennett i. 361 

Hilton v. Burley ii. 765 

v. Dinsmore ii. 10 

v. Eckersley i. 487 ; ii. 890, 893 

v. Houghton ii. 900, 905 

v. Shepherd i. 320 

Hime v. Dale ii. 834, 337, 347 

Himely v. S. Car. Ins. Co. ii. 525, 532 

v. Stewart ii. 495 

Himes v. Barnitz ii. 881 

Himrod Furnace Co. ■/. Cleveland, 

&c. B. Co. iii. 15 

Hinchcliffe v. Barwick iii. 223 

v. Earl of Kinnoul ii. 664 

Hinckley v. Arey ii. 749, 823; iii. 13 

v. Kreitz ii. 

v. Southgate ii. 49; iii. 41 

Hind v. Holdship i. 497 

Hinde v. Gray ii. 890 

v. Liddell iii. 223 

v. Whitehouse i. 510, 563, 577, 584 ; 

iii. 12, 49 

Hindle v. O'Brien iii. 136 

Hindley v. Westmeath i. 394, 396, 396, 

399 

Bondman v. Dill iii. 403 

v. Langford iii. 27 

v. Shaw ii. 461 

Hindman's Appeal ii. 708 

Hine v. Allely i. 311 

v. Lart ii. 358, 366, 370 

Hinely v. Margaritz i. 335, 364, 369 

Hines v. Butler i. 475 

Hinesburgh v. Sumner i. 481 

Hingston v. Wendt ii. 442; iii. 288 

Hinkle v. Wanzer i. 251 

Hinkley v. Fowler i. 497, 498 

v. Marean ii. 719; iii. 391, 607 

Hinman v. Hapgood ii. 59 

v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 557, 559 

v. Judson i. 611 

v. Moulton i. 473 

Hinsdale v. Bank of Orange i- 331 

Hinsdell v. Weed ii. 414 

Hinton, Ex parte iii. 449 

v. Acraman iii. 462 

v. Citizens Ins. Co. i- 80 

v. Dibbin ii. 268 

v. Locke ii. 670, 675, 677 

Hirbour v. Eeeding i. 167 

Him v. The State of Ohio iii. 510 

Hirsch v. Patterson iii. 231 

Hirschfeld v. London, &c. E. Co. ii. 915 

Hirschman v. Budd ii. 853 

Hirschorn v. Canney i. 580 

Hiscock v. Phelps i. 167, 172 

Hitch v. Davis i. 263 

Hitchin v. Groom ii. 624, 691 

Hitchcock v. Aicken ii. 741 

v. Buchanan i- 282 

„.Coker i. 465 ; ii. 369, 890 

v. Huat i.-.636 

v. Humphrey ii- 24 



Hitchcock v. St. John 


i. 201 


Hitchings v. Ellis 


i. 177 


Hitner's Appeal 


i. 397 


Hixon v. Hetherington 


i. 246 


v. Hixon 


iii. 233 


Hoadley v. Bliss 


i. 315 


v. M'Laine 


iii. 14 


Hoadly v. Northern Trans. 


Co. ii. 265 


v. Watson 


iii. 181 


Hoag v. McGinnia 


iii. 169, 170 


Hoagland v. Moore 


ii. 654 


v. Segur 


iii. 168 


Hoard v. Garner 


iii. 206 


Hoare v. Dresser 


i. 64 


v. Graham 


i. 7 


Hobart v. Drogan 


ii. 439, 468 


v. Littlefield 


i. 574 


v. Norton 


ii. 533 


Hobbs v. Francais 


ii. 355, 363 


v. Hull 


i. 401 


v. London, &c. E. Co. 


iii. 193 


v. Memphis Ins. Co. 


ii. 475 


v. Norton 


ii. 939 


Hobby v. Dana 


ii. 545 


Hoblins v. Kimble 


iii. 176 


Eobson v. Watson 


i. 129 ; ii. 60 


Hoby v. Eoebuck 


iii. 37 



Hochster d. De La Tour ii. 38, 800, 809, 

810 

Hockenbury v. Myers ii. 7 

Hockett v. Jones i. 463 

Hodgdon v. Hodgdon iii. Ill 

v. New York, &c. R. Co. ii. 415 

Hodge v. Coombs i. 46 

v. Fillis i- 308 

v. Hudson River E. E. Co. ii. 319, 324 

v. Manley iii. 79, 82 

Hodgedon v. Hubbard ii. 928 

Hodges v. Dawes i. 180 

v. Eastman i. 248, 254 

v. Hodges i. 393 

v. Horsfall iii. 343 

v. King iii. 168 

v. Lovatt iii. 132 

v. Richmond Mfg. Co. iii. 40 

v. Saunders i- 467 

v. Smiles i. 280, 331 

v. Welch ii. 342 

Hodgkins v. Bond iii. 10 

Hodgkinson v. Fernie, ii. 422, 430- 

v. Fletcher i. 401, 402 

Hodgman v. Smith i. 180 

Hodgson, Ex parte i. 238; iii. 420, 449 

v. Anderson i. 74, 245 

v. Barrett i. 568 ; ii. 755 

a. Bell iii- 200 

v. Davies ii. 668, 811 

o. Dexter i- 138 

v. Glover ii- 492 

v. Hodgson 'j;. 695 

v. Johnson iii- 38 

v. Le Bret "ii- 46 

v. Loy i. 642, 645 

v. Marine Ins. Co. ii- 490 

v. Millward iii. 183 



ex 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Hodgson v. Richardson 


ii. 622 


v. Shaw 


ii. 6 


v. Temple 


ii. 894 


Hodnett v. Tatum 


i. 51 


Hodsden v. Harridge 


ii. 801 


Hodson, In re 


ii. 841 


v. Terrill 


ii. 759 


Hoey v. Eurman 


ii. 870 



Hoffman v. ^Etna Ins. Co. ii. 470, 478, 570 

v. Bechtel ii. 25 

v. Brown ii. 850 

v. Carrow i. 556 

v. Coombs ii. 28 

v. John Hancock Ins. Co. ii. 616 

v. Noble iii. 270 

v. Pitt i. 569 

v. Western Ins. Co. ii. 578 

Hoffnung, The ii. 426 

Hog v. Gouldney ii. 536 

Hogaboom v. Herrick ii. 26 

Hogan v. Del. Ins. Co. ii. 475 

v. Reynolds i. 204 

Hogarth v. Latham i. 200 

Hogarth v. Wherley ii. 747 

Hoge t>. Hoge i. 468 

Hogg v. Emerson ii. 328 

v. Horner ii. 535 

v. Kirby ii. 336, 337, 349, 361 

v. Orgill i. l'J8, 242 

v. Snaith i. 42 

Hoggart v. Scott iii. 336 

Hoggins v. Gordon ii. 59, 836 

Hogins v. Plympton i. 624, 634 

Hogsett v. Ellis iii. 26 

Hogshead v. Williams ii. 28 

Hogue v. Davis i. 35 

Hoit v. Hodge ii. 806 

v. Underhill i. 364 

Hoitt v. Holcomb ii. 025 

Holabird v. Atlantic Ins. Co. ii. 598 

Holbird v. Anderson iii. 382 

Holbrook v. Allen i. 305 

v. Amer. Ins. Co. ii. 575, 585 

u. Armstrong iii. 38, 44 

... Baker i. 612 

v. Bullard ii. 50 

v. Burt ii. 811 

v. Camp i. 275 

v. Chamberlin i. 52, 212, 546 

v. Debo ii. 932 

v. Foss iii. 403 

v. Lackey ii. 878 

v. St. Paul Ins. Co. ii. 561 

v. Utica & Schen. Co. ii. 240, 817 

v. Waters iii. 437 

v. Wight i. 107 ; iii. 281 

Holbrook & Co., Re iii. 468 

Holcomb v. Stimpson ii. 818 

Holcombe v. Hewson i. 632 

Holcroft v. Barber ii. 35 

v. Dickenson ii. 64, 65 

Holdemen v. Baker i. 53, 98 

Holden v. Cosgrbve i. 273 

v. Dakin i. 618, 622, 627 

v. Eitchburg R. Co. ii. 45 



Holden v. Taylor i- 531 

Holder v. Borden ii. 438 

v. Dickeson "• 76 

Holderness v. Shackels ii. 391 ; iii. 297, 298 

Holding v. Pigott i. 544; ii. 669 

Holdridge v. Gillespie i. 150 

v. Utica, &c. R. R. ii. 251 

Holeman v. P. H. White, The ii. 392 

Holford v. Blatchford iii. 143, 145, 153 

v. Hatch i. 259 ; iii. 424 

Holker v. Parker i. 131 ; ii. 825 

Holl v. Griffin ii. 152 

v. Hadley iii. 103 

Holladay i>. Davis i. 93 

Holland, Ex parte iii. 432 

u. Hodgson i. 546 

v. Holland ii. S2 

v. Martin iii. 471 

v. Pelham ii. 605; iii. 149 

v. Turner i. 306, 317 

Holliday v. St. Leonard i. 98 

Hollingworth v. Tooke i. 107 

Hollingsworth v. Napier i. 648, 652 ; 

iii. 444 

v. Svvedenborg i. 348 

Hollis v. Claridge iii. 287 

v. Morris ii. 924 

v. Pool i. 549 

v. Staley i. 240 

Hollister v. Hollister ii. 736 

v. Nowlen ii. 212, 234, 258, 259, 273 

Holloman i\ Life Ins. Co. ii. 593 

Holloway v. Griffith ii. 810 

v. Hampton iii. 43 

v. Holloway ii. 364, 370, 372 

v. Lowe ii. 908 

Holly v. Rathbono i. 248 

Holman v. Johnson ii. 700, 886, 894 

v. Loynes , i. 93 

Holme v. Brunskill ii. 19 

v. Hammond i. 183 

Holmer v. Viner iii. 477 

Holmes, In the matter of iii. 401 

v. Blogg i. 360, 367, 374 

u. Buckley i. 261 

u. Charlestown Ins. Co. ii. 541, 556, 

580 
v. German Sec. Bank i. 565 

v. Goring ii. 664 

v. Higgins i. 164, 184 

v. Holmes ii. 85 ; iii. 500 

o. Hoskins iii. 46 

v. Kerrison i. 302; iii. 97 

v. Knights iii. 21 

<-. Mather i. 113 

v. McGray i. 167 

v. Misroon iii. 114 

v. N. E. R. Co. ii. 46 

v. Onion i. 114 

v. Porter i. 182 

v. Remsen ii. 701, 738 ; iii. 405, 407, 
408, 409 
u. Rhodes iii. 200 

v. Robinson ii. 874 

v. Sinnickson iii. 242 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXI 



Holmes v. Smythe 
i). Tremper 
v. Trumper 
u. United Ins. Co. 
v. Weed 
v. West 
v. Williams 
!>. Williamson' 



Holsapple v. Rome, &c. R. Co. ii. 270 

Hoist c Pownal i. 041 

Holt v. Bodey ii. 27 

v. Brien i. 387 

v. Holt i. 579; iii. 308 

v. Ward Clarencieux i. 370, 481 ; 

ii. 06 
Holten v. Arthur ii. 366 

Holtgreve v. Wintker i. 190 

Holtliam v. Ryland ii. 806 

Holtzman v. Millandon i. 505 

Holy land v. De Mendez i. 190; iii. 449 
Holyoke v. Haskins ii. 712 

Homan v. Brooklyn Ins. Co. i. 54 

v. Earle ii. 66 

Home Bank v. Carpenter iii. 411 

Home Ins Co. v. Augusta iii. 480 

o. Baltimore Warehouse Co. ii. 565, 

583 

v. Curtis ii. 616 

v. Green i. 327 

v. Hauslein ii. 575 

v. Heck i. 565 

v. Pierce ii. 617 

v. Western Trans. Co. ii. 564 

Home, &c. Assoc, v. Thursby iii. 117 

Homer v, Ashford i. 467 ; ii. 890 

v. Dorr ii. 480 

v. Guardian Ins. Co. ii. 610 

v. Homer i. 167 

v. Thwing i. 356 ; ii. 137 

v. Wood i. 208 

Homes v. Crane i. 569, 612 ; ii. 122, 401 

v. Dana i. 474, 483 

v. Smith i. 321 

v. Smyth i. 292 

Hone v. Mutual Safety Ins. Co. ii. 478, 

671 

Honeyman v. Marryatt i. 507; iii. 312 

Honner v. 111. Central R. R. Co. ii. 46 

v. Morton iii. 438 

Honnett v. Honnett ii. 88 

Honnick «>. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 478 

Honore v. Lamar Ins. Co. ii. 504 

Honyman v. Campbell ii. 67 

Hood v. Adams i. 527 

v, Farnstock i. 81 

v. Hood ii. 737 

u. Manhattan Ins. Co. ii. 478, 483, 537 

v. New York & New Haven 

R. R. Co. i. 158 ; ii. 231 

v. Riley ii. 878 

v. State ii. 737 

Hood's Estate ii. 708 

Hoodly v. McLaine i- 562 

Hooe v. Groverman ii. 421 

v. Oxley i- 49 



iii. 117 Hook v. Hook ii. 940 

i. 547 i'. Kinnear iii. 308 

ii. 853, 802 r. Moreton ii. 459 

ii. 480 v. Pratt i. 465 

i. 32 v. Stone i. 201 

i. 200 v. White ii. 881 

iii. 153, 154 Hooker v. De Palos i. 487 

i. 31, -')4 !■. Vandewater ii. 887 

Hoop, The ii. 447 
Hooper, Ex parte iii. 66, 349, 403 

v. Brundage iii. 288 

v. Chicago, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 232 

v. Edwards ii. 901 

v. Goodwin i. 263 

u. Keay ii. 766 

v. Perley ii. 400 

v. Pierce ii. 837 

v. Smith iii. 441 

v. Stephens iii. 80 

v. Tuckerman iii. 403 

v. Wells ii. 263 
r. Williams i. 277, 278 
Hoover v. Pierce i. 486 ; ii. 924 

v. Wise i. 81 
Hopcraft v. Hickman ii. 829, 834; iii. 309 

v. Keys ii. 940 

Hope, The ii. 438 

Hope, Ex parte iii. 463 

v. Booth iii. 462 

v. Cust i. 209 

r. Dido, The ii. 439 

v. Hayley i. 612 

v. Liddell iii. 287 

Hope Ins. Co. v. Brolaskey ii. 559 

Hopewell v. De Pinna ii. 612 

Hopkins v. Appleby i. 638 

< . A. & St. L. R. R. Co. ii. 240 

v. Beebe i. 276 

!'. Crittenden iii. 113 
v. Forsyth ii. 387, 464 

v. Grazebrook iii. 246 

if. Grey iii. 381 

a. Hopkins ii. 93 

u. Lacouture i. 66 

v. Lee iii. 245 
v. Logan i. 479, 502, 503 

v. Megguire ii. 879 

v. Mehafly i. 69, 72 

v. Richardson ii. 12 

v. Roberts iii. 351 

v. Sanford iii. 196 

e. Smith i. 213 

v. Tanqueray i. 621 

v. Thompson i. 611 

v. Westcott ii. 277 
Hopkinson v. Lee i. 14, 16, 17, 18, 22 

Hopkirk v. Page i. 310 

Hopley v. Dufresne i- 308 

Hopper v. Childs iii. 293 

v. Hopper iii. 362 

v. Sisk ii. 917 

Hopping v. Quin i. 128 

Hopjon c. Boyd i. 438 

v. Trevor iii. 310 

Horbach v. Elder i. 32 



CX11 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Horder v. Horder 


i. 410 ; ii. 78 


Houghton v. Houghton 


ii. 838 


Hore v. Whitmore 


ii. 518, 521 


v. Manuf. Ins. Co. ii. 


524, 520, 553, 


Horn v. Buck 


i. 617 ; iii. 2iy 




555, 556, 557 


r. Horn 


ii. 874 


v. Matthews i. 101; iii 


274, 276, 277 


i . Ivy 


i. 153 


v. Maynard 


iii. 398, 508 


y. Nason 


iii. 464 


v. Page ii 


700; iii. 123 


i'. Roberts 


ii. 847 


Houlditch v. Cauty 


i. 322 


Hornbuckle r. Hornbury 


i. 402 


v. Donegal 


ii. 740 


Hornby c. Lacy 


i. 497 ; ii. 745 


v. Milne 


iii. 27 


Horncastle v. Farran 


i. 045 


Houliston v. Smyth 


i. 393 


p. IJaworth 


ii. 480 


Hountz v. Holthouse 


i. 246 


Horne r. Midland R. Co. 


iii. 207 


Housatonio Bank v. Laflin 


i. 319, 322 


v. Kouquette 


i. 314 


House v. Fort i 


617, 622, 623 


Horner v. Fish 


iii. 107 


v. Palmer 


ii. 639 


v. Flintoff 


iii. 172 


v. Schooner Lexington 


ii. 208 


v. Graves 


ii. 890 


Househill Co. v. Neilson 


ii. 310 


!•. Leeds 


ii. 940 


Household Ins. Co. v. Grant 


i. 615 


v. Marsliall 


i. 434 


Houseman v. Girard Ass. 


i. 80 


Horneyer r. Lushington 


ii. 480 


Houser it. Lamont 


iii. 344 


Hornsby r. Lee 


iii. 437 


v. Planters' Bank 


iii. 124 


Horrel v. M'Alexander 


ii. 832 


c. Reynolds 


i. 363, 306 


Horsburgh v. Orme 


ii. 749 


Houston v. LafEee 


iii. 39 


Horsefall r. Mather 


i. 535; ii. 136 


v. Pollard 


ii. 829 


Horsfall r. Fauntleroy 


ii. 745 


v. Robertson 


ii. 876 


v. Handly 


i. 85 


Houston, &c. R. Co. v. Oram 


ii 46 


i: Mather 


i. 535 ; ii. 136 


Hovonden v. Annesley 


ii. 940 


Horsford v. Wright 


iii. 242 


Hovey v. American Ins. Co. 


ii. 553 


Horsley r. Bell 


i. 139 


v. Blanchard 


i. 51, 82 


v. Rush 


ii. 421 


v. Chase 


i. 433 


Horst v. Wagner 


ii. 853 


v. Hobson 


i. 435 


Hort v. Norton i 


476 ; ii. 51, 61 


v. Hovey 


i. 433, 435 


Horton v. Benson 


ii. 833 


v. Sebring 


i. 298 


v. Champlin 


iii. 286 


r. Stevens ii. 


307, 315, 321 


v. Green 


i. 617 


Hovil v. Pack 


i. 51 


v. Home 


iii. 722 


How v. Abbott 


ii. 314 


v. Mabon 


ii. 308 


v. Camp 


iii. 382 


v. Manning 


i. 298 


v. Kemball ii. 7, 8; iii. 17 


v. Stanley 


ii. 844 


v. Weldon 


i. 523 


Horton's Appeal 


i. 222 


v. Whitebanck 


i. 90 


Hosack v. Weaver 


i. 556 


v. Whitefield 


i. 90 


Hosea v. McCrory 


ii. 194 


Howard i\ Ames i. 


289; iii. 253 


v. Rowley 


ii. 28 


v. Babcock 


ii. 117 


Hosford v. Nichols 


ii. 701, 716 


r. Baillie 


i. 42 


Hoskins i: Duperoy 


iii. 461 


c. Burgen 


iii. 43 


v. Jliller 


i. 385 


v. Cadwalader 


ii. 922 


u. Paul 


i. 553 


v. Chapman 


ii. 747 


v. Pickersgill 


ii. 483 


v. Cobb 


ii. 408 


Hosmer c. Beebe 


i. 104 


i\ Continental Ins. Co. 


ii. 014 


Hostler's case 


ii. 148 


v. Cooper 


ii. 828 


Hotchkiss i'. Artisan's Bank ii. 190 


v. Crompton 


iii. 438 


v. Greenwood 


ii. 307 


u. Crowther 


iii. 453 


Hotel Co. v. Wade 


i. 158 


v. Daly 


i. 515 


Hotham r. East India Co. 


ii. 625 


v. Doolittle 


i. 532 


Houdlette v. Tallman 


i. 566 


v. Edgell ii. 


826; iii. 316 


Hougli v. Edwards 


iii. 286 


v. Ellis 


iii. 313, 328 


v. Evans 


ii. 918 


r. Emerson 


i. 632 


v. May 


ii. 755 


f. Grover 


ii. 58 


v. People's Ins. Co. 


ii. 583 


v. Henriques ii. 


354, 360, 363 


v. Richardson 


i. 621 


v. Hildreth 


iii. 109 


v. Warr 


ii. 34 


v. Hoey 


i. 631 


Houghtaling v. Ball 


ii. 700 


v. Holbrook 


iii. 18 


v. Houghtaling 


iii. 37 


v. Hopkyns 


iii. 310 


v, Marvin 


i. 77 


v. Howard 


i. 59 


Houghton, Ex parte 


iii. 464 


v. Hudson 


ii. 936, 943 


v. Adams 


ii. 754 


r. Ives 


i. 318 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CX1I1 



Howard v. Jemmett iii. 424, 439 
u. Kentucky & Louisville M. Ins. 

Co. iii. 607 

v. Macondray ii. 425 

v. Miner i. 575 ; ii. 784 

v. Mississippi Bank i. 300 

v. Odell- ii. 396, 400 

v. Priest i. 170 

v. Rogers iii. 345 

v. Sexton ii. 825 

v. Shepherd i. 328 

v. Smith i. 108 
r. Tucker ii. 943; iii. 206 

v. Whetstone i. 393 

v. Williams i. 569 

v. Wissman ii. 410 

Howard's case ii. 486 

Howard Bank, Ex parte iii. 469 

Howard College v. Pace i. 248 

Howden v. Haigh iii. 477 

v. Simpson i. 486 

Howe v. Abbott ii. 307, 312 

o. Batchelder iii. 36 

... Bradley i. 306 ; ii. 769 

t-. Handley i. 12 ; iii. 218 

v. Hayward iii. 58 

v. Howe Machine Co. ii. 378 

v. Howe Man. Co. ii. 372 

v. Huntington ii. 666, 795 

v. Merrill i. 300 

v. Morton ii. 314 

v. Newmarch i. 115 

o. Nickels ii. 14, 15, 16 

v. O'Mally i. 478 

v. Ould i. 271 

v. Palmer iii. 47, 51 

a. Searing ii. 369, 378 

v. Sheppard ii. 877 

v. Synge i. 488 

v. Thompson iii. 92 

v. Underwood ii. 304 

v. Ward i. 35 
Howe Machine Co. v. Ballmeg ii. 745 

v. Reber iii. 224 

v. Willie ii. 814 

Howell v. Burnet iii. 103 

v. Cincinnati Ins. Co. ii. 556 

v. Coupland i. 491; ii. 805 

v. Edgar in\ 382 

v. Gordon i. 78 

u. Harding ii. 875 

v. Harvey i. 219 

v. Jackson ii- 161 

v. Knickerbocker Ins. Co. ii. 617 

v. Mclvers i- 475 

v. Morlan ii- 153 

v. Selving i- 147 

v. Sevier ii- 28 

v. Young iii- 99 

Howells v. Landore Steel Co. ii. 47 

Howes, In re »i- 460 

v. Barker »■ 458 

v. Bigelow i- 383, 385 

Howie v. Ray iii- 219 

Howland, Ex parte i"- 415 



Howland v. Carson i. 303 

v. Comm. Ins. Co. ii. 480, 648 

v. Continental Ins. Co. ii. 016 

v. Greenway ii. 415 

u. Harris i. 594 

i . Lounds i. 513 

v. Mar. Ins. Co. ii. 512 

Howlet v. Strickland ii. 873, 879 

Ilowley v. Whipple ii. 2!>8 

Howson v. Hancock ii. 760, 887 

Howton v. Frearson ii. 664 

Howze v. Patterson i. 200 

Hoxie v. Carr i. 168, 169, 171, 172 

i'. Home Ins. Co. ii. 410 

v. Pacific Ins. Co. ii. 531 

Hoy v. Holt i. 537 

!■. Rogers i. 383 

Hoyle v. Stowe i. 363, 366, 368, 370 

Hoyt v. Bridgewater Co. iii. 143 

v. Byrnes ii. 753, 774 

v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. ii. 203 

v. French ii. 28 

u. McKenzie ii. 336 

v. N. Y. Ins. Co ii. 606 

v. Shipherd i. 92 

v. Sprague i. 150 ; ii. 045 

v. Wildfire ii. 38, 461 

Hubbard v. Callahan iii. 113 

v. Charlestown Branch R. R. 

Co. iii. Ill 

v. Coolidge i. 466, 509 

v. Cummings i. 361, 367, 368 

-o. Glover ii. 523 

u . Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 559, 583 

v. Jackson i. 297 

». Matthews i. 226 

v. Morgan i. 242 

v. Norton iii. 244 

v. Shaw i. 537 

Hubbell v. Carpenter ii. 29 

v. Cramp iii. 478 

v. Great Western Ins. Co. ii. 400 

Hubbersty i\ Ward i. 44 ; ii. 190, 409 

Hubbert v. Borden i. 57 

Huber v. Steiner ii. 721 

Hubert v. Moreau iii- 6 

v. Turner iii. 6, 11 

Hubgh v. New Orleans R. R. ii. 46 

Hubon v. Park iii. 23 

Huck v. Globe Ins. Co. ii- 569 

Huckle v. Money iii. 183, 187, 188 

Huckman v. Fernie i. 47, 62, 79 ; ii. 597, 

599 
Hucks v. Thornton ii. 486, 527 

Huddersfield Canal Co. v. Buckley 

ii. 873 

Huddlestone's case i- "6 

Hudnal v. Wilder i. 264, 569 

Hudnall v. Scott ii- 881 

Hudson v. Baxendale ii. 224, 410, 416 

v. Bennett ii- 3' 7 

v. Bilton ij- 521 

L-. Clementson ii- 688 

v. Granger i. 107; ii- 883 

v. Guestier «• 399 



cxiv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Hudson r. Harrison 
v. Hudson 
v. Johnson 
v. Bevett 
v. Robinson 
v. Tenny 
v. Worden 



ii. 512 

i. 140 

ii. 746 

i. 123 

i. 12 

iii. 112 

ii. 57 



Huelsenkampf v. Citizen's E. E. Co. ii. 240 

Huey v. Pinney ii. 24 

Haft' i'. McCauley iii. 36 

v. Nickerson i. 500 ; ii. 042 

v. Wright i. 411 

Huffman i-rHulbert ii. 24, 25 

Hugg v. Augusta Ins. Co. ii. 409, 418, 

503, 505, 509, MO 

Huggeford r. Ford iii. 218 

Hughes, Ex parte i. 95; iii. 420 

v. Hughes i. 048 

v. Humphreys ii. 55 

v. Kerney " iii. 294, 205 

?>. Kiddell i. 298 

c. Large i. 290 

c. Lenny iii. 272 

i'. Morris iii. 046 

v. Stanley i. 558 

v. Stubbs iii. 315 

v. AVashington i. 93 

v. Wheeler ii. 757 ; iii. 125 

v. Young iii. 364 

Hughes's Appeal i. 151 

Huguenin !•. Basely i. 93 

v. TCayley ii. 598, 912 

Hulett v. Craig ii. 806 

v. Hugg ii. 882 

r. Smith ii. 156, 157 

Hull v. Augustine i. 282 

r. Blake ii. 738 

... Caldwell iii. 113 

i.Clark iii. 211 

v. Connolly i. 350 

v. Cooper ii. 532 

v. Hull ii. 736, 938 

v. Northwestern Ins. Co. ii. 018 

v. Peer iii. 333 

v. Piekersgill i. 49, 50, 53 

Hull Dock Co. v. Browne ii. 487 

Hull of a New Ship ii. 126, 129 

Hulle v. Heightman ii. 44 

Hulme v. Muggleston iii. 439, 469 

Hultz v. Gibbs i. 393 

Humble v. Hunter i. 55, 56 

v. Mitchell iii. 50 

Hume v. Bolland i. 209 

k. Hord i. 409 

p. Peploe ii. 771 

Humes r. Scruggs iii. 455 

Humplirey v. Arabin ii. 607 

v. Dale i. 590, 591; ii. 667 

v. Douglass i. 356 

i: Phinney iii. 239 

Humphreys v. Comline i. 023, 632 

0. Gardner ii. 826 

v. Ouillow ii. 860 

v. Jones iii. 76 

v. Lundy iii, 08 



Humphreys v. Union Ins. Co. ii. 605, 508 
Humphries v. Blight's Assignees 

iii. 424, 439 



v. Chastain 

v. Harrison 
Hundley v. Webb 
Hunsaker v. Sturgis 
Hunsden v. Cheyney 
Hunt, Ex parte 

v. Adams 

v. Bate 

v. Bell 



i. 218 

i. 381 

i. 569 

ii. 120 

ii. 77 

i. 351 

ii. 7, 857 

i. 475, 503 

ii. 897 



t: Bridgham ii. 26, 28 ; iii. 88 

k Carlisle ii. 468 

v. Chicago, &c. E. E. Co. ii. 48 

v. Cleveland, The ii. 414 

v. DeBlaquire i. 393, 401, 402 

v. Pish i. 321 

v. Frost ii. 685 

v. Hall ii. 716 
v. Haskell ii. 215, 220, 221, 419 ; 
iii. 210, 252, 269 

i: Hecht iii. 52 

v. Hort ii. 693 

v. Hunt ii. 92, 737 

v. Johnson i. 384 ; ii. 78 

v. Jones ii. 700 

v. Maybee i. 316 

u. Moore ii. 921 

i'. Nevers iii. Ill 

u. Nugent i. 320 

v. Otis Company ii. 37, 39, 879 

v. Peake i. 370, 481 ; ii. 66 

v. Eousmanier i. 74, 76 ; iii. 355 

v. Eoyal Ex. Ass. Co. i. 211 ; ii. 794 

v. Saekett i. 616 

... Silk ii. 813, 814 

v. Thompson i. 343 

v. United States ii. 26, 28 

v. Wimbledon Local Board i. 154 

Hunt's Appeal ii. 85 

Hunter v. Agnew i. 335, 3o3 

?'. Bennison ii. 834 

v. Boucher i. 394, 395 

v. Daniel iii. 338 

v. Fry ii. J22 
v. General Mut. Ins. Co. N. Y. ii. 648 

v. Hatfield ii. 73 

v. Hudson River, &c. Co. i. 79 

f. Hunt i. 31 

v. Hunter i. 263 

v. Jameson i. 62 

v. Leathley ii. 484, 534 

v. Le Conte i. 534 

o. Miller i. 55 

v. Osterhondt i. 550 

v. Parker i. 52, 85, 122 

v. Potts ii. 428 ; iii. 406 
u. Prinsep ii. 398, 413, 418, 484 ; 
iii. 210 

v. Rice i. 571 

v. Robinson iii. 101 

v. Wetsell iii. 58 

». Wright ii. 481 

Hunter, The ii. 402, 403 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



cxv 



Huntgate v. Mease ii. 837 

Huntington v. American Bank ii. 772 

v. Finch ii. 857 

v. Gilmore i. 263, 205 

v. Hall i. 610 

v. Knox i. 56, 66 

Huntley v. Bacon iii. 183 

v. Bulwer i. 128 

v. Sanderson iii. 98 

Huntly v. Waddell _ i. 615 

Huntress v. Patten iii. 132 

Huntress, The ii. 416 

Huntzinger v. Brock iii. 507 

Hurd v. Brydges iii. 416 

u. Cook i. 567 

v. Fogg i ii. 875 

v. Little i. 324 

v. West ii. 142, 144 

Hurdle v. Waring i. 515 

Hurff v. Hires i. 665, 566 

Hurlburt v. Pacific Ins. Co. ii. 885 

Hurley v. Brown ii. 631 

v. Milward ii. 448 

Huron, The, v. Simmons ii. 302 

Hurry v. Hurry ii. 401, 421 

o. John & Alice, The ii. 401 

v. Mangles i. 048 

o. Royal Exch. Ass. Co. ii. 488 

Hursh v. Byers ii. 102 

v. Sheets i. 129 

Hurst v. Bambridge ii. 829 
v. Gwennap iii. 426, 458 

v. Hill i. 219 

v. Holding i. 110 

v. Usborne ii. 422 

Hurt v. Clarke i. 208 

v. Southern R. R. Co. ii. 238 

Hurtin v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 523, 524 

v. Union Ins. Co. ii- 419 

Husband v. Davis ii. 748 

Husbands v. Smith's Adm'r i. 140 

Huscombe v. Standing i. 446 

Huse v. Hamblin i. 279 

v. MeDaniel ii. 756 

Hussey v. Christie i>- 454 

v. Criekett ii. 896 

v. Freeman i. 318 

v. Horn-Payne iii- 17 

v. Jewett i. 370 
a. Roundtree i. 338; ii. 52 

v. Thornton i. 564 

v. Whitely ii. 324 

Hustler, Ex parte iii. 282 

Huston v. Cantril i- 460 

v. Moorhead iii. 152 

Hutcheson r. Blakeman i. 505, 516 

Hutchins v. Adams iii- 176 

v. Bank of Tenn. i- 109 

i». Brackett ii- 1°* 

r. Gilchrist i- 5 70 
v. Hebbard i. 74 ; ii. 938 

c. Hudson i- 19 1 

u. Kimmell ii- 84, 86 

o. King »i- 35 

o. Olcutt »■ 645 



Hutchins v. Riddle 

v. Scott 

v. Turner 
Hutchinson v. Bowker 

v. Coombs 

v. Gascoigne 

v. Hosmer 

v. Howard 

v. Moody 

v. Morley 

v. Pettes 

v. Reid 

v. Smith 

v. Sturges 

v. Tatham 

v. Watkins 



ii. 874 

ii. 855 

i. 209 

i. 508 

ii. 464 

iii. 416 

iii. 143, 149 

iii. 286 

ii. 28 

ii. 020 

iii. 280 

. 879; iii. 226 

i. 205, 238 

ii. 873 

i. 58 ; ii. 668 

i. 557 



v. York, Newcastle, & Berwick 
Ry. Co. ii. 46 

Hutchison v. Bowker, i. 505 ; ii. 471, 624, 

628, 666 

v. Mitchell 
Huthacher v. Harris 
Hutson v. Merrifield 
Huttmann r: Boulnois 
Hutton v. Bragg 

v. Bulloch 

v. Eyre 

v. Mansell 

v. Moore 

v. Padgett 

v. Warren i. 537, 544; ii. 



i. 27 



ii. 78 

i. 562 

ii. 608 

ii. 35 

ii. 421 

i. 67, 105 

ii. 850 

ii. 66 

i. 561 

iii. 17 

, 670, 678 

ii. 10 

i. 206 

iii. 178, 187 

i. 603, 624, 626 

i. 227 

ii. 143, 145 

ii. 729 



Huyler v. Atwood 
Hyat t\ Hare 
Hyatt v. Adams 

v. Boyls 
Hyde v. Brashear 
v. Cookson 
v. Hyde 

v. Johnson iii. 85 

v. Louisiana Ins. Co. ii. 507 

v. Paige i- 66 

v. Stone i. 385; iii. 115 

v. Trent & Mersey Navigation ii. 150, 
196, 204, 205, 415, 669 
v. Wolf i- 66 

v. Woods iii- 431 

Hydraulic Engineering Co. v. McHaf- 

fie ii. 629; iii. 196,197 

Hyleing v. Hastings iii- 68 

Hylton v. Brown iii. 238 

Hynds v. Schenectady Co. Ins. Co. 

ii. 547, 573 
Hyne v. Dewdney (• 280 

Hynes v. Stewart i- 230 

Hysinger v. Baltzells iii- 103 

Hyslop v. Clarke iij- 382 

v. Jones i' 319 



I. 

Icard v. Goold 
Ide v. Gray 

v. Pass. Riv. R. R. Co. 

v. Stanton 



ii. 460 

ii. 913 

i. 331 

iii. 14, 18 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Idle v. Royal Exch. Ass. Co. ii. 396, 397, 

510 

r. Thornton i. 597 

Ilett e. Collins iii. 294 

Iley !•. Frankenstein i. 681 

Illidge v. Goodwin ii. 247 

Illinois, The ii. 435, 483 

111. Central R. R. Co. a. Cox ii. 46 

v. Frankenberg ii. 227 

v. Mitchell ii. 232 

v. Patterson iii. 311 

111., &e. R. R. Co. u. Johnson ii. 227 

, . Rend ii. 238, 270 

c. Whittemore ii. 240 

Illinois Ins. Co. v. Andes Ins. Co. ii. 494 

Illinois, &c. Soe. v. Winthrop ii. 593 

Illslev v. Jewett ii. 756; iii. 80 

Inchoff v. Chicago R. R. Co. ii. 250 

Imlay v. Elleften ii. 719 ; iii. 391 

r. Huntington i. 409 

t-. N. & W. R. R. Co. ii. 315 

v. Wikoff ii. 831 

Imperial Gas Light & Coke Co. v. 

London Gas Light Co. iii. 107 

Imperial Ins. Co. i>. Murray ii. 565 

Imperial Marine Ins. Co. v. Fire Ins. 

Corporation ii. 484 

Importers' Ins. Co. c. Christie i. 539 

Inee, In re ii. 284 

Independent Ins. Co., Re iii. 401 

Independent Ins. Co. v. Agnew ii. 571 

Indiana, The ii. 431 

Indiana Ins. Co. v. Coquillard ii. 539 

Indiana, &c. R. R. Co. v. Beaver ii. 245 

r. Mundy ii. 238 

Indianapolis, &c. R. R. Co. v. Allen ii. 271 

( . Horst ii. 245 

r. Maguire i. 565 

v. Paramore ii. 24'J 

Indianapolis Ins. Co. v. Brown iii. 125 

Industry, The ii. 439 

Infanta, The ii. 458 

Ingalls v. Bills ii. 180, 236, 243 

v. Cole ii. 628 

v. Herrick i. 569 

r. Lee i. 291; iii. 153, 150 

v Lord iii. 210 

IngalUbv v. Wood ii. 104 

I. & C. R. R. Co. o. Rutherford ii. 817 

Ingate v. Christie ii. 179 

Inge v. Bond i. 616 

Ingersol v. Jones ii. 70 

v. Van Rookkelin iii. 210 

Ingersoll u. Baker ii. 7 

r. Ingersoll ii. 91 

r. Martin i. 403 

Ingle r. Hartman i. 94 

Ingledew v. Douglas i. 352 

Inglis v. Haigh iii. 93, 94, 96 

!•. Vaux ii. 487 

Ingraham v. Albee ii. 466 

( . Geyer iii. 407, 409 

v. Gilbert i. 462 

v. Grigg iii. 403 

r. Hall ii. 751 



Ingraham v. South Carolina Ins. Co. ii. 526 

v. Wheeler »• 395 

v. Whitmore i-. 102 

Ingram v. Ingram i- 89 

v. Jordan iii- 224 

v. Lawson iii. 197 

v. Webb ii- 834 

Inkster v. Marshall Bank _ ii. 25 

Inman v. Foster iii- 179 

Inman Steamship Co. v. Bisehoff ii. 498 

Innel v. Newman ii. 749 

Innes v. Stephenson ii. 747 

Ins. Co. v. Bruce ii. 943 

v. Colt ii. 471 

v. Davis i. 78 

v. Dunham ii. 470 

v. Dutcher ii. 615 

v. Eggleston ii. 617 

u. Express Co. ii. 570 

u. Foley ii. 597 

v. Haven ii. 559 

v. Jarvis ii. 539, 615 

v. McCain i. 75 ; ii. 745 

v. Railroad Co. ii. 228 

t>. Southard ii. 542, 554, 556 

v. Stinson ii. 561 

v. Thompson ii. 501 

v. Updegraff ii. 561, 504 

v. Webster ii. 544 

v. "Weides ii. 587, 588 

Ins. Co. of Penn. v. Smith ii. 472 

Ionic, The ii. 275 

Ionides v. Pacific Ins. Co. ii. 483, 484, 

522, 525 
i. Pender ii. 526 

v. Universal, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 498 

Ipswich Manufacturing Company r. 

Story ii. 852 

Irby v. Wilson ii. 732 

Ireland v. Kip i. 306 

v. Livingston i. 61, 572, 597 ; ii. 674 

Ireland's case iii. 167 

Irish v. Cutter i. 263, 275, 283 

v. Nutting i. 203 

Irons v. Kentner i. 565; ii. 149 

v. Smallpieee i. 203 

Irvine v. Crockett i. 370 

a. Irvine i. 303 

v. Kirkpatrick i. 620 ; ii. 918. 924 

i'. Stone i. 486 ; iii. 19 

v. Watson i. 65, 67 ; ii. 745 

v. Withers i. 309 

Irving v. Greenwood ii. 70, 76 

v. Manning ii. 491, 506, 507 

v. Motley i. 79 

u. Thomas i. 619 ; ii. 920 

v. Veitch iii. 77, 80, 97 

Irwin v. Bidwell i. 174 

Isaac v. Clark ii. 105 

Isa'acs v. Cooper ii. 324 

Isabella Jacobina, The ii. 420 

Isbell v. Norvell ii. 136 

Isberg v. Bowden ii. 873, 883, 885 

Island City, The ii. 435, 437, 439, 442 

Isle Royale Mining Co. v. Hertin iii. 214 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXV11 



Isler w. Baker 




i. 223 


Jackson v. Lever 




iii. 429 


Israel v. Clark 




ii. 242 


v. Ligon 




iii. 356 


Itinerant, The 




ii. 428 


v. Lodge 




ii. 870 


Ivans v. Draper 




i. 19' 


v. Lomas 




iii. 477 


Ives v. Jones 




i. 37, 87 


v. Loomis 




iii. 238 


v. Sterling 




i. 484 


v. Lowe 




iii. 4 


Ives's case 




ii. 646 


v. Lunn 




i. 448 


Iveson i>. Conington 




i. 129 


v. Malin 




ii. 856 


Ivey v. McQueen 




iii. 183 


v. Mass. Ins. Co. ii. 


493, 


562, 575, 


Izon v. Gorton 




i. 532 






582, 583 








v. Mayo i 


364, 


370, 497 








v. Murray 




ii. 933 


J. 






v. Packard 
v. Parker 




iii. 129 
i. 309 


Jaccard v. Anderson 




i. 315 


v. Parks 




i. 399 


Jack, In re 




iii. 316 


a. Parkhurst 


ii. 


680, 931 


v. McKee 




iii. 247 


v. Pierce 




iii. 66 


Jack Park, The 




ii. 459 


v. Ransom 




ii. 687 


Jacks v. Bell 




iii. 185 


v. Reeves 




ii. 638 


v. Moore 




ii. 881 


v. Richards 




i. 313 


v. Nichols 




iii. 123 


v. Robinson i. 176, 183; ii. 387 


Jacobs, Ex parte 




i. 324 


v. Rogers 




ii. 185 


Jackson, Ex parte 


i. 214 


; iii. 418 


v. Schoonmaker 




ii. 479 


v. Alexander 




i. 189 


a. Sedgwick 




i. 229 


v. Ambler 




ii. 828 


v. Sill 




ii. 680 


v. Baker 


i. 104 


; iii. 173 


v. Stackhouse ii 


634, 


849, 851 


v. Bartlett 




ii. 746 


v. Stevens 


ii. 


634, 933 


v. Blodgett 


ii. 635, 


638, 640 


v. Stewart 




i. 125 


v. Bowen 




iii. 130 


v. Tufner 




iii. 242 


v. Bryan 




i. 548 


u. Union Bank 




ii. 113 


v. Bull 




ii. 933 


v. Van Dalfsen 




i. 95 


v. Burchin 


i. 


365, 368 


v. Vanderhayden 


i. 4oe 


; ii. 933 


v. Carpenter 


i. 


365, 368 


v. Walker 




i. 489 


v. Catlin 




iii. 12 


v. Walsh 




i. 95 


v. Charnock 




ii. 446 


o. Wetherill 




i. 623 


v. Cobbin 


i. 502, 


503, 536 


v. Wheat 




iii. 103 


v. Cocker 




iii. 309 


v. Wilcox 




ii. 919 


v. Cornell 




i. 238 


v. Winslow 




ii. 933 


v. Covert 




iii. 60 


v. Wood 




iii. 237 


v. Craig 




ii. 689 


v. Yabsley 




ii. 833 


v. Cummings 




iii. 267 


v . York & Cumberland R. R. Co. i. 330 


v. Davis 




ii. 940 






ii. 178 






v. Delong 




ii. 829 


Jackson Ins. Co. v. Partee 


i. 78 


; iii. 440 


v. Duchaire 


ii. 8, 78 


; iii. 477 


Jacky v. Butler 




i. 233 


v. Dunsbagh 




ii. 635 


Jacob, The 




ii. 403 


v. Eddy 




i. 542 


Jacob v. Kirk 




iii. 14 


v. Evans 




iii. 39 


Jacobs v. Adams 




iii. Ill 


v. Farmers Ins. Co. 




ii. 493 


v. Featherstone 




i. 407 


v. Fitzsimmons 




i. 448 


v Latour 




iii. 260 


v. Galloway 




i. 506 


v. Locke 




iii. 337 


d. Gibbs v. Osborn 




ii. 860 


Jacobson v. Le Grange 




ii. 58 


v. Green 




i. 448 


v. Williams 


iii. 


431, 433 


v. Henry 




iii. 130 


Jacomb v. Harwood 




i. 26 


v. Hubble 




ii. 932 


Jaffray v. Crane 




ii. 28 


v. Hudson i 


326; ii. 


639, 643 


Jagger Iron Co. v. Walker 




ii. 756 


v. Ireland 




ii. 645 


Jaggers v. Binnings 




ii. 391 


v. Irvin 




iii. 418 


Jalie v. Cardinal 




ii. 163 


v. Jackson ii. 


732, 736 


; iii. 352 


James Adgar 




ii. 433 


v. Jacob 




ii. 745 


James v. Attwood 




ii. 844 


v. Jacoby 




ii. 860 


v. Bixby 




ii. 50 


v. Johnson 


ii. 766 


; iii. 102 


v. Campbell 




iii. 178 


v. Jones 




iii. 129 


v. Catherwood 




ii. 700 


v. King 




iii. 414 


v. Chalmers 




i. 329 


v. Lamphlre 


iii. 


488, 511 


v. Cotton 




ii. 812 


v. Lawrence 




ii. 639 


v. David 




ii. 819 



cxvm 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



James v. Dowell 


ii. 863 


v. Emery 
v. Fulerod 


i. 14, 16, 16, 17 

i. 478 


u. Griffin 


i. 644 


v. Jones 


ii. 195 


v. Le Roy 

v. Lycoming Ins. Co. 


ii. 67 
ii. 551 


v. McCredie 


i. 60 


v. Morey 
v. Morgan 
v. Muir 


iii. 190 
i. 466 
i. 561 


v. O'Driscoll 


ii. 58 


v. Patten 


iii. » 


v. Pawnee, The 


ii. 392 


v. Raggett 
v. Shore 


ii. 875 
i. 525 


v. Stratton 


i. 232 


c. Stull 


iii. 511 



v. Williams i. 478; iii. 16, 17, 81 

James Church v. Moore i. 278 

Jameson a. Brick & Stone Co. iii. 440 

v. Gregory i. 581 

v. Royal Ins. Co. ii. 573 

v. Swinton i. 320, 323 

Jamey v. Columbia Ins. Co. ii. 398 

Jamieson, In re ii. 844 

Jamison v. Brady ii. 877 

v. Cosby ii. 18 

Jane, The ii. 402, 404 

Jane & Matilda, The ii. 459 

Janes v. Whitbread i. 174 

Janet Mitchell, The ii. 438 

Jaques v. Marquand i. 204, 205 

c. Methodist Church i. 400 

v. Todd i. 39 

v. Withy ii. 874 

Jarmain v. Algar iii. 24 

Jarman v. Woolloton iii. 455 

Jarrald v. Houlston ii. 336, 341, 343, 349 

Jarvis v. Brooks i. 169, 239 

v. Chappie ii. 882, 883 

v. Davis i. 569 

v. Peck i. 488; ii. 891 

v. Rogers ii. 127. 129 

v. Wilkins iii. 17 

Jay v. Almy ii. 465 

Jebsen v. East & West India Dock Co. 

iii. 186, 190 
Jee r. Thurlow i. 398, 399, 400 

Jeffcott v. No. Brit. Oil Co. i. 585 

Jefferson v. Adams iii. 184, 185 

v. Washington ii. 710 

Jefferson Co. Bank v. Chapman ii. 882 
Jefferson Ins. Co. v Cothral ii. 542, 545, 

554 
Jeffersonville R. R. Co. v. Cleveland 

ii. 203 

v. Hendrick ii. 250 

v. White ii. 151 

Jpffery v. Walton ii. 084, 685 

Jefferys v. Boosey ii. 330, 338 

v. Gurr i. 500 

c. Jefferys iii. 318 

Jefford v. Ringgold i. 370 

Jeffrey v. Bigelow i. 79 



Jeffreys v. Baldwin 




ii.-348 


Jeffries v. G. W. R. R. Co. 




ii. 816 


v. Ins. Co. 




ii. 656 


v. Jeffries 




iii. 335 


v. Wiester 




i. 94 


Jefts v. York 




i. 72 


Jelliet v. Broade 




ii. 888 


Jemison r. Blowers 




iii. 478 


Jenckes v. Cook 




i. 540 


Jencks v. Coleman 




ii. 241 


Jendwine v. Slade 




i. 622 


Jenkins r. Bacon 


i. 476 


ii. 108 


v. Blizard 




i. 191 


u. Brewster 




i. 258 


v. Eldridge 




iii. 32 


v. Gillespie 


i. 131 


ii. 825 


v. Heycock 




ii. 531 


v. Hooker 




i. 253 


«. Hopkins 




iii. 245 


v. Hutchinson 




i. 72 


v. Jarrett 




i. 563 



v. Nicholson Pavement Co. ii. 319 

v. Pickett ii. 194 

v. Quincy Ins. Co. ii. 555 

v. Reynolds iii. 16, 17, 18 

v. Robertson ii. 807 

Jenks v. Lewis ii. 465 

Jenkyns r. Brown i 650 

v. Usborne i. 328, 645, 651, 652 ; 

ii. 409 ; iii. 444, 445 

Jenness v. Bean i. 292 

v. Carleton i. 225 

v. Emerson i. 349 

v. Wendell ii. 814 ; iii. 49 

Jenney r. Aldon i. 349 

v. Lesdemier i. 131 

Jennings v. Broughton iii. 370 

u. Brown i. 460, 465 

v. Camp ii. 39, 655 

v. Chenango Co. Ins. Co. ii. 522, 542, 

553, 560 

v. Estes i. 198 

v. Gage i 557 

v. Gratz i. 624 

u. Ins. Co. ii. 402 

v. Johnson iii. 218 

!-. Maddock iii. 184 

v. Merrill i. 102 

!•. Newman i. 143 

v. Pitman i. 354 ; ii. 54 

v. Roberts i. 322, 323 

i: Rundall i. 356 

r. Thomas i. 284 

Jennison v. Parker ii. 120 

v. Stafford i. 470 

Jenys r, Pawler i. 300 

Jeremy v. Goochman i. 475 

Jerome v. Bigelow i. 487 

v. Scudder iii. 338 

v. Whitney i. 279 

Jersey City, &c. R. R. Co. v. Jersey 

City, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 270 

Jersey Glass Co. iii. 417 

Jerusalem, The ii. 381,403 

Jervis v. Berridge iii. 16, 18 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CX1X 



Jervoise v. Silk i. 347 

Jesse v. Roy i. 441 ; ii. 458 

Jessel v. Williamsburgh Ins. Co. i. 254 

Jeune !'. Ward i. 882 

Jewell v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. ii. 240 

v. Grand Trunk R. Co. ii. 199 

v. ii. 031 

Jewett' v. Carter i. 79 

i>. Cornforth i. 35 

v. Dockray i. 255 

ir. Dringer ii. 145; iii. 213 

v. Miller i. 95; ii. 935 

v. Preston iii. 434 

o. Ricker iii. 38 

v. Stevens i. 198 

v. Warren i. 474 ; iii. 47, 49 

Jewitt v. Wadleigh i. 131 

Jewry v. Busk ii. 69 

Tewson v. Moulson i. 381 ; iii. 437 

Tilson v. Gilbert iii. 41 

Todderell v. Cowell iii. 449 

Jodrell v. Jodrell iii. 374 

Joel v. Morrison ii. 247 

Johan & Siegnmnd, The ii. 388 

Johann Friedrich, The ii. 434 

Johannes, The ii. 439 

Johannes Christoph, The ii. 454 

John Hancock Ins. Co. v. Daly ii. 597 

v. Moore ii. 603 

John Owen, The, v. Johnson ii. 413 

John Perkins, The ii. 437 

John r. Bacon ii. 251 

Johns u. Bailey ii. 903 

v. Dodsworth i. 28 

v. Johns ii. 88, 91 ; iii. 66 

v. Simons i- 84 

v. Stevens ii. 840 

Johnson, Ex parte i. 217, 306 

v. Arnold iii. 195 

v. Arrigoni i. 307 

v. Bank of N. America i. 296 

v. Barry i. 199, 200 

v. Berlizheimer i. 227 

v. Berkshire Ins. Co. ii. 574 

v. Blasdale i. 73, 88, 272 

v. Blenkensop ii. 37 

v. Bloodgood i. 258 

v. Boone ii- 766 

v. Boston ii. 47 

v. Buck iii- 11, 15, 18 

v. Campbell i. 107 ; iii. 276 

a. Clark i- 167 

v. Clay ii. 771, 772 

v. Collins . i- 27 

v. Cope i. 618 

v. Courts iii- 240 

v. Craig __ i- & 

v. Cranage ! 



v. Credit Lyonnais Co. 

v. Cunningham 

a. Cuttle 

v. Day 

v. Dodgson 

v. Dorsey 

v. Evans 



102 
ii. 746 
iii. 53 
ii. 898 
iii. 6 
i. 466 
i. 236 



Johnson v. Parnum 


iii. 273 


v. Pitzhugh 


iii. 471 


v. Poster 


i. 49S 


v. Gilbert 


iii. 27 


v. Greaves 


ii. 405 


v. Hartshorne 


i. 228 


v. Helmstaedter 


iii. 441 


v. Henderson 


i. 279 


v. Hersey 


i. 208 


v. Hill 


ii. 167 


v. Holdsworth 


ii. 749 


v. Hopkins 


iii. 08 


v. Huckins 


ii. 463 


v. Hudson 


ii. 894 


v. Hudson River R. Co. 


ii. 248 



f. Hunt ii. 380 ; iii. 409, 436 

v. Jackson ii. 815 

v. Johnson i. 32, 381, 526 ; ii. 648, 651, 
712; iii. 125, 356 
v. Kennion i. 297, 298 

v. Knapp ii. 11 

v. Lancashire R. Co. i. 564 

o. Lancaster ii. 771, 772 

v. Latham ii. 830 

v. Lines i. 336, 350 

v. Marlborough ii. 860 

v. Marriott i. 127 

v. Martinus i. 290 

v. McDonald i. 595, 596 

v. Medlicott i. 435 

v. Meeker i. 301 

v. Midland Railway ii. 185, 187 

v. Miln ii. 422 

v. Morse ii. 869 

v. Municipality i. 154 

v. Nyoe iii- 243 

v. Ogilby i. 67 

v. O'Hara i. 104 

v. Peck ii. 914 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 586 

v. Pie i. 357 

v. Planters Bank ii. 24 

r. Reynolds ii. 163 

v. Root ii. 304, 309, 315, 317 

v. Sandusky, The ii. 383 

ii. Schooner McDonough ii. 154 

v. Shrewsbury & B. Ry. Co. iii. 322, 
330, 374 
v. Sims i. 442 ; ii. 458 

v. Smith i. 51, 55 ; iii. 49 

v. Somers iii. 14 

v. Somerville iii- 312 

v. Stone ii. 275, 277 

v. Sumner iii. 211 

v. Thayer i. 246 

v. Totten i. 192 

v. Trinity Church iii- 8 

v. Union Ins. Co. ii- 578 

v. Watson iii- 44 

v. Way i. 289 

v. White ii- 871 

v. Whitwell iii- 381, 3X2 

». Wilson i. 25 ; ii. 835 

v. Winona R. R. Co. ii- 236 

Johnson's Appeal i- 151 



cxx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Johnson & Stowers, Re 


iii. 421 


Jones v. Harris 


i. 78 


Johnston, Ex parte 


i. 306 


v. Herbert 


i. 210 ; ii. 852 


v. Bower 


ii. 863 


o. Hibbert 


iii. 451 


v. Brown 


i. 42 ; ii. 143 


v. Hoar 


ii. 772 


v. Browne 


i. 558, 565 


v. Hoey 


ii. 674 


v. Caulkins 


ii. 809 


v. Hook 


ii. 719 


v. Commonwealth 


ii. 900, 901 


v. Hoyt 


ii. 413 


v. Cope 


i. 627 


u. Ins. Co. 


ii. 531 


v. Dutton 


i. 217 


v. Johnson 


ii. 853 


v. Fessler 


i. 506 


v. Jones i. 


646; ii. 91, 853 


u. Glancy ii 


. 66, 349, 358 


v. Judd 


ii. 63, 792 


v. Huddleston 


ii. 798 


v. Kilgore 


ii. 7G5 


v. Nicholls 


ii. 24 


v. Lees 


ii. 893 


v. Orr Ewing 


ii. 370 


v. Lewis 


iii. 101 


(/-. Searcy 


ii. 28 


v. Littledale 


i. 68, 527 


v. South Western Railroad Bank i. 79 


v. Lock 


i. 266 


v. Thompson 


ii. 26 


v . Lusk 


i. 231 


v. Wabash College 


i. 482 


v. Marcy 


iii. 41 


v. Wilcox 


i. 78 


v. Marsh 


i. 550 ; iii. 225 


Johnstone v. Huddlestone 


i. 544, 648 ; 


v. Marshall 


iii. 177 




ii. 940 


v. Mechanics Ins. Co 


ii. 586 


Joliet Iron Co. u. Scioto Brick Co. ii. 128 


u. Merchants Bank 


ii. 128 


Jolland, v. 


i. 97 


v. Moore 


iii. 92 


Jollett v. Deponthieu 


iii. 406 


v. Morrisett, The 


ii. 392 


Jollie v. Jacques 


ii. 348 


v. Nanney 


i. 527 


Jolly v. Baltimore Equitable So- 


v. Neptune Ins. Co. 


ii. 484 


ciety 


ii. 551 


o. Newman 


ii. 689 


Jonasshon v. G. N. Ry. Co. 


ii. 663 


a. Nicholson 


ii. 497, 500 


Jones, Ex parte 


iii. 143, 465 


v. Noy 


i. 76, 223 


v. Ashburnham i. 


470, 472, 473 


v. O'Brfe'n 


i. 308 


v. Ashford 


ii. 5 


v. Pearce 


ii. 313 


v. Barcley 


ii. 659 


v. Perkins 


i. 435 


v. Belt 


iii. 337 


v. Peterman 


iii. 66 


v. Bennett 


ii. 836 


v. Pitcher 


ii. 396 


v. Blanchard 


iii. 409 


v. Powell 


iii. 467 


v. Blum 


ii. 391 


v. Provincial Ins. Co. 


ii. 593 


v. Boston Mill Corporation i. 467 ; 


v. Randall 


ii. 896 


ii. 832, 


840; iii. 333 


v. Reed 


i. 535 


v. Boyce 


ii. 180, 236 


v. Richardson 


i. 612 


v. Bradner 


i. 639 


i'. Robinson i. 


19, 23, 496, 497 


v. Brandon 


iii. 505 


o. Roe 


i. 560 


u. Brewer 


i. 151 


v. Ryde 


i. 298 


u. Bright 


i. 630 


v. Saw kins 


ii. 822 


v. Bullitt 


ii. 751 


v. Selby 


i. 265, 267 


v. Clarke 


ii. 673 


v. Shaddock 


i. 137 


v. Clifton 


i. 384, 410 


v. Shorter 


iii. 24 


o. Commerce, The 


ii. 392 


v. Sims 


i. 573 


v. Cooper 


iii. 22 


e. Smith 


ii. 97, 122, 804 


o. Dareh 


i. 370 


v. Starkey 


ii. 113 


v. Dexter 


i. 256 


v. Tanner 


i. 141 


v. Dowman 


i. 67 


v. Thurloe 


ii. 148, 167 


v. Dunn 


ii. 051 


v. Todd 


i. 360 


v. Dyke 


i. 527 


v. Tyler 


ii. 166 


i>. Edney 


i. 524 


v. United States 


ii. 776 


v. Fales 


ii. 669 


v. Victoria Graving Dock Co. iii. 18 


v. Flint 


iii. 34, 35 


v. Voorhees 


ii. 179, 253, 276 


v. Foxall i. 


136; iii. 422 


v. Waite 


i. 399, 485, 488 


v. Gibbons 


iii. 427 


v. Ward 


ii. 769 


v. Gilman 


iii. 193 


v. Wasson 


i. 629 


v. Gilreath 


ii. 878 


v. Williams 


i. 509 


v. Glass 


ii. 134 


v. Witter 


i. 257, 258 


v. Goodwin 


i. 275 


v. Woodbury 


ii. 63 


v. Grand Trunk R. Co. 


iii. 207 


v, Yates 


i. 229 : ii. 924 


v. Gwynn 


iii. 177 


Jones Manuf. Co. v. Manuf . Ins. Co. ii. 524, 


v. Harmovan 


iii. 234 




545. 653 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CSX1 



Jonge Andries, The ii. 439 

Bastiaan, The ii. 438, 439 

Jordan v. Black i. 411 

v. Dobbins ii. 533 

v. Fall River R. R. Co. ii. 275 

v. Gillen i. 253 

v. James i. 109, 594, 042 

v. Lewis iii. 170 

v. Meredith ii. 670 

c. Neilson ii. 861 

a. Norton i. 41, 508 

a. Trumbo iii. 136 

v. Warren Ins. Co. ii. 409, 417, 510 

v. Williams ii. 466 

Joseph v. Bigelow ii. 685 

Joseph E. Coffee, The ii. 383 

Joseph Cunard, The ii. 385 

Joseph Harvey, The ii. 468 

Joseph, The ii. 520 

Josephine, The ii. 519 

Josephs v. Pebber • i- 111 

v. Pebrer i. 162 

Joshua Barker, The ii. 414, 456 

Joslyn v. Grand Trunk R. Co. ii. 197 

v. Smith ii. 26, 28 ; iii. 88 

Jourdain v. Wilson i. 261 

Jowers v. Blandy i. 579 

Joy v. Campbell iii. 435 

v. Hopkin9 iii. 221 

v. Sears ii. 395 ; iii. 433 

Joyce v . Adams i- 566 

v. Maine Ins. Co. ii- 552 

v. Realm Ins. Co. ii- 484 

Joynes v. Statham iii. 312 

Jubber v. Jubber ii- 08S 

Judah v. Harris i. 280 

v. Randall ii- 509 

Judd v. Day i. 511 

v. Fulton ii- 797 

v. Ives iij- 400 

v. Lawrence i- 449 

Judge v. Wilkins i- 406 

Judkins v. Walker i. 355 ; ii. 40 

Judovine v. Goodrich ii. 941 

Judson v. Cope ii. 309, 314, 315, 322 

v. Etheridge iii- 266 

Judy v. Gilbert iii- 349 

v. Holmes i- 272 

u. Sturges i- 1° 3 

v . Wass i. 524 ; ii. 790 

v. Western R. R. Co. ii. 233 

Juhel v. Church ii. 481 

Julia M. Hallock, The ii. 468 

Julia, The ii- 520 

Juliana, The i. 441 ; ii. 457, 458, 460 

Jumel v. Marine Ins. Co. ii. 447, 602, 517 

Jung v . Second Ward Bank ii- 752 

Juniata Bank v. Hale }■ 306 

Junkins v. Simpson ii- 815 

Juno, The «• 481 

Jupe v. Pratt «■ 810 

Jupiter, The «• 432, 43o 

Jurgenson v. Alexander u. 375 

v. Catharina Maria ii. 461 

Juzan v. Toulmin ii- 91 < 



K. 

Kainu.Old i. 589,634; ii. 679 

Kaines v. Knightly ii. 475 

Kallenbach v. Dickinson iii. 87 
Kallman v. United States Express 

Co. ii. 270 

Kaltenbach b. Mackenzie ii. 512 

Kane v. Bloodgood iii. 107 

v. Columbia Ins. Co. ii. 535 

v. Gott i. 150 

v. Hood ii. 626, 661, 663 

v. Paul i. 143 

Kane, In re i. 347 

Kansas, &c. R. Co. v. Little ii. 181 

Kansas City Bank v. Mills i. 93 

Karr v. Karr i. 136 

Karthaus v. Ferrer i. 216 ; ii. 828 

Kase v. John i. 637 

Kasson, In re iii. 450 

v. Broeker i. 212 

Kathman ». Gen. Mut. Ins. Co. ii. 483 

Kautzman v. Weirick ii. 31 

Kavanagh v. Day ii. 716 

Kay v. Allen ii. 14 

v. Curd iii. 14 

v. Duchess De Pienne i. 407 

v. Marshall ii. 312 

v. Wheeler ii. 428 

Kaye v. Brett i. 48 

v, Dutton i. 462, 502, 503 

v. Waghorne ii- 824 

Kayser v. Disher i- 142 

Kead v. Rann ii- 673 

Keane v. Boycott i. 335 ; ii. 52 

Kearney v. Holmes ii- 39 

Kearsarge, The ii. 383, 384 

Kearsey v. Carstairs iii- 448 

Kearslake v. Morgan ii- 820 

Keasley v. Codd i- 164 

v. Cole i- 325 

Keate v. Temple iii- 22 

Keates v. Cadogan i. 513, 621, 630 

Keating v. Central R. R. Co. ii. 817 

v. Price ii- 685 

v. Spink ii- 392 

Keeble v. Hickeringall iii- 195 

Keech v. B. & W. R. R. Co. ii. 248 

Keegan v. Cox i. 354 

v. Geraghty ii- 701 

Keeler v. Field i- 579 

v. Fireman's Ins. Co. ii- 409 

v. Goodwin i- 565, 639 

v. Neal ii- 823 

v. Niagara Ins. Co. u. 478 

v. Salisbury ii- 824 

Keeley v. Boston, &c. R. Co. ii- 273 

Keen v. Coleman ii. 942 

v. M'Laughlin iii- 180 

v. Vaughan ||- 751 

Keenan v. Brown ii- 663 

v. Southworth «• 153 

Keene v. Beard ..'■ %<!' 

v. Dilke «"■ 1?* 

v. Keene m - H 3 



cxxn 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Keene v. Kimball ii. 332, 333, 334 

o. Thompson ii. 763 

u. Wheatley ii. 333, 334, 338, 34b 

Keener v. Bank of United States ii. 077 

v. Harrod i. 68 

Keenholts v. Becker iii. 170 

Keightley v. Watson i. 14, 17, 23 ; ii. 023 

Kein v. Tupper i. 504, 505 

Keine v. Home, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 558 

Keir v. Leeman i. 469 

Keith v. Chirk iii. 480 

v. Goodwin i. 35, 37 

v. Jones i. 280 

Keithsburg v. Frick i. 160 

Kekewich v. Manning iii. 315 

Kelby v. Steel i. 26, 34, 35 

Kelhim i'. MeKinstry i. 563 

Kell v. Nainby i. 24; ii. 937 

Keller v. Phillips i. 391 

?'. Ybarru i. 505 

Kelley v. Davis i. 339 

r. Hemingway i. 281 

v. Hurlburt i. 188, 189 

u. Riley ii. 71, 75 

i . Sanborn iii. 90 

v. Solari ii. 536 

v. Webster iii. 38 

Kellner v. Le Mesurier ii. 481 

Kellogg v. Barnard i. 029 

o. Brennan ii. 392 

v. Denslow i. 636, 638 

v. Gilbert ii. 740 

v. Hickock iii. 100 

v. Lovely iii. 273 

v. Norris ii. 746 

v. Richards ii. 751 

v. Schuyler iii. 466, 478 

v. Slawson iii. 403 

v. Smith ii. 939 

u. Winnebago ii. 709 

v. Wood ii. 933 

Kelly i'. Commonwealth Ins. Co. ii. 471 

v. Cunningham ii. 431 

v. Dutch Church of Schenectady 

iii. 242, 248 

u. Garrett ii. 882 

u. Holdship iii. 426 

v. Hooper ii. 349 

v. Low iii. 244 

v. Mayor, &c. of N. Y. i. 117 

v. Morris ii. 334, 336, 344 

v. Powlet ii. 691 

v, Renfro ii. 71 

v. Scott iii. 440 

v. Smith i. 562; ii. 536; iii. 200 

v. Solari i. 496 

v. Whitney i. 280 

v. Worcester, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 578 

Kelsea r. Haines i. 567 

Kelsey v. Crawford Bank i. 51 

Kember v. Southern Express Co. ii. 260 

Kemble v. Farren iii. 170, 172, 173 

v. Kean i. 221 ; iii. 322 

Kemeys v. Proctor iii. 312, 343 

Kemleys v. Richards i. 215 



Kemp r. Andrews 




i. 30 


v. Balls 


i. 29£ 


; ii. 749 


v. Burt 




i. 126 


v. Canavan 




i. 651 


v. Carnley 




i. 200 


v. Coffin 




i. 219 


£•• Coughtry 


ii. 181, 


225, 456 


i: Falk 




i. 052 


v. Finden 




i. 31, 33 


v. Pryor 




i. 88, 104 


v. Westbrook 


iii. 


289, 291 


Kempe v. Fitchie 




iii. 327 


Kendal v. Symonds 




ii. 830 


v. Fitts 




i. 569 


u. Hamilton 




i. 12 


v. Kendall 




ii. 861 


v. Kingsley 




ii. 796 


v. Stone 


iii. 179, 


183, 104 


u. United States 




i. 252 


v. Winsor 


ii. 


305, 321 


Kendig v. Marble 




iii. 130 


Kendrick v. Campbell 




i. 303 


v. Delafield 




ii. 500 


v. Lomax 




ii. 820 


i\ McCrary 




ii. 76 


v. Turbell 




ii. 835 


Kennard v. Burton 


ii. 250, 


251, 430 


!'. Cass. Co. 




i. 330 



Kennaway v. Treleaven i. 480; iii. 17 
Kennebec Co. v. Augusta Ins. Co. ii. 474, 

475, 487 

Kennedy v. Baltimore Ins. Co. i. 154 

«-. Barnwell iii. 110 

u. Bohannon i. 191 

u. Dunckles ii. 874 

v. Gad ii. 897 

v. Green ii. 804 

v. Kennedy ii. 91 ; iii. 299 

t: Lee i. 173, 614 ; iii. 344 

v. McFaden i. 184 

v. Ross i. 509 

v. Shea ii. 76 

t\ St. Lawrence Co. Ins. Co. ii. 473, 

542, 553, 554, 555, 557, 560 

v. Strong iii. 209, 211 

v. Ware iii. 318 

r. Whitwell iii. 115, 209, 211, 221 

Kennersly Castle, The ii. 404 

Kennett v. Chambers i. 486 

v. Milbank iii. 77 

Kenney v. Alvater i. 200 

v. Ingalls iii. 441 

Kennison v. Taylor iii. 242 

Kenniston v. Mer. Co. Ins. Co. ii. 569 

Kennon v. Dickens iii. 161 

Kenny r. Udall i. 381 

Kenny's Patent Button-Holeing Co. 

v. Somerville ii. 368 

Kenrig ;;. Eggleston ii. 216, 274 

Kensington, Ex parte i. 238 

v. Dollond iii. 465 

v. Inglis ii. 545 

Kent v. Burgess ii. 729 

v. Dawson Bank i. 90 

v. Elstob ii. 840 



INDEY TO CASES CITED. 



CXX111 



Kent v. Ginger 
v. Humphreys 
v. Huskinson 
v. Kent 

v. London Ins. Co. 
v. Manuf. Ins. Co. 
v. Midland R. Co. 
v. Phelps 
v. Shuckard 
v. Somervell 



iii. 221 

ii. 793 

iii. 6, 50 

ii. 49; iii. 41 

ii. 549 

ii. 493 

ii. 188 

iii. 143, 145 

ii. 160 

i. 142 



Kentucky, The, v. Brooks ii. 392 

Kentucky Mut. Ins. Co. v. Jenks ii. 540, 

611 

Kentucky, &c. R. R. Co. t>. Dills iii 186 

Kentyen v. Parks i. 329 

Kenworthy v. Schofield i. 510 ; iii. 12 

Kenyon v. Berthon ii. 518, 521, 522 

v. Farris i. 392 

v. Nichols ii. 685 

v. "Welty iii. 355 

Keplinger v. De Young ii. 321 

Kepner v. Keefer ii. 898, 900 

Ker v. Dungannon i. 93 

v. Mountain ii. 242 

v Snead i. 137 

Kercheval v. Triplett ii. 932 

Kermeyer v. Newby ii. 756 

Kerns v. Piper i. 42 

v, Sehoonmaker iii. 99 

Kerr r. Bell i. 361 

v. Chess ii. 870 

u. Laird i. 137 

v. Moon ii. 700 

v. Willan ii. 273 

Kerrigan v. Rantigan i. 263 

Kerrison v. Cole i. 487, 488 

Kershaw v. Matthews i. 226 

Kerslake v. White i. 530 

Kerwhaker v. Cleveland C. & C. R. R. 

Co. ii- 248 
Kesee v. Chicago & N. W. R. R. Co. 

ii. 817 

Ketchell v. Burns ii- 4 

Ketchum v. Barber iii- 158 

v. Durfee i- 203 

v. Durkee i. 199, 231 

a. Evertson ii- 39 

v. Stout iii- 358 

Kettell v. Alliance Ins. Co. ii. 505 

v. Wiggin ii. 527, 531, 532 

Kettle i'. Harvey ii- 655, 660 

Ketsey's case i. 373 

Kettleby v. Atwood iii- 329 

Keutgen v. Parks i- 329 

Keve v. Paxton i- 546 

Kewley v. Ryan ii. 484, 533 

Key v. Bradshaw ii- 64 

v. Cotesworth i. 642, 650 

v. Vattier ii- 908 

v. Wilson ii.-.882 

Keyes v. Keyes ,«• 88 

Keys v. Harwood ii- 813 

v. Williams i- 251 

Keyser v. Hanbeek i. 557 ; ii. 407 

Keystone Lumber, &c. Co. v. Dole ii. 806 



Kid v. Mitchell 


iii. 212 


Kidd v. Rawlinson 


i. 569 


Kiddell v. Burnard 


i. 035 


Kidder v. Hunt 


iii. 66 


v, Norris 


ii. 764 


Kidney v. Stoddard 


ii. 919 


Kieran v. Sandars 


ii. 152 


Kierlighett, The 


ii. 399 


Kiester v. Miller 


i. 478 


Kiggil v. Player 


iii. 426 


Kilborn v. Field 


ii. 93 


Kilburn v. Kilburn 


ii. 828, 833 


Kilby i>. Wilson 


i. 209 


Kilgore v. Bulkley 


ii. 669 


v. Dempsey 


ii. 714 


v. Powers 


iii. 113 


Kilgour v. Finlyson 


i. 48 


v. Miles 


ii. 799 


Kilkelly v. Martin 


ii. 853 


Kill v. Hollister 


ii. 844 


Killcrease v. Killcrease 


i. 380 


Killick, Ex parte 


iii. 455 


Killips v. Putnam Ins. Co. 


ii. 586 


Killmore v. Howlett 


iii. 37 


Kilmorey i\ Thackeray 


iii. 324 


Kilvington v. Stevenson 


ii. 876 


Kimball, The 


ii. 407 


v. Blaisdell 


ii. 933 


v. Brown 


iii. 79 


v. Cunningham 


ii. 922, 923 


v. Hamilton Ins. Co. 


i. 201 


v. Howard Ins. Co. 


ii. 583, 584 


v. Keyes 


i. 402 


v. Leland 


i. 263 


v. Morris 


iii. 474 



v. Proprietors of Boston Athe- 
naeum iii. 126 
v. Rutland & B. R. R. Co. ii. 178, 256, 

259 

v. Thompson iii. 403 

v. Tucker ii. 422 

Kimball Manuf. Co. v. "Vroman iii. 223 

Kimberley r. Jennings iii. 373 

Kimberly v. Ely iii. 507 

Kimbro v. Hamilton i. 563 

Kimmey v. Commonwealth ii. 726 

Kimpton v. Eve i. 646; iii. 328 

Kinahan v Bolton ii. 355 

Kincade v. Conley i- 146 

Kincaid v. Brunswick ii- 773 

Kinder v. Howarth iii- 428 

v. Shaw i- 102 

Kine v. Balfe iii- 349 

King, Ex parte iii. 451, 462, 466 

v. Baldwin ii- 26 

v. Bardeau i- 624 ; iii. 358 

v. Barrett i- 127 

v. Batterson "• 14 

v. Bickley .}• 322 

v. Bowen ii- 828 

t: Bradley ii- 880 

v. Bremond m- 230 

v. Brown "'• 247 

v. Chase ii. 868, 870, 871 

v. Diehl i»- I 11 



CXX1V 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



King 



v. Doolittle 

. Dowdall 

. Drury 

. Eagle Mills 

. Faber 

. Fleece 

. Fleming 

. Flintan 

. Fox well 

. Gillett 

. Gilson 

. Green 

. Hamilton 

. Hartford Ins. Co 

. Hoare 

. Hobbs 

. Humphreys 

. Hutehins 

. Johnson 

. Jones 

. Kerr 

. Kersey 

. Lane 

. Lenox 

, Lowry 

. Mashiter 

. Milsom 

. Moon 

. Paddock 

. Perry 

. Phillips 

. Pyle 

. Richards 



i. 292 ; ill. 354, 355 

ii. 7'J'J 

iii. 149 

i. 570 

i. 203 

i. 298 

ii. 805 

i. 395 

ii. 709 

ii. 425 

iii. 242 

ii. 130 

iii. 305 

ii. 487 

i. 11, 12 

i. 471 

ii. 143 

ii. 813 

iii. 153 

i 



in 
ii. 103, 218 



v. Root 

i'. Sears 

v. Shepherd ii. 

v. Smith 

v. Sow 

v. State Ins. Co. ii. 489. 

u. Talbot 

v. Thorn i. 

v. Trice 

v. Upton i. 

v. Wilcomb 

v. Wilson 

v. Withers 

o. Zimmerman 
King's Heirs v. Thompson iii. 
Kingdom v. Nottle i. 

Kingham v. Robins 
Kinghom v. Montreal Tel. Co. 

Kingman v. Spurr 

King Philip Mills v. Slater 

Kingsbury v. Smith 

v. Westfall 
Kingsford « Merrj- i. 557 ; 

Kingsland v. Braisted 
Kingsley, Ex parte 

v. Balcombe 

v. Holbrooke 

v. Lake Shore, &c. R. Co. 

v. Wallis ii. 666, 

Kingsman v. Kingsman 



144 
iii. 242 
ii. 75 
iii. 104 
ii. 104 
ii. 389 
ii. 631 



ii. 928 
iii. 415 
ii. 404 
i. 570 
. 242, 243 
223, 224 ; 
iii. 209 
iii. 183 
i. 485 
. 180, 183 
ii. 746 
ii. 52 
562, 504 
i. 136 
142, 143 
iii. 382 
470, 472 
i. 170 
iii. 339 
iii. 317 
i. 331 
309, 314 
144, 21 if) 
ii. 772 
ii. 299, 
301 
i. 174 
ii. 815 
iii. 170 
. 543 



290 
i. 186 
iii 467 
iii. 24 
iii. 36 
ii 212 
794, 811 
i. 335 



Kingst. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Clark _ii. 16 

Kingston v. Girard "• 532 

v. Kincaid i. 41, 87, 91 ; ii. 831 

a. Knibbs ii- 073 

v. Phelps i- 479, 481 

v. Preston ii. 659, 660 

r. Wilson i. 87 

Kington v. Kington ii. 752 

Kinley v. Fitzpatrick i. 623 

Kinlock v. Craig i. 644 ; iii. 276 

Kinlyside v. Thornton i. 546, 547 

Kinnard r. Daniel i. 410 

Kinnerley v. Hossack ii. 878, 880 

Kinnersley v. Orpe i. 538 

Kinney v. Central R. Co. ii. 238 

c. Ensign ii. 852 

v. Lee i. '280 

v. Watts iii. 242, 248 

Kinscy v. Minnick i. 543 

v. Stewart iii. 285 

Kinsley r. Ames i. 549 

r. Robinson i. 307 

Kinsman v. Kershaw ii. 745 

r. Loomis ii. 932 

r. Parkhurst ii. 318, 893 

Kintzing v. McElrath i. 620 ; ii. 918 

Kintzinger, Estate of i. 380 

Kinzey v. Leggett i 578 

Kipling v. Turner ii. 21 

Kirby, Ex parte iii. 474 

c. Bannister i. 140 

v. Duke of Marlborough ii. 707 

v. Ingersoll i. 201, 207 

v. Schoonmaker i. 231 

v. Sisson i. 331 

v. Smith ii. 526 

Kirk v. Blurton i. 125 

v. Bromley Union iii. 343 

v. Dodge Ins. Co. i. 280 

v. Glover ii. 746 

v. Hamilton ii. 938 

o. Hodgson i. 202, 217 

v Nice i. 631 

Kirkham v. Boston iii. 294 

!-. Marter iii. 31 

Kirkman v. Newstead i. 24 

r. Shawcross ii. 161 ; iii. 256 

Kirkpatrick r. Alexander i. 573 

v. Bonsall ii. 896 

v. Houston iii. 132 

('. Howk ii. 19 

v. McCullock i. 315 

v. Muirhead i. 292 

v. Smith ii. 686 

r. Stainer i. 106 

Kirney v. Smith iii. 416 

Kirrigan v. Kirrigan ii. 737 

Kirsclmer v. Conklin i. 294 

Kirtland v. Wanzer i. 326 

Kirton v. Braithwaite ii. 773, 774 

v. Elliott i. 337 

Kirwan p. Kirwan i. 214, 466 

Kisler ;•. Tinder ii, 881 

Kissam i\ Albert, The ii. 430 

Kisten v Hildebrand ii. 160 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXXV 



Kistner v. Sindlinger 
Kitchen v. Bartsch 

v. Bedford 

v. Lee 
Kitchin v. Buckley 

v. Campbell 

v. Compton 
Kitner v. Whitlock 
Kitson v. Julian 
Kittredge v. Brown 

v. Holt 

v. Woods 
Kittridge v. McLaughlin 
Klauber v. BiggerstafE 
Kleeman v. Collins 



i. 232 

iii. 451 

ii. 78 

i. 368 

i. 21 

iii. 426, 434 

i. 21 

i. 205 

ii. 16, 18 

iii. 75 

ii. 868 

i. 545 

iii. 459 

i. 279 

iii. 15 

Kleimwort v. Cassa Marittima ii. 404 

Klein, In re iii. 388 

v. Currier i. 284 ; ii. 8 

v. Seibold i. 556 

Kleine o. Catara ii. 423, 828, 840, 841 

Kleinhaus v. Generous ii. 28 

Klewin v. Bauman iii. 181 

Kline v. Beebe i. 335, 366 

v. Central R. R. Co. ii. 245 

o. L'Amoureux i. 350 

v. Raymond ii. 14 

Klingman v. Holmes iii. 181 

Klock v. Robinson iii. Ill 

Klopp & Stump v. Lebanon Valley 

Bank i. 291 

Knaggs v. Greene ii. 4 

Knapp, In re iii. 285 

v. Alvord i. 76 

v. Curtis ii. 149 

v. Hanford i. 142 

v. Harden ii. 684 

v. Maltby iii. 174 

v. MeBride i. 223, 226 

v. Parker i. 284 

v. Wallace i. 110 

Knave v. Ternott i. 93 

Knears v. Schuylkill Bank ii. 309, 323, 

327 
Knecht v. Mitchell i. 548 

Kneeland v. Ensley ii. 730 

Knew v. Hoffman i. 185 

Knibs v. Jones iii. 219 

Knickerbocker Ins. Co. v. Gould ii. 587 
v. Peters ii. 603 

Knickerbocker, &c. Ins. Co. v. Weitz 

ii. 608 
Knight v. Attila, The ii- 401 

v. Barber iii. 56 

v. Bennett i. 544 

v. Burton ii. 834, 836 

v. Cambridge ii. 499 

v. Clements ii. 860 

v. Cole ii. 633 

o. Crockford iii. 7 

v. Eureka, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 389 

v. Faith ii. 489, 506, 517 

v. Fox i. 116 

v. Hughes i- 33 

v. Hunt iii- 477 

v. Knotts ii- 684 



Knight v. Lord Plimouth 


iii. 421 


v. Luce 


i. 59 


v. Mann 


iii. 50 


v. Nepean 


ii. 613 


v. N. E. Worsted Co. 


ii. 663 


v. Nichols 


i. 611 


v. Ogden 


i. 170 


v. Parsons 


ii. 463 


v. Peachy 


iii. 448 


v. Portland, &c. R. R. Co. 


ii. 231 


v. Pror., &c. R. Co. 


ii. 226 


Knights v. Putnam 


iii. 128 


v . Quarles 


i. 145 


Knill v. Hooper ii. 527, 528 


Knobb v. Linsay 


i. 448 


Knoll v. Harvey 


iii. 231 


Knott v. Cottee 


i. 137 


v. Hogan 


i. 265 


v. Knott 


i. 167 



v. Morgan i. 173 ; ii. 360, 363 

Knoup v. The Piqua Bank iii. 482, 483, 

486, 498 

Knowles v. A. & St. L. R. R. Co. ii. 102 

v. Maynard ii. 940 

v. McCamly iii. 368 

v. Michel iii. 35 

Knowlman v. Bluett iii. 41, 43 

Knowlton v. Boss ii. 466 

v. Vickies ii. 843 

Knox v. Clifford ii. 907 

v. Flack i. 335 

i>. King iii. 12 

v. Lee ii. 770 

v. Ninetta, The ii. 406, 410, 414, 677 

v. Simonds ii. 842 

v. Waldoborough ii. 871 

Knox Co. Com. v. Aspinwall i. 330 

Knoxville Bank v. Clark ii. 862 

Koch v. Briggs iii. 378 

!'. Godshaw iii. 219 

Kockill v. Witherell ii. 834 

Koehler v. Black Co. i. 153, 156 

v. Iron Co. i. 156, 157 

Koenig v. Mueller iii. 293 

Kohler v. Smith iii. 113 

Kohlman v. Ludwig i. 288 

Kolb v. O'Brien iii. 181, 184 

Kohn v. Packard i. 207, 218, 416 

v. Schooner Renaisance ii. 894 

Kohne v. Ins. Co. ii 540 

Kollock v. Parcher ii. 628 

Konig v. Bayard i. 326 

Konigmacher v. Kimmel i. 151 

Koons v. Miller iii. 110 

Kooystra v. Lucas i. 531 

Kopitoff v. Wilson ii. 406 

Kornegay v. White i. 635 

Kortright v Buffalo Com. Bank iii. 212 

Koster v. Keed ii. 498 

Kountz v. Holthouse i. 215 

u. Kennedy ii. 853 

v. Kirkpatrick iii. 219 

Kowing v. Manly ii. 108 

Kramer v. Sanford i. 308, 317 

Kratzer v. Lyon ii. 826 



CXXT1 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Kraus v. Arnold 


ii. 776 


Krause v. Meyer 


ii. 853 


Kreis v. Gorton 


iii. 440 


Kreiss v. Seligman 


i. 487 


Kribbs v. Downing 


iii. 356 


Krider v. Lafferty 


ii. G87 


Krolin v. Sweeney 


ii. 156, 160 


Krom v. Schoonmaker 


iii. 178 


Kronheim v. Johnson 


iii. 46 


Krueger, Re 


iii. 416 


Kruger v. Wilcox 


iii. 275 


Krulder v. Ellison 


i. 505 


Krumbhaar v. Birch 


i. 615 


Krutz v. Stewart 


iii. 29 


Kuhn v. Newman 


i. 176 


Kunckle v. Kunckle 


ii. 831 


Kunzler v. Kohaus 


iii. 831, 832 


Kurtz v. Adams 


ii. 8 


v. Frank 


ii. 72 


Kyle v. E. R. R. Co. 


ii. 232 


v. Green 


i. 315 


v. Kavanagh 


i. 562 


o. Wells 


iii. 72, 92 


Kymer v. Larkin 


iii 435, 454 


v. Suwercropp 


i. 66, 67, 643 


Kynaston v. Crouch iii. 


381, 434, 457, 458 


Kynter's case 


ii. 394 



La Amistad de Rues 






iii. 196 


Labaree r. Carleton 






i. 457 


Labouchere v. Dawson 


i 


172 


; ii. 893 


L. A. C. Assoc, v. Fairhurst 




i. 384 


Lacaussade v. White 






ii. 887 


Lackey r. Stouder 






i. 010 


Lackington v. Atherton 






iii. 49 


Laclouch v. Towle 






ii. 217 


Lacon v. Briggs 






iii. 68 


v. Higgins 






ii. 720 


v. Mertins 




iii. 


295, 349 


La Constantia 






ii. 405 


Lackawanna R. R. Co. v 


Chenewith 


Lackman v. Wood 






ii. _ i * ' 
ii. 945 


Lacoste v. Flotard 






i. 492 


Lacy, Ex parte i. 94 ; 


iii. 


418, 


421, 422 


1-. Dubuque Lumber Co. 




i. 55 


v. Kynaston 




i. 27 


; ii. 850 


v. Lear 






i. 550 


v. Osbaldiston 






ii. 39 


Ladd i'. Ohotard 






ii. 195 


v. Hildebrandt 






iii. 368 


v. Kenney 






i. 308 


v. Lord 


ii. 


836 


; iii. 227 


v. Lynn 






i. 403 


Lady Arundell v. Phips 






i. 569 


Lady Belknap's case 






i. 407 


Lady Cox's case 






iii. 467 


Lady Durham, The 




ii. 


460, 461 


Lady Ormond v. Hutchinson 




i. 96 


La Farge v. Herter 






ii. 27 


v. Kneeland 






i. 85 



Lafferty v. Jelley 

Laflin v. Willard 

Lafollett v. Kyle 

Lafonde v. Ruddock 

Laforge v. Jayne 

Lafou v. Chinn 

Laliy v. Holland 

Laidlaw v. Organ 

Laidler ;;. Burlinson ii. 

v. Elliott 
Laing v. Chatham 

v. Colder ii. 235, 

v. Fidgeon 

u. Lee 
Laing & Todd, In re 
Lainson v. Tremere 
Laird v. Allen 

v. Pirn iii. 

v. Robertson 
La Jeune Eugenie 
Lake Erie R. R. Co. i>. Eckler 
Lake Hill v. Rose Hill Cemetery 
Lake Shore, &c. R. Co. v. Pierce 
Lallande v. Ball 
Lalor v. C. B., &c. R. R. Co. 

v. Wattles 
Lamar a. Minter 
Lamatt v. Hudson River Ins. Co. 
Lamb v. Briard 

v. Crafts i. 624, 63 

v. Durant ii. 395 

v. Lathrop 

v. Lindsay 

v. Paine 

!■. Parkman 
Lambard v. Pike 
Lambert, Ex parte 

v. Bessey 

v. Liddard 
Lambert's case 
Lambeth v. Western Ins. Co. 
Lambreth r. Clarke 
Lamburn v. Cruden 
Lamego v. Gould 
Lamerson v. Marvin 
Lamond i\ Davall 
L'Amoreux v. Gould i. 467, 

t>. Van Rennsselaer 
Lamourieux v. Plewett 
Lampen v. Kedgewin 
Lampet's case 
Lamphier v. Phipos 
Lamphire v. Cowan 
Lampon v. Corke ii. 

Lamprey v. Lamprey 
Lamson v. Clarkson 

r. Westcott 
Lancashire v. JIason 
Lancaster v. Harrison 
Lancaster Bank v. Moore i. 

v. Wordward 
Lancaster Canal Co., Ex parts 
Lance r. Cowan 
Lancey v. Maine Central R. Co. 
Lanchester v. Tricker 



i. 97 

iii. 235 

iii. 352 

iii. 104 

iii. 72 

i. 182 

i. 25 

i. 620 

380, 649 

i. 126 

ii. 8S1 

259, 207 

i. 630 

iii. 17 

ii. 826 

ii. 931 

iii. 352 

225, 248 

ii. 474 

ii. 700 

i. 96 

iii. 510 

ii. 246 

ii. 881 

ii. 48 

iii. 388 

iii. 237 

ii. 473 

ii. 403 

3 ; iii. 62 

; iii. 443 

ii. 787 

iii. 135 

ii. 18 

ii. 410 

ii. 221 

iii. 421 

iii. 178 

ii. 535 

i. 206 

ii. 482 

i. 82 

ii. 43 

iii. 151 

ii. 923 

i. 579 

480, 482 

i. 409 

ii. 3 

ii. 871 

i. 250 

i. 92 

ii. 826 

634, 929 

iii. 314 

i. 541 

ii. 463 

i. 641 

i. 28, 29 

435, 436 

i. 290 

iii. 402 

i. 656 

iii. 78 

i. 31 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXXV11 



Lanckton v. Wolcott iii. 468 

Land v. Jefferies i. 669 

Land Credit Co., In re i. 200 

Lander v. Clark ii. 423 

Landers v. Watertown Ins. Co. ii. 683 
Landry v. Stansbury i. 307 

Landsberger v. Magnetic Tel. Co. ii. 200, 

301 
Landsdale v. Cox i. 32 

Lane, Ex parte iii. 428 

In re iii. 421 

v. Burghart iii. 25, 463 

o. Chandler ii. 884 

v. Cook iii. 202 

v. Cotton ii. 99, 161, 185, 187 ; iii. 207 
v. Drinkwater i. 13, 15, 20, 22, 23 



v. Goodwin 

v. Harrison 

v. Ironmonger 

v. Maine Ins. Co. 

v. McKeen 

v. Montreal Tel. Co. 

v. Old Colony R. Co. 

v. Owings 

v. Pearce 

v. Penniman 

v. Steward 

v. Taylor 

o. Thomas 

v. Tyler 



ii. 00 

ii. 871 

i. 388 

ii. 574 

i. 387 

ii. 290 

iii. 270 

i. 28 

ii. 875 

ii. 413, 454 

i. 315 ; iii. 153, 156 

i. 150 

i. 175 

i. 184 



Lane, Praser and Boylston, oase of i. 178 



Lane & Co., Re 
La Neuville v. Nourse 
Lanfear v. Sumner 
Lang, Ex parte 

In re 

v. Anderdon 

i'. Brevard 

v. Smith 

v. Waring 

v. Webber 

v. Whidden 
Langan v. Hewett 
Langdale, Ex parte 
Langdon v. Buel 

v. De Groot 

v. Doud 

v. Hughes 

v. Litchfield 

v. Minn. Ins. Co. 

v. Paul 

v. Richardson 
Lange v. Kennedy 
Langer v. Felton 
Langford v. Frey 
Langfort v. Tiler i. 



Langhorn v. Allnutt 

v. Collogan 
Langhton v. Higgins 
Langley v. B. & M. R. R. Co 

v. Berry 

v. Palmer 
Langloie v. Brant 



iii. 470, 472 

i. 627 

i. 594, 654 

iii. 411 

iii. 460 

ii. 521 

ii. 26 

i. 330 

i. 168 

ii. 875 

i. 434 

i. 210 

i. 176 

i. 611 

ii. 309, 315 

ii. 944; iii. 103 

iii. 23 

iii. 498 

ii. 575 

ii. 857 

iii. 22 

i. 225 

ii. 929 

i. 335 

563,564, 572,642; 

iii. 225 

ii. 535 

ii. 474, 481 

i. 565 

ii. 232 

i. 246 

i. 310 

ii. 488 



Langridge v. Levy 



ii. 921 ; iii. 195 



Langston, Ex parte iii. 297 

v. Bates iii. 352 

Langton v. Higgins i. 561 

v. Horton i. 560, 613 ; ii. 126, 129, 

394 

v. Hughes ii. 887, 894 

Lanier v. McCabe i. 215 

Lankton v. Stewart iii. 351 

Lann v. Church iii. 286 

Lano v. Neale ii. 394 

Lansdale v. Brashear iii. 79, 95, 96 

Lansdowne v. Lansdowne iii. 354 

Lansing v. Gaine i. 191 

v. Lansing i. 143 ; ii. 897 

v. McKillup i. 211 

v. Montgomery ii. 929 

v. Prendergast iii. 464 

Lantry v. Parka ii. 39, 40, 44 

Lantz v. Frey ii. 52 

Lanyon v. Blanchard iii. 283 

v. Toogood i. 572 

Lapham v. Atlas Ins. Co. ii. 487 

v. Whipple iii. 41 

Lapsley v. McKinstry i. 99 

v. Pleasants ii. 602 

Larch, The ii. 390, 454 

Larkin v. McMullin ii. 78 

Larrabee v. Talbot iii. 397 

Lary v. Young i. 315 

Lasher v. St. Joseph, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 559 

Lassell v. Reed i. 545, 547 

Latham v. Latham ii. 91 

v. Morrow i. 526 

v. Sumner i. 578 

Lathrop v. Amherst Bank ii. 908 

u. Atwood iii. 200 

v. Kneeland i. 161 

v. Morris i. 292 

Latimer v. Batson i. 569 

Latourette v. Williams i. 381 

Latt v. Booth i. 335, 353 

Latta v. Shawk ii. 307 

Lattimore v. Garrard ii. 503 

Laubach v. Laubach iii. 224 

Laughan r. Bewett i. 406 

Laugher v. Pointer i. 20, 118, 119 

Laughlin v. Ferguson i. 569 

v. Fream i. 406 

v. Lorentz i. 227 

Laughter's case ii. 641 

Laughton v. Taylor ii. 863 

Laurent v. Chatham Ins. Co. ii. 565, 578, 

579 

Lavabre v. Wilson ii. 535 

Laval v. Myers ii. 897 

Lavassar v. Washburne i. 387 

Lavender, Ex parte iii. 416 

Laveroni v. Drury ii. 184, 428 

Lavery v. Crooke iii. 181 

Laverty v. Burr i. 210 

v. Hall iii. 311 

v. Moore iii. 337 

La Vie v. Phillips iii. 415 

Lavinia, Ship, v. Barclay i- 84 

Law v. Hollingsworth ii. 627 



CXXV111 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Law v. Jackson ii. 773 

p. London Life Policy Co. ii. 006 

v. Sutherland iii. 104 

v. Wilkin i. 339, 341, 475, 499 

Lawler v. Keaquick i. 91, 103 

Lawley v. Hooper iii. 116, 149 

Lawrence v. Aberdein ii. 484 

c. Brown ii. 936 

v. Clark i. 184 

v. Cowles iii. 1-0 

v. Dana ii. 338, 341, 342, 344, 346, 

347, 349 

v. Davis iii. 382 

v. Dole ii. 789, 790 

v. Dorsey iii. 306 

v. Fox i. 498 

v. Gebhard i. 287 

v. Hand ii. 921 

v. Heister i. 406 

v. Holyoke Ins. Co. ii. 575 

v. Kemp i. 547 

v. Kidder ii. 893 

v. McArter i. 334 

u. McCalmont ii. 5, 24, 634 

u. M'Gregor ii. 672 

u. Miller ii. 770 

v. Minturn ii. 448 

v. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 533 

v. Smith ii. 337 

v. Staigg ii. 770 

v. Stonington Bank i. 285; ii. 113 

u. Sydebotham ii. 533 

v. Taylor i. 169, 207 ; iii. 14 

v. Van Home ii. 517 

v. Wardwell iii. 195, 197, 198 

v. Warrall iii. 69 

v. Wright i. 146 

Lawrence County v. Dunkle iii. 85 

Lawrence Mfg. Co. v. Lowell Mills ii. 352 

Lawrenson v. Butler iii. 9, 305 

Laws v. Purser ii. 940 

Lawson r. Dickinson iii. 2*7 

u. Dumlin ii. 409 

u. Farmers Bank i. 318, 321, 323 

v. Higgins ii. 384 

v. Lawson i. 205 

v. Lovejoy i. 335, 361, 367, 374 

v. Townas ii. 14 

v. Weston i. 272, 289 

Lawton v. Lawton i. 547 

v. Salmon i. 547 

Lay v. Neville ii. 941 ; iii. 49 

Layer v. Nelson i. 31 

Layet r. Gano i. 04 

Layfield's case i. 202 

Layson o. Kowan iii. 382 

Laythoarp v. Bryant iii. 9, 64 

Layton, .Ear parte iii. 414 

». Butler iii. 238 

v. Pearce ii. 790 

Lazard v. Wheeler i. 253 

Lazarus v. Com. Ins. Co. ii. 430, 476, 477, 

562 

v. Waithman iii. 434 

Lazear v. Union Bank iii. 124 



Lazell v. Pinnick 


i. 434 


Lea v. Alexander, The 


ii. 439 


v. Barber 


iii. 19, 20 


v. Guire 


i. 189 


v. Lea 


ii. 931 


v. Whitaker 


iii. 172 


Leabo v. Goode 


i. 246 


Leach r. Fobes 


iii. 319 


v. French 


ii. 132 


v. Hewitt 


i. 307 


v. Mullett 


i. 525, 582 


v. Republic Fire Ins. Co. 


ii. 588 


v. Thomas 


i. 546 


Leadbetter v. iEtna Ins. Co. 


ii. 586 


Leader t>. Barry i 


. 333 ; ii. 82 


Leads v. Wright 


i. 647 


Leaf o. Coles 


i. 223 


League v. Waring 


ii. 756 


Leake ;>. Young 


ii. 820 


Lean v. Shutz 


i. 407 


Leaper v. Tatton 


iii. 69, 70 


Lear v. Yarnel 


iii. 121 


Learned v. Bellows 


ii. 851 



Leary v. Miller i. 308 

Leask v. Scntt i. 051 
Leather Cloth Co., The, v. Hirsch- 

field ii. 376 
o. The American Leather Cloth 

Co. ii. 353, 363, 364, 366, 367, 368 

Leatherdale v. Sweepstone ii. 776, 777 

Leathers v. Farmers Ins. Co. ii. 667 

Leathly v. Hunter ii. 534 

Leavenworth v. Delafield ii. 451, 510 

Leavitt v. Cutler ii. 73, 75 

v. De Launy iii. 145 

v. Palmer i. 487 

v. Peck i. 202 

v. Putnam i. 269 

v. Savage ii. 26, 28 

i". Simes i. 306 

Leballister r. Nash ii. 780 

Lebeau v. General Steam Navigation 

Co. ii. 412 

Le Blanche v London, &c. R. Co. ii. 260 

Le Breton v. Miles ii. 713, 730 

v. Nouchet ii. 730 

Le Cheminant v. Pearson ii. 517 

Lechmere v. Brasier iii. 336 

v. Carlisle iii. 467 

u. Fletcher iii. 75 

v. Hawkins ii. 882 

Leek v. Maestaer ii. 149 

Leckey v. McDermott iii. 269 

Leckie v. Sears ii. 415 

Le Couteulx r. Buffalo i. 157 

Ledlow v. Becton iii. 31 

Ledoux v. Goza i. 90 

Ledwich v. McKim ii. 861 

Ledyard v. Hibbard ii. 678 

Lee, Ex parte iii. 287, 451 

v. Atkinson ii. 136 

o. Boardman ii. 501 

v. Coleshill i. 487 

v. Davis i. 187 

v. Dick ii. 14 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXX1X 



Lee ». Early ii. 762 

v. Elkins ii. 831, 835 

v. Gaskill iii. 36 

v. Gray ii. 533 

v. Grinnell ii. 444, 447, 449, 450, 451 

v. Hodges ii. 76 

u. Howard Ins. Co. ii. 473, 544, 555, 

557 

v. Kilburn i. 640 

v. Kimball i. 594 

v. Kirkpatrick ii. 939 

v. Lashbrooke i. 229 

v. Lee ii. 52, 873, 876 

v. Mass. Ins. Co. ii. 493 

v. Muggeridge i. 461, 462 

v. Pain ii. 681 

t>. Perry iii. 69 

v. Starbird ii. 859 

v. Vernon i. 532 

v. Wood ii. 850 

v. Woolsey iii. 191 

Leech v. Baldwin ii. 173 

Leeds, Ex parte iii. 417 

v. Clieetlmm ii. 589 

v. Dunn ii. 7 

v. Metropolitan Gas Light Co. iii. 234 

v. Vail i. 380 

Leeds Banking Co., In re i. 321 

Leeds and Liverpool Canal Co. v. 

Hustler ii. 638 
Leeds and Thirsk Railway v. Fearn- 

ley i. 372, 374 
Leeke, Ex parte iii. 474 
Leeming v. Snaith ii. 422 
Leer v. Yates ii. 425 
Lees v. Nuttall i. 93, 94 
v. Whitcomb i. 478 
Leese v. Martin iii. 281 
Leeson v. Holt ii. 258 
Lefever ;;. Lefever ii. 941 
v. Underwood i. 187 
Lefferson v. Dallas iii. 63 
Leffingwell v. Elliott iii. 176, 240, 244 
v. Warren iii. 109 
Leffler v. Armstrong iii. 378 
v. Rice i. 200 
Leflore v. Justice i. 631 
Leftwitch v. St. Louis Ins. Co. ii. 497 
Legal v. Miller iii. 309 
Legg v. Benion i. 549 
v. Evans iii. 260 
v. Legg i. 254, 380, 384 
v. Willard iii. 261 
Leggat v. Reed i. 388 
Leggate v. Clark i. 405 
Legge v. Croker iii. 371 
Leggett v. Perkins i. 409 
v. Steele iii. 239 
Leggott v. Gt. Northern R. R. Co. i. 144 
Legh v. Hewitt i. 537 ; ii. 668 
v. Legh i. 26, 210, 254 
Legrand v. Hampden Sydney Col- 
lege i- 154 
Legro v. Staples i. 246 
Le Guen v. Gouverneur ii. 26 



Lehain v. Phillpott i. 552 

Lehigh Coal Co. v. Mohr 1. 78 

Lehigh Valley Co. v. McFarlan iii. 480 

Lehman v. Jones i. 308 

Lehnbeuter v. Holthaus ii. 306 

Leicester v. Rose iii. 477 

Leidig v. Coover i. 351 

Leigh v. Hind ii. 890 

v. Leigh ii. 749 

i). Mobile i. 564, 567 

v. Paterson ii. 809 ; iii. 220 

v. Smith ii. 190 

v. Taylor i. 140 

Leighton, Ex parte i. 152 

v. Atkins iii. 463 

v. Sargent i. 92 

v. Stevens i. 579 

v. Wales ii. 890 

Leitch v. Hollister iii. 382 

v. Wells ii. 865 

Lekeux v. Nash iii. 448 

Leland, In re i. 224 

v. Creyon ii. 12 

v. Hayden i. 159 

v. Medora, The ii. 402, 403 

v. Stone iii. 187 

Le Loir v. Bristow ii. 45, 880 

Le Louis ii. 698 

Leman, Ex parte iii. 420 

Lemar v. Miles i. 548 

Le Mesurier v. Vaughan ii. 484 

Lemoine v. Bank of No. America i. 210, 

297 

Lemon v. Temple i. 329 

Lemont v. Lord ii. 418 

Lemott v. Skerrett i. 637 

Lempriere v. Pasley iii. 427 

Lenfers v. Henke iii. 36 

Lengsfield v. Jones ii. 423 

Leonard v. Robinson i. 68 

Lennig v. Ralston ii. 713 

Lennon v. Napper iii. 308, 332, 373 

Lennox r. Roberts i. 318 

Lenox v. United Ins. Co. ii. 216, 448, 537 

!•. Winnissimet Co. ii. 431 

Leominster v. Fitchburg R. R. Co. ii. 827 

Leonard v. Adm'r of Villars ii. 769 

v. Bates i. 457; ii. 661, 663 

v. Fowler i. 628 

v. Hendrickson ii. 182 

v. Huntington ii. 386, 396 

v. Leonard i. 437 

v. Nye i. 256 ; iii. 434 

v. N. Y., Alb., & B. Tel. Co. ii. 279, 

280, 282, 283, 285, 290, 300 

v. N. Y., &c. Tel. Co. i. 515 

v. Pitney iii- 107 

v. Vredenburgh ii. 78; iii. 18 

v. Wildes i. 283 

Leopold v. Salkey ii. 4 

v. Van Kirk i. 627, 630 

Le Page v. McCrea ii. 758 

Lepard v. Vernon i. 76 

Lerned v. Johns i- 56 

Leroux v. Brown ii. 722 ; iii. 63 



VOL. I. 



cxxx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Le Roy v. Beard ii. 719 
u. Crowninshield ii. 721 ; iii. 390,397 
v. Johnson i. 203 
v. Tatham ii. 307, 311, 312, 321 
Le Sage v. Coussmaker ii. 62 
Lesley v. Rosson iii. 39 
Leslie v. Baillie iii. 355 
v. Guthrie iii. 424 
v. Thompson iii. 356 
v. Wiley i. 189 
Lessee v. Kincaid i. 540 
Lessee of Lazarus v. Bryson i. 95 
Lester v. East i. 563, 564, 567 
c. Garland ii. 796, 797 
v. Jewett i. 479 ; ii. 663 
v. McDowell i. 560 
L'Estrange v. L'Estrange i. 245 
Le Sueur v. Le Sueur ii. 734 
Letcher v. Bank of the Common- 
wealth ii. 20 
v. Norton i. 612 
Lethbridge r. Mytton iii. 200, 245 
v. Phillips ii. 104 
Letorey v. Korstall i. 183 
Lett v. Melville iii- 416 
Letton v. Young iii. 188 
Leuekhart v. Cooper iii. 256, 283, 2S5 
Lever v. Fletcher ii. 496 
Leverick v. Meigs i. 87, 100 
Levering v. Levering ii. 91 
v. Union Transportation Co. ii. 270 
Levezey u. Gorgas ii. 834 
Levi v. Kanrick i. 230 
v. Lynn, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 180 
v. WaterUouse ii. 261 
Levois v. Gale ii. 417 
Levy, In re iii. 428, 457, 470 
v. Baillie ii. 588 
v. Bank of U. S. i. 300 
v. Brown i. 130 
v. Cohen i. 514 
v. Drew i. 290 
v. McCartee i. 448 
v. Merrill ii. 501 
v. "Walker i. 172 
Levystein v. Whitman ii. 762 
Lewin v. Dille i. 51 
v. Guest i. 525 
Lewis, Ex parte ii. 154, 403 ; iii. 284, 

416, 422 

In re iii. 416 

v. Ames ii. 84 

v. Anderson i. 172 

v. Atlas Ins. Co. i. 76 

v. Atlas Mut. Ins. Co. iii. 203 

v. Brass ii. 772 

u. Brelime i. 101 

v. Browning i. 515 

v. Burgess ii. 836 

v. Burr i. 321 

v. Campbell iii. 248 

v. Chapman ii. 348 

v. Cleveland, The ii. 392 

v. Clifton ii. 937 

v. Covilland i. 563 



Lewis v. Culbertson ii. 878 

v. Eagle Ins. Co. ii. 522, 523, 554 

v. Elizabeth & Jane, The ii. 461 

v. Fullarton ii. 336, 342, 343 

v. Gamage i. 131; ii. 746 

v. Gompentz i. 322 

a. Hancock ii. 454 

u. Harvey i. 274, 283, 284 

v. Houston iii. 107 

v. Jones i. 325, 537, 515 ; ii. 751, 915 
v. Kramer i. 303, 304 

v. Langdon i. 173 ; ii. 369 

v. Lee i. 407 ; ii. 94 

v. Lewis iii. 507 

v. Littlefield i. 356 ; ii. 896 

c. London, &c. R. Co. ii. 251 

a. Lyman i. 515 

o. Lyster ii. b20 

v. Marshall ii. 672, 674 

v. McAfee ii. 137 

v. Nicholson i. 70, 72 

v. Owen iii. 397 

v. l'ayn ii. 856 

v. Pead i. 438 

v. Peake i. 635; iii. 176,229 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 606, 609, 615, 017 
v. Rucker ii. 490 

v. Springfield Ins. Co. ii. 560, 571 
v. The Western Railroad Co. ii. 199, 
212, 214 
r. Trickey i. 475 

v. United States iii. 478 

v. Webber iii. 440 

v. Welch i. 489 

< . Weldon ii. 663 

r. White ii. 815 

v. Williams i. 276 ; ii. 447, 452 

Lexington v. Clarke i. 486 ; iii. 19, 20 
Lexington & Ohio R. R. Co. v. Ap- 

plegate iii. 494 

Lexington, &c. R. R. Co. o. Elwell ii. 941 
Leycester v. Logan ii. 454 

Libbey v. Pierce ii. 941 

v. Tolford i. 533, 535 

Libby v. Hopkins iii. 470 

Liber v. Parsons iii. 242 

Liberty Hall Association i>. Housa- 

tonic Ins. Co. ii. 472, 542, 549 

Libhart v. Wood ii. 38 

Lichty v. Hugus iii. 101 

Lickbarrow v. Mason i. 290, 328, 330, 

651,652; ii. 409, 410,443,444 

Liddard v. Kain i. 618 

v. Lopes ii. 419 

Liddell r. Sims ii. 793 

Liddlow v. Wilmot i. 401, 402 

Lidgett v. Secretan ii. 517 

v. Williams ii. 421 

Liebig's Extract of Meat v. Hanbury 

ii. 353 
Liedemann v. Schultz ii. 667 

Liford's case i. 546, 547 ; ii. 664, 665 

Ligbtbody v. North American Ins. 

Co. ii. 540 

o. Ontario Bank ii. 754 



INDEX TO OASES CITED. 



CXXX1 



Lightbum v. Cooper 


i. 637 


Lightfoot v. Heron 


iii. 373 


v. Tenant 


ii. 894 


Lightly v. Clouston 


ii. 56 


Ligonia v. Buxton 


ii. 87 


Like v. Beresford 


i. 382 


v. Thompson 


ii. 760 


Lill v. Egan 


i. 204 


Lillard v. Whitaker 


iii. 211 


Lilley v. Elwin ii. 


35, 38, 39, 44 


LiUie ». Hoyt 


iii. 98 


Lilly v. Hays 


i. 457, 497 


v. Hodges 


i. 12 


Limerick Academy v. Davis 


i. 482 


Lime Rock Bank v. Mallett 


ii. 28, SO 


v. Phetteplace 


i. 167 


Lincoln v. Battelle 


ii. 721 


v. Claflin 


ii. 928 


v. Emerson 


i. 76 


v. Erie Preserving Co. 


i. 505 


v. Hapgood 


ii. 709 


v. Hope Ins Co. 


ii. 508 


v. S. & S R, E. Co. 


iii. 176, 194 


v. Whittenton Mills 


ii. 830 


v. Wilbur 


iii. 413 


v. Wilder 


ii. 638 



v. Wright 
Lincoln & Kennebec Bank 

ii. 669 

Lindauer v. Delaware Ins. Co. ii. 540 

Lindenau v. Desborough ii. 558, 592, 597, 

698, 912, 019 

Linder v. Monroe iii. 189 

Lindgren v. Lindgren ii. 681 

Lindley v. Union Ins. Co. ii. 493 

Lindo v. Unsworth i. 321 

Lindon v. Hooper iii. 210 

Lindsay v. Amesley iii. 168 

a. Limbert iii. 447 

v. Lynch iii. 65, 309 

v. Springer ii. 939 

Lindsey v. Gordon ii. 793 

Lindus c. Bradwell i. 392 

Line v. Stephenson i. 531 ; ii. 647 

Lineker v. Ayeshford i. 328 

Lines v. Smith i. 282, 616 

Linforth, In re i. 558 

Lingen v. Simpson iii. 325 

Lingham v. Eggleston i. 564, 567 

Lingwood v. Eade ii. 834 

Link ii. Clemmens ii. 799, 901 

Linker v. Long i. 523 

Linn v. Crossing i' 12 

v. Hamilton iii. 476 

v. Sigsbee ii. 893 

Linn Boyd Co. v. Terrill iii- 15 

Linseott v. Mclntire iii- 38, 41 

Linsell v. Bonsor iii- 82 

Linsenbigler v. Gourley >■ 266 

Linsey v. Ashton ii- 834 

Linsley v. Bushnell iii- 176, 183 

v. Lovely «- 677 

Linton v. Porter i. 615 

Lion, The «■ 430, 431 

Liotard v. Graves i. 103; in. Ill 



Lipe v. Eisenlerd 
Lipford v. Railroad Co. 
Lippincott v. Barker 
Lipscombe v. Holmes 
Lipson v. Harrison 
Liscom v. Boston Ins. Co. 



ii. 76 ; iii. 183 

ii. 171 

iii. 381 

ii. 60 

ii. 436 

ii. 584, 588 



Lishman u. Northern Maritime Ins. 

Co. ii. 526 

Lister v. Baxter i. 84 

v. Lister iii. 422 

Litchfield, In re iii. 418, 421, 425 

v. Cudworth i. 95 

Litowitch v. Litowitch ii. 737 

Litt i>. Cowley i. 641, 642 

Littell v. Hord iii. 128 

r. Marshall i. 293 

Little, Ex parte iii. 413 

v. Blunt iii. 92, 98, 104 

v. Boston, &c. R. Co. ii. 270 

v. Clark i. 191 

v. Dawson ii. 52 

v. Dodge i. 406 

v. Gould ii. 337, 338 

v. Hall ii. 330 

v. Rogers iii. 288 

v. Willetts i. 262 

Littledale v. Dixon ii. 5i5 

Littlefield v. Littlefield iii. 98, 332 

v. Shee i. 461, 462, 465 

v. Smith ii. 827 

v. Winslow ii. 631 

Littlejohn, Ex parte iii. 463 

v. Jones ii. 181 

Little Miami R. R. Co. v. Stevens ii. 46 

Litton v. Baldwin i. 409 

Lively, The Schooner iii. 196 

Liver Alkali Co. v. Johnson ii. 180 

Livermore v. Merscliell ii. 868 

v. Rand ii. 763, 766; iii. 79, 111 
Liverpool A. L. A. u. Fairhurst i. 384 

Liverpool Ins. Co. v. Verdier ii. 583 

Liverpool, &c. Ins. Co. u. McGuire ii. 546 

Livie i». Janson ii. 517 

Living, Ex parte iii. 427 

Livingston v. Bird iii. 138 

v. Dugan i. 469 

v. Indianapolis Ins. Co. iii. 132 

v. Jones ii. 325, 327 

v. Livingston i. 410 

v. Maryland Ins. Co. ii. 519, 522, 526 

v. Miller ii. 784 

v. Roosevelt i. 201, 213 

v. Woodworth ii- 328 

v. Wootan ii. 7U0 

Livingstone v. Ralli ii. 846 

Lizardi v. Cohen i. 314 

Llewellyn, Ex parte iii. 474 

v. Earl of Jersey ii- 680 

Lloyd, Ex parte iii. 473 

v. Archbold i. 25, 189 

v. Brewster ii. 914, 923 

v. Crispe i. 491 

v. Freshfield i. 205 

v. Fulton ii- 77 

v. Goodwin iii. 216, 218 



cxxxu 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Lloyd v. Howard 


i. 285, 286 


v. Johnson 


i. 337 


v. Keaeh 


iii. 127, 153 


v. Leisenring 


ii. 897 


v. Lloyd 


ii. 79 



a. Maund ii. 624, 625 ; iii. 69, 70, 74, 75 

v. Oliver i. 276, 281 

v. Scott iii. 116, 127, 149 

v. Thomas i. 225 

v. Walkey ii- 773 

v. West Branch Bank i. 59 

v. "Williams iii. 133, 134, 135, 142 

Load v. Green ii. 914 

Lobdell v. Baker i. 59 ; ii. 943 

v. Hopkins i. 575 ; ii. 783 

Lock v. Furze iii. 165 

v. Miller ii. 881 

Lock Company v. W.&N. R.R. ii. 228 

Locke v. Lewis i. 208 

v. McVean ii. 20 

v. North Am. Ins. Co. ii. 562 

v. Swan ii. 424 

«/. United States ii. 26, 29 

v. Williamson i. 627 

Lockett v. Merch. Ins. Co. ii. 532 

Lockhart v. Barnard i. 22 

Lockridge v. Foster ii. 917, 927 

Lockwood v. Barnes iii. 41, 44 

v. Bostwick ii. 358, 370 

v. Crawford i. 295 

v. Cullen i. 384 

v. Ewer ii. 129 

v. Laskell ii. 249 

v. Salter i. 383 

v. Thomas i. 402 

Lockyer v. Offley ii. 499, 612 

v. Savage iii. 472 

Loder v. Chesleyn i. 474 

Lodge v. Phelps ii. 719; iii. 319 

Lodwicks v. Ohio Ins. Co. ii. 673 

Loehner v. Home Ins. Co. ii. 559 

Loeschman v. Machin ii. 134 

v. Williams i. 647 

Lofield's case ii. 639 

Logan v. Austin ii. 823 

v. Birkett i. 398 

v. Bond i. 204, 206 

v. Hall i. 537 

v. Mason ii. 763, 766 

v. Mathews ii. 134, 901 

e. McGinnis iii. 3(32 

t\ Simmons i. 411 

v. Wienholt iii. 310, 362 

Logs of Mahogany ii. 407, 413, 421, 863 

Lohnes v. Ins. Co. ii. 543 

Loker i>. Damon iii. 190 

Lolley's case ii. 734 

Lombard Bank v. Thorp iii. 429 

London Chartered Bank of Australia 

v. White iii. 281 

London Gas Light Co. v. Nichols i. 12 
London S. F. Society v. Hagerstown 

Savings Bank i. 280 

London & B. Railway Co. v. Fairclougli 

i. 263 



London & Bir. Railway Co. v. Winter 

iii. 345, 363 
London & Prov. Law Ass. Co. u. Lon- 
don & Prov. Joint-Stock Ins. Co. ii. 375 
London & South Western Bank v. 

Wentworth i. 298 

Londonderry i,\ Chester ii. 83, 87 ; iii. 501 

Lonergan v. Stewart i. 558, 565 

Long, In re i. 240 

I?. Allen ii. 669 

i. Battle Creek i. 505 

v. Bonner i. 552 

v. Brown iii. 369 

v. Colburn i. 55, 56, 72 

v. Hicks i. 617 

v. Majestre i. 187 

o. Millar i. 67 ; iii. 18 

v. Preston i. 654 

v. Ryan ii. 708 

v. Storie iii. 126 

v. Story i. 219 

v. Younge i. 230 

Long & Wharton's case iii 150 

Longcope r. Bruce i. 232 

Longley v. Griggs i. 35 

Longman v. Winchester ii. 336 

Longridge v. Dorville i. 468, 471 ; ii. 823 

Longworth r. Mitchell i. 512 ; ii. 770 

Lonsdale v. Brown i. 326, 471 

v. Littledale i. 114 

Loomis v. Barker i. 208 

v. Bedel ii. 240, 242 

v. Cline i. 352 

u. Eagle Ins. Co. ii. 605, 606, 607 

«•. Green ii. 868 

v. Marshall i. 180 

v. Newhall i. 351,462; iii. 19 

v. Pierson i. 211 

v. Shaw ii. 511 

Loop r. Loop i. 358 

Loosemore r. Radford iii. 200 

Loraine v. Cartwright i. 87 

Lord v, Baldwin i. 233 

v. Belknap ii. 600 

(.-. Bigelow i. 540 

v. Brig Watchman iii. 382, 436 

c- Dall ii. 489, 606 

v. Ferguson ii. 396 

v. Goddard ii. 917 

v. Grow i. 625 

v. Jones iii. 261, 267 

v . Midland R. R. Co. ii. 260 

v. Neptune Ins. Co. ii. 409, 417, 502, 

510 

v. Ocean Bank i. 293 

v Stephens iii. 364 

«>. Wheeler ii. 655, 805 

Lord Brooke v. Rounthwaite iii. 356 

Lord Camoys v. Scurr ii. 118 

Lord Cochrane, The ii. 402, 405 

Lord Cranstown v. Johnston iii. 333 

Lord Darcy v. Askwith ii. 665 

Lord Dormer v. Knight ii. 633 

Lord Nelson, The ii. 441 

Lord Ward o. Lumley ii. 862 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXXX1U 



Lorent v. Kentring 


ii. 215 


Lorillard v. Palmer 


ii. 415 


v. So. Car. Ins. Co. 


ii. 486 


Loring v. Brackett 


ii. 852 


o. Cooke 


ii. 778 


v. Gurney 


ii. 675 


v. Manuf'. Ins. Co. 


ii. 577 


v. Neptune Ins. Co. 


ii. 537 


v. Proctor 


ii. 471, 474 


v. Steinman 


ii. 612 


v. Thorndike 


ii. 729 


Lorymer v. Smith 


i. 560 



Los Angeles Assoc, v. Phillips iii. 810 

Losee v. Dunkin i. 295 

Losh v. Hague ii. 307 

Lothrop v. Foster ii. 36 ; iii. 36 

■u. Greenfield Ins. Co. ii. 543 

Lotty, The ii. 468, 469 

Loud v. Citizens Ins. Co. ii. 524 

v. Loud ii. 737 

v. Pierce iii. 388 

Loudon v. Taxing District iii. 230 

v. Tiffany ii. 882 

Loughor Coal & Ey. Co. v. Williams 

ii. 628 
Loughran v. Ross i. 545 

Louis v. Brown iii. 168 

Louisa, The ii. 426 

Louisa Bertha, The ii. 403 

Louisiana v. New Orleans iii. 506 

Louisiana Bank v. Citizens Bank i. 301 
v. Kenner's Succession i. 226 

Louisiana State Bank v. Seneca i. 83 

Louisiana, The, v. Fisher ii. 431 

Louisville Ins. Co v. Bland ii. 507 

Louisville Manuf. v. Welsh ii. 31 

Louisville & Charleston B. R. Co. v. 

Letson i. 153 

Louisville & Frankfort R. R. Co. v. 

Ballard ii. 246 

Louisville, &c. R. R. Co. v. Collins ii. 47 

v. Filbern ii 48 

Lounsbury v. Protection Ins. Co. ii. 547, 

551 

Lovatt v. Field i. 595 

v. Hamilton i. 597 

Love v. Cobb iii. 362 

v. Hackett iii. 75 

v. Hinckley ii. 439 

v. Pares ii. 639 

v. Sierra Nevada Co. i. 125 

v. Wells ii. 903 

Lovegrove v. White i. 130 

Lovejoy v. Augusta Ins. Co. ii. 557 

v. Spafford i. 191 

v. Whipple ii. 900, 905 

Lovel v. Whitridge ii. 878 

Lovelace's case iii- 425 

Loveland v. Shepard ii. 32 

Lovell v. Briggs i- 180 

v. Howell ii. 46 

e. Williams i. 65 ; ii. 756 

Lovelock v. Franklyn ii. 800, 809 

o. King ii. 61, 147 

Lover v. Davidson ii. 336 



Lovett v. Hobbs ii. 179, ]86 

Lovewell v. Westchester Ins. Co. ii. 628 

Lovie's case i, 145 

Lovrein v. Thompson ii. 467 

Low v. Allen iii. 109 

v. Archer iii. 199 

i'. Barchard i. 466 

v. Blodgett ii. 6 

v. Davy ii. 488 

v. Elwell i. 548 

v. Hart ii. 370 

v. Howard i. 308 

v. Pew i. 560 

Lowber v . Connit iii. 15 

v. Le Roy ii. 633 

Lowe v. Beckwith ii. 14 

v. Bliss i. 280 

v. Griffiths i. 337 

v. Martin iii. 285 

v. Moss ii. 172, 173, 198, 215 

v. Peers ii. 04, 79 ; iii. 174 

v. Waller iii. 117, 127 

v . Weatherly i. 470 

Lowell v. Boston & Lowell R. Co. i. 117, 

120 

v. Daniels ii. 942 

v. Gage i. 274 

v. Johnson iii. 129 

u. Lewis ii. 307, 309, 315, 327 
v. Middlesex Ins. Co. ii. 555 ; iii. 295 
Lowell Manuf. Co. v. Safeguard Ins. 

Co. ii. 582, 687 

Lowell Wire Fence Co. v. Sargent ii. 227 

Lower v. Winters iii. 36, 41 

Lowerre, Matter of iii. 457 

Lowery v. Gear iii. 85 

v. Scott i. 311 

Lowes v. Mazzareddo iii. 127 

Loweth v. Fothergill iii. 69 

Lowfield v. Bancroft i. 28 

Lowman's Appeal ii. 877 

Lowndes v. Lane i. 522 

Lowrey v. Murrell i. 302; ii. 754 

Lowry v. Adams ii. 4, 16 

0. Bourdieu ii. 481 

v. Dufferin iii. 350 

v. Francis iii. 481 

v. Guilford i. 126 

v. Hall iii. 409 

u. Houston i. 380 

v. Mehaffy ii. 660 . 

v. Steamboat Portland ii. 249 ;j 

D.Thornton i. 381 j\ 

Lowther v. Lowther i. 94, 95 ; iii. 329 

Loy i>. Ins. Co. ii. 575 

Loyd v. Hicks iii. 189 

v. Lee i. 460, 465, 471 

v. Mansell iii- 286 

Lubbock v. Inglis ii. 152 

v. Potts ii. 887 

Lucas r. Bank of Darien i. 192 

v. Beach i- 164 

v. Beale i. 22 

v. Bristow ii- 670 

v. Brooks i- 540 



CXXX1V 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Lucas v. Chamberlain 

v. Cole 

v. Comerford 

v. De La Cour 

v. Dorrien 

v. Godwin 

v. Groning 

v. James 

v. Jefferson Ins. Co. 

v. Laws 

v. Milwaukee R. Co. 

v. Novosilieski 

r. Steamboat Swann 

v. Worswick 
Lucena v. Craufurd 



iii. 24 

i. 174 

iii. 320 

i. 65 

i. 330 

i. 494 ; ii. 50, 793 

i. 101, 103 

iii. 372 

i. 32 ; ii. 582 

i. 236 

ii. 245 

ii. 53 

ii. 429 

i. 502 



i. 48 ; ii. 460, 473, 

561, 565 

Lucesco Oil Co. v. Brewer ii. 048 

Luckett v. Townsend ii. 129 

r. Williamson iii. 335, 337, 347 

Lucy, Ex parte i. 468 

v. Ingram i. 117 

v. Levington i. 144 

Ludington v. Bell i. 192 

Ludlam v. Ludlam i. 447 

Ludlow v. Cooper i. 168 

v. Gill ii. 914 

!'. McCrea i. 12 

v. Van Ransselaer ii. 700, 894 

Ludlow, Mayor of, v. Charlton i. 154 

Ludwick v. Huntzinger iii. 113 

Luey v. Bundy ii. 815 

Lufburrow v. Henderson ii. 880 

Luff v. Pope i. 304 

Luffkiti v. Curtis i. 405 

Luke v. Lyde ii. 418, 419, 420, 017 

Lukem's Appeal i. 136 

Lumbermen's Bank v. Pratt i. 225 

Lumley v. Gye ii. 52 

v. Wagner iii. 304, 328, 330, 364, 367 

Lumpkin r. Wilson i. 61 

Lundie v, Robertson i. 308 

Luney v. Vantyne i. 351 

Lunn v. Thornton i. 561, 012 

Lunt v. Adams i. 303 

v. Stewart i. 27, 211 

v. Whitaker iii. 205 

Lupton v. White i. 06, 110 

Lush v. Druse iii. Ill 

v. Russell ii. 43 

Lusk v. Smith i. 210 

Lutz v. Linthicum ii. 831, 842 

Luxmore v. Robson iii. 249, 424 

Lyde v. Mynn iii. 324, 463 

I. y decker v. Palisade Land Co. iii. 506 

Lyell v. Sanbourn i. 47 

Lygo v. Newbold ii. 237 

Lyle v. Barker iii. 216 

v. Murray iii. 98 

v. Rodgers ii. 827, 830 

Lylly's case ii. 54 

Lyman !>. Babcock iii. 172 

v. Brown ii. 864, 871 

v. Cessford ii. 926 

v. Clark ii. 634, 851 

v. Lyman i. 229, 230 



Lyman v. United Ins. Co. ii. 475 

Lynch i>. Baldwin i. 552 

v, Bragg ii. 878 

v. Clemence ii. 826, 827 

v. Commonwealth i. 125, 126 

v. Crowder ii. 458 

v . Dalzell ii. 574, 577 

v. Fallon i. 94 

v. Hamilton ii. 524 

v. Livingston ii. 636 



v. Nurdin 
u. O'Donnell 
v. Smith 
Lynde v. Budd 
v. McGregor 



ii. 247, 248; iii. 195 
i. 565 

ii. 817 
i. 368 

ii. 913 



Lyndeborough Glass Co. v. Mass. 

Glass Co. i. 49, 158 

Lyndon v. Gorham i. 232, 233, 234 

v. Lyndon ii. 88 

Lynn v. Bruce i. 29 

v. Burgoyne ii. 480 

Lynx v. King ii. 172, 173 

Lyon v. Armstrong ii. 908 

v. Commercial Ins. Co. ii. 558, 919 

o. Culbertson ii. 896 

i-. Johnston i. 230 

v. King iii. 43 

v. Knott ii. 730 

v. Lamb iii. 16 

i. Marshall iii. 477 

u. Mells ii. 258, 267 

v. Pollock i. 62 

v. Reed i. 543; ii. 941 

v . Richmond iii. 355 

v. Smith ii. 155 

v. State Bank iii. 139 

v. Strong ii. 900 

f. Sundius i. 304 

Lyons v. Barnes i. 581 

i'. Martin i. 114 

Lyons Bank v. Ocean Bank ii. 98 

Lysaft v. Bryant i. 323 

Lysaght v. Walker iii. 17 

Lysatt !■. Bryant i. 323 

Lysney v. Sclby i. 621 

Lyte v. Perry i. 263 

Lytle v. Pope i. 36 

Lytton v. Lytton i. 372 



M. 

Maanss v. Henderson i. 42 ; 

Mabbett v. White 
Maber v. Maber 

v. Massias 
Maberley v. Sheppard iii 

Maberly r. Turton 
Macally's case 
Macarthur r. Campbell 
Macbeth v. Haldiman 
Macclesfield v. Davis 
Maccord i>. Osborne 
MacDonald v. Law Union Ins. Co. 



ii. 


938 


i. 


200 


iii. 85 


iii. 


259 


46, 55 


i. 


347 


ii. 


898 


ii. 


837 


i. 


138 


iii. 


329 


i. 


363 



ii. 592 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXXXV 



Macdowall v. Fraser 
Mace v. Wells 
Maofarlane v. Taylor 
MacGliee o. Morgan 
Machir v. Moore 
Machou v. Railway Co. 
Mack v. Jones 

v. Patchin 
Mackaness v. Long 
Mackay, In re 

v. Bloodgood 

v. Holland 
Mackenzie v. Pooley 
Mackersy v. Ramsays 
Mackie v. Cairns 
Mackinley v. McGregor 
Mackintosh v. Barber 

v. Mitcbeson 



ii. 523 

iii. 463, 464 

i. 631 

i. 466; iii. 310 

ii. 807 

ii. 187 

iii. 499 

i. 531 

i. 668 

ii. 827 

i. 122 

i. 289 

ii. 396 

i. 46 

iii. 381, 382 

i. 386 

i. 95 

i. 84 



v. The M. C. Railway Company ii. 664 
v. Whitworth ii. 494 

Macklin v. Richardson ii. 330, 334 

Mackrell v. Simond ii. 424 

Mackreth v. Syramons iii. 293, 294 

Maclay v. Harvey i. 505, 512, 515 

Maclean v. Dunn i. 46, 5S7, 592, 636 ; 

iii. 11 

Macloon v. Smith i. 313 

MacMahon v. Jacobs iii. 411 

Macomber v. Cambridge Ins. Co. ii. 563 

v. Durham iii. 113, 121 

v. Howard Ins. Co. ii. 544, 545, 555, 

557 

i,-. Parker i. 564, 566; ii. 420 

v. Thompson ii. 365 

Macon «. Crump ii. 826, 831 

v. Sheppard i. 483 

Macrory v. Scott iii. 4 

Macrow v. Great Western R. R. Co. ii. 213 

Mactier v. Frith i. 514; ii. 296, 540 

Macy v. De Wolf ii. 391 

v. Mut. Ins. Co. ii. 531 

v. Whaling Ins. Co. ii. 478, 511, 667, 

672 
v. Wheeler ii. 400 

Mad River, &c. R. R. Co. v. Fulton 

ii. 275, 277 

Maddeford v. Austwick i. 187 ; ii. 920 

Madden v. Kempster iii. 277, 301 

Maddock v. Hammett iii. 133 

Maddux v. Bevan i. 51 

Madeira v. Hopkins iii. 343 

Madeley v. Booth iii. 357 

Madigan v. Walsh iii. 36 

Madison Bank v. Davis iii- 124 

Madonna D'Idra, The ii. 403, 461 

Maester v. Atkins i»- 276 

Magalhaens v. Busher if- 408 

Magee, Ex parte iii. 413 

v. Atkinson '• 68 

v. Badger '• 289 

v. Lavell »'• 172 

v. Young 

Maggs v. Ames 

Maghee v. Morgan 

Maghee v. O'Neil 



ii. 4 

i. 4 

iii. 84 



Magill v. Hinsdale 

v. Merrie 
Magnay v. Edwards 
Magniac v. Thompson 
Magnin v. Dinsmore 
Magnus v. Buttemer 
Magoffin v. Holt 
Magrath v. Church 
Magruder v. Gage 

v. Union Bank 
Maguire v. Card 



i. 55 

i. 191 

i. 22 

i. 410, 460 

ii. 270, 274 

ii. 497 

iii. 339 

ii. 451, 502 

i. 574 

i. 306 

ii. 384 



v. Maguire ii. 732, 730 ; iii. 501 

Mahan v. Waters i. 309 

Mahana v. Blunt iii. 347 

Maher y. Hibernia Ins. Co. ii. 586, 588 

Mahier v. Keays i. 280 

Mahoney v. Porter iii. 456 

Mahony v. Ashlin i. 325 

v. Metropolitan R. R. ii. 817 

v. Young iii. 239 

Mahurin i>. Bickford ii. 744 

v. Pearson ii. 878 

Maigley v. Haner i. 458 

Maillard v. The Duke of Argyle iii. 81 

Main v. Melbourne iii. 349 

Maine Bank i>. Butts iii. 123, 138, 142 

Maine Central Institute v. Haskell i. 483 

Mainwaring v. Baxter iii. 309 

u. Brandon i. 92 

v. Leslie i. 394 

v. Newman i. 186 

v. Sands i. 394 

Mainzinger v. Mohr « iii. 90 

Mair v. Glennie i. 176; iii. 443 

Mairs v. Taylor ii. 130 

Maisonnaire v. Keating ii. 447 

Maitland v. Martin i. 87 

Majestic, The ii. 415 

Major v. Haukes i. 225 

v. Tardos iii. 160 

Majors v. Everton i. 410; ii. 78 

Makarell v. Bachelor i. 337 

Makepeace v. Coutes i. 26; ii. 874 

v. Harvard College ii. 634 

Makin v. Watkinson ii. 802 

Making v. v. Welstrop ii. 836 

Makins, Ex parte iii. 429 

Malbon v. Southard i. 272, 274, 283 

Malcom v. Loveridge i. 551 

Maiden v. Fyson iii. 245, 361 

Male v. Roberts ii. 704 

Maleverer v. Redshaw i. 487 

Maley v. Shattuck ii. 931 

Malin v. Malin ii. 916 

Malins v. Brown iii. 350 

v. Freeman ii. 371, 373, 812 

Mallam v. Ardan i. 540 

Mallan v. May ii. 800 

Mallett v. Foxcroft ii. 869 

Mallory v. Bird iii. 133 

v. Vanderheyden i. 383 

v. Willis ii- 143 

Mallough v. Barber i. 93 

Malone v. Boston, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 260 

v. Hathaway ii. 47 



CX XXVI 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Maloney v. Stephens 
Malory v. Gillett 
Maltby, Ex parte 

v. Harwood 
Man, Ex parte 

v. Sliiffner 
Manahan v. Noyes 
Manby v. Long 



i. 78 ; ii. 745 

iii. 29 

iii. 473 

ii. 52, 54 

iii. 429 

i. 93; iii. 260 

ii. 813 

i. 153 



v. Scott i. 337, 388, 394, 396 

Manchester v. Hough i. 400 

v. Milne ii. 410 

Manchester Bank v. Fellows i. 126, 316, 

319 

v. White i. 320 

Manchester Iron Co. u. Sweeting ii. 26 

Mandel r. Steel ii. 879 

Manderston v. Robertson iii. 87, 88 

Mandeville v. Reynolds i. 130 

v. Welch i. 245, 247, 249 ; iii. 297 

v. Wilson iii. 96 

Maneelly v. McGee ii. 756 

Manella v. Barry i. 87 

Maney v. Killough i. 569 

Mangles v. Dixon i. 254 

Manhattan Co. v. Osgood iii. 143 

Manhattan Ins. Co. v. Barker ii. 559 

v. La Pert i. 46 

v. 8 tein ii. 575 

v. Warwick i. 78 ; ii. 601 

Manley v. Geagan iii. 23 

j\ Ins. Co. ii. 576 

Manly v. Howlett iii. 314 

v. United Ins. Co. ii. 485 

Mann v. Evertson i. 027 

v. Forrester iii. 283 

v. Huston iii. 401 

v. Sliiffner i. 102 

v. White River Log, &c. Co. ii. 175 

Manning v. Albee i. 570; ii. 810 

v. Cox ii. 749 

u. Manning i. 136 

t . McClure i. 292 

v. Purcell ii. 759 

v. Wells ii. 156, 102 

Manrow v. Durham ii. 12 ; iii. 18 

Mansell v. Burredge i. 12 

Manser v. Heaver ii. 834 

Mansfield v. Cole ii. 131 

v. Mclntyre ii. 730 

v. Ogle iii. 116 

v. Trigg ii. 650, 814 

Manson v. Felton i. 430 

Manton c. Parker ii. 309 

Mantz v. Goring i. 536 

Manufacturers Bank v. Barnes i. 301 

!•. Follett ii. 853 

v. Hazard ii. 945 

v. Schofield ii. 944 

Manufacturing Co. c. Corbin ii. 308 

Manville v. Cleveland & Toledo R. R. 

Co. ii. 46 

r. West. Union Tel. Co. ii. 300 

Many v. Beekman Iron Co. ii. 632 

v. Jagger ii. 307, 309, 314, 322 

v. Sizer ii. 307, 309, 324 



Maple v. Kussart «• 945 

Maples v. Wightman i- 335 

Marble v. Moore i- 564, 567 

Marburg v. Brooks iii- 382 

v. Marburg iii. 166 

Marcardier v. Chesapeake Ins. Co. ii. 421, 

500 

March v. Berrier i. 150 

v. Hammond ii. 930 

v. Pigott ii. 486 

v. Putney ii. 31 

Marchant v. Dodgin iii. 131 

Marchesseau v. Chaffee iii. 220 

Marcus v. St. Louis Ins. Co. ii. 610, 617 

Marcy v. Marcy iii. 38 

v. Sun Ins. Co. ii. 497, 528 

Mardall !>. Thelusson ii. 877 

Marden v. Babcock i. 569 

Mardis v. Tyler i. 464 

Mare, Ex parte ii. 462 

v. Charles i. 57, 288 

Marengo, The ii. 388 

Marfield v. Goodhue i. 77, 104, 108 ; iii. 205 

Margaret, The ii. 442 

Margaret Podger's case i. 50 

Margetson v. Wright i. 617 

Maria, The i. 117 ; ii. 436, 439, 464, 469, 

520 
Marietta i\ Flearing iii. 483 

Marine Bank v. Wright ii. 410 

Marine Dock & Mutual Ins. Co. v. 

Goodman ii. 507, 508 

Marine Ins. Co. u. Stras ii. 534 

v. Tucker ii. 480, 533 

v. U. S. Ins. Co. ii. 419 

Marine & F. Ins. Bank v. Jauncy i. 276 

Mariners v. Washington, The ii. 462 

Marion Commissioners v. Clark i. 330 

Marion, The ii. 382 

Markham v. Brown ii. 161 

v. Gonaston ii. 853 

v. Jones i. 196 

Markle v. Hatfield i. 301 ; ii. 753 

Marks v. Barker iii. 439 

c Hamilton ii. 561 

c. Morris iii. 136 

Marley v. Noblett iii. 40 

Mario w v. Pitfield i. 338, 392 

Marmon v. Marmon i. 438 

Marquand v. Hipper iii. 17 

v. N.V.Man. Co. i. 174, 220,222, 224 

Marquette Bank v. Stewart ii. 195 

Marquette Man. Co. v. Jeffery i. 578 

Marquette R. Co. u. Kirkwood ii. 220 

Marquis of Huntley ii. 441 

Marr v. Johnson i. 294 

Marrett v. Brackett ii. 755 

Marriott v. Shaw i. 234 

v. Stanley ii. 250 

Marryatt v. Broderick i. 74 ; ii. 759 

Marryatts v. White ii. 767 

Marsdon v. Reid ii. 535 

Marseilles o. Kenton iii. 95 

Marsh, Ex parte iii. 474 

v . Billings ii. 360 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXXXVH 



Marsh v. Blythe 


ii. 432, 434 


v. Puller 


i. 264 


v. Griffin 


ii. 19, 85.3 


v. Home 


ii. 261, 272 


o. Hutchinson 


i. 407 


v. Hyde 


iii. 57 


v. Keating 


i. 49 


v. Low 


iii. 223 


v. Marsh 


i. 411 



v. Martindale iii. 116, 129, 138, 141 

v. Minnie, The ii. 886 

v. Packer ii. 837, 847 

v. Putrnan iii. 398 

v. Rouse i. 563 

v. Rulesson ii. 39 

v. Russell i. 76, 175 

v. Titus i. 558 

v. Ward i. 11 

v. Webber i. 621 ; iii. 195, 219 

v. Wood ii. 848 ; iii. 427 

Marsh's Appeal i. 230 

Marshall, Ex parte iii. 462 

v. Am. Express Co. ii. 196, 198 

v. Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. i. 469 ; 
ii. 895 

v. Betner iii. 176 
v. Broadhurst i. 143, 145, 146 ; ii. 664 

v. Duke i. 616 

u.Pall i. 647 

v. Perguson iii. 35 

v. Garner ii. 446, 450 

v. Green iii. 37, 50 

v. Hutchison iii. 382 

v. Lynn iii. 16 

o. Marshall i. 221 

v. Mitchell i. 308, 315 

v. Nashville Ins. Co. ii. 499 

v. New York, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 187 

v. Pierce ii. 939 

v. Rutton i. 399, 406 

v. Smith i. 13 

v. Stevens i. 409 

v. York, N. & B. Co. ii. 238 

Marson, Ex parte iii. 470 

Marsteller v. M'Clean iii. 102 

Marston v. Allen i. 286 

v. Hobbs i. 260 ; iii. 240 

Martendale v. Pollet ii. 858 

Martha, The ii. 414, 426 

Martha Washington, The ii. 386 

Martin, Ex parte iii. 439 

v. Atkinson iii. 238, 242, 245 

v. Baker i- 144 

u. Barton Iron Works i. 457 

v. Berens i. 538 

v. Black's Ex'rs i- 470 

v. Boyd i. 274, 283 

v. Brecknell ii. 767 ; iii. 463 

v. Broach iii- 75 

v. Chauntry i- 289 

v. Clarke •>• 908 

v. Cotter i- 624 

v. Crokatt «■ 511 

v. Delaware Ins. Co. ii. 532, 672 

v. Dwelly iii- 368 



Martin v. Pishing Ins. Co. ii. 518, 531 

o. Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 477 

c G. N. Ry. Co. ii. 234 

v. Harrington iii. 286 

v. Hawks ii. 875 ; iii. 286 

v. Hayes i. 297 

v. Heathcote iii. 96 

v. Hewson ii. 759, 760 

v. Hill ii. 722 

v. Hurlbut i. 556 

v. Long iii. 240 

v. Martin i. 399 

v. Mathiot i. 519 

v. Mayo i. 364, 370 

v. Mayor, &c. of Brooklyn ii. 154 

v. McCormick iii. 355 

v. Merritt iii. 332 

v. Mitchell iii. 9, 366, 368, 369 

v. Morgan i. 496 

v. Nicolls ii. 740 

v. Nutkin iii. 331 

v. Porter iii. 215 

v. Pycroft iii. 343, 345 

v. Roberts ii. 922 

v. Salem Ins. Co. ii. 428 

v. Silliman i. 110 

v. Sitwell ii. 479 

v. Striblin ii. 9 

v. Temperley i. 116, 117 

v. Thornton ii. 836 

v. Thrasher i. 206 

v. Voeder ii. 908 

u. Wade ii. 895 

v. Wharton iii. 39 

v. Williams ii. 826, 827 

v. Winslow i. 306 

v. Wright ii. 24, 52, 344 

Martin's Heirs v. Martin ii. 88 

Martindale v. Booth iii. 264 

v. Smith i. 643 

Martine v. International Ins. Co. i. 222 ; 

ii. 601, 615 

Martineau v. Kitching i. 566, 576 

Martini v. Coles i. 102 

Marvin, Ex parte iii. 417 

v. Bates iii. 107 

v. Titsworth iii. 378 

v. Trumbull i. 172 

v. Wallis iii. 46 

Marvine v. Hymers iii. 138, 141, 143 

Marwick, In re i. 238 

Mary, The ii. 399, 401, 403, 439, 447, 448, 

462,718; iii. 147 

Mary Ann, The ii. 403, 466 

Mary Caroline, The ii. 454 

Mary Hale, The ii. 438 

Mary Paulina, The ii. 462 

Mary Pleasants, The ii. 441 

Maryland v. Bank of Md. iii. 382 

Maryland Ins. Co. v. Le Roy ii. 531 

v. Ruden ii. 523 

Marx v. National Ins. Co. ii. 471 

Marzetti v. Williams i. 87, 92 

Mascal's case i. 260; iii. 235 

Mason v. Armitage iii. 325 



CXXXV111 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Mason v. Bauman i. 92 

v. Blair iii. 347 

v. Blaireau, The ii. 437, 438, 440, 441, 

442 

v. Chambers i. 531 ; ii. 659, 060 

v. Citizens Ins. Co. ii. 587, 015 

u. Connel i. 171, 189, 2 20 

v. Crosby ii. 927 

v. Denison iii. 415 

v. Dennison i. 3611 

v. Farnell i. 141 

v. Felton i. 439 

v. Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 483, 538 

... Fuller ii. 730 

o. Haile iii. 393, 503 

v. Harvey ii. 586 

v. Homer ii. 730 

v. Knowlson ii. 874 

t. Jordan ii. 942 

v. Joseph i. 89, 90 

v. Lickbarrow i. 94, 575 

v. Martin iii. 273 

v. Mason ii. 013 

v. Pritchard ii. 641 

v. Robinson ii. 089 

v. Thompson ii. 156, 162, 164, 106 

v. Whitbeck Co. iii. 51 

v. White ii. 680 

v. Whithorne i. 136 

v. Wright i. 337 

Mass. Gen. Hospital v. Fairbanks i. 433 

Massasoit, The ii. 461 

Massey v. Davies i. 97, 111 

v. Building Assoc. iii. 117 

Massie v. Sebastian ii. 933 

v. Watts iii. 333 

Massiter v. Cooper ii. 212 

Masson r. Bovet ii. 814, 923 

Mast v. Pearce i. 033 

Master v. Miller i. 253 ; ii. 854, 855, 857, 

907 

Masterman v. Cowrie ii. 119, 143 

Masters, In re ii. 907 

v. Baretto i. 309 

v. Madison Co. Ins. Co. ii. 555, 575 

v. Masters ii. OSfi 

v. Warren iii. 178 

Masterton v. Mayor of Brooklyn iii. 198, 

201, 200 

Matasce v. Hughes ii. 756 

Matchin r. Matchin ii. 93 

Mateer r. Brown ii. 156, 157 

Matern v. Gibbs ii. 437 

Mather v. American Express Co. ii. 253 

v. Bush iii. 391, 393 

v. Maidstone i. 300 

v. Ney ii. 89 

Matheson v. Equitable Ins. Co. ii. 517 

Mathews v. Aiken ii. 6 

u. Davis iii. 238 

u. Howard Ins. Co. ii. 573 

v. Hunter i. 107 

v. Lewis iii. 151 

v. Menedger iii. 277 

Matliewson v. Clarke i. 173, 174 



Mathewson i>. Johnson 

v. Stockdale 
Mathewson's case 
Matlock v. Gibson 

v. Matlock 

v. Todd 
Matsell c. Flanagan ii. 



i. 334, 362 

ii. 336, 344 

i. 12 

i. 457 

i. 169 

iii. 107 

. 361, 370, 375 



Matson v. Farm Building Ins. Co. ii. 551 

v. Wharam iii. 22 

Matteson v. Holt iii. 223 

v. Nathanson i. 225 

Matthews, Ex parte ii. 395, 400 

v. Allen i. 317 

v. Baxter i. 435 

v. Bliss i. 621 

v. Coalter ii. 861 

v. Coe iii. 144 

v. Cribbett ii. 75 

v. Felch i. 182 

u. Fuller i. 91 

v. Houghton ii. 577 

v . Howard Ins. Co. ii. 499; iii. 192 

v. McStea i. 226 

v. Milton ii. 12 

v. Offley ii. 464 

v. Parker . i. 635 

v. Poythresg i. 289 

Matthie v. Potts ii. 488 

Matthiessen Co. v. McMahon i. 434 ; 

iii. 58 

Mattison v. Marks i. 281 

v. Westcott ii. 781 

Mattocks v. Chadwick iii. 77 

Mattoon v. Pearce iii. 217 

Mattox v. Craig iii 231, 232 

Mauck r. Melton iii. 66 

Maud r. Waterhouse i. 472 

Maudslav ;•. Le Blano i. 163 

Maul v. Rider i. 523 

Maule v. Murray ii. 738, 739 

Maundrell, Ex parte iii. 448 

Mauney v. Coit i. 225 

v. Ingram iii. 267 

Maunsell v. White iii. 33 

ilnury v. Talmadge ii. 234, 236 

Maving ». Todd ii, 154, 192, 257, 258 
Mavor v. Pyne ii. 649, 792 ; iii. 44, 108 

Mawdesley v. Parke iii. 409 

Mawe «. Samuel ii. 837 

Alawuian v. Tegg ii. 341, 312, 344, 348, 

349 

Mawson v. Blane i. 303 

Maxey v. Strong i. 225 

Maxim r. Morse i. 463 

Maxwell v. Day ii. 756 

v. Deare ii. 757 

v. Goodrum i. 280 

u. Hogg ii. 361, 363 

v. Jameson i. 247 

v. Mcllvoy ii. 155 

v. Robinson ii. 535 

May v. Babcock ii. 410, 686 

v. Breed iii. 395, 404, 409, 508 

v. Calder i. 150 

v. Campbell iii. 153, 156 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXXX1X 



May v. Christie 


ii. 536 


v. Coffin 


i. 467 


v. Gamble 


ii. 757 


v. Harvey 


iii. 478 


v. May 


i. 20 


v. Princeton 


ii. 248 


v. Skey 


i. 392 


v. Woodward 


i. 12, 30 


May Queen, The 


ii. 459 


M&yall v. Mitford 


ii. 548 


Mayberry v. Willoughby 


i. 225 


Maybin v. Coulon 


ii. 832 


v. Railroad Co. 


ii. 190 


Maydew v. Forester 


i. 32 


Mayell v. Potter 


ii. 416 


Mayer v. Mayer 


ii. 92 


v. Mutual Ins. Co. 


ii. 543, 617 


Mayfield v. Wadsley 


i. 486; ii. 649; 




iii. 19, 35, 36 


Mayham v. Coombs 


iii. 294 


Mayhew v. Boyee 


ii. 250 


v. Boyd 


ii. 19 


v. Criekett 


i. 36, 210 


v. Eames 


i. 83 


v. Mayhew 


ii. 89 


v. Terry 


ii. 457 


Maynard v. Brown 


iii. 365 


v. Hunt 


ii. 776 


v. Morse 


ii. 16 


v. Rhodes 


ii. 599, 912 


v. Wright 


ii. 629 


Mayne v. Griswold 


iii. 107 


Maynell v. Surtees 


iii. 352 


Mayo v. Archer 


iii. 416 


v. Maine 


ii. 491 


v. Marine Ins. Co. 


ii. 491 


v. Snow 


ii. 421 


Mayor v. Humphries 


ii. 244 


v. Johnson 


i. 331 


v. Lefferman 


i. 446 


u. Steward 


iii. 44'J 


v. Williams 


i. 466 



Mayor of Berwick-upon-Tweed v. 

Oswald ii. 18, 824 

Mayor of Cambridge v. Dennie ii. 18 

Mayor of Ludlow v. Charlton i. 154 

Mayor of New York v. Bailey i. 117, 

120 
v. Colgate iii. 108 

v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 588 

Mayor of Norwich v. Norfolk Railway 

Co. ii. 660 

Mayor of Thetford's case i. 153 

Mayor, &c. of Alexandria v. Patten 

ii. 762 
Mayor, &c. of Kidderminster v. Hard- 
wick i. 154 
Mays v. Cannel ii. 833 
v. Manufacturer's Bank iii. 438, 446 
Mayson v. Beazeley i. 230 
Maze v. Miller ii. 822 
Mazozon v. Foot iii. 104 
McAUester v. Sprague i. 27 
McAllister v. Gallaher ii. 761 
v. Hoffman ii. 761, 897 



McAllister v. New England Mut. Ins. 

Co. ii, 615 

v. Reab ii. 879 

McAlpine v. Wingard i. 290 

McAndrew v. Bassett ii. 354, 355, 363 

McAndrews v. Electric Tel. Co. ii. 279, 

286, 287 

McArthur v. Sears ii. 170, 171, 181, 183 

v. Slauson i. 109 

McAuley v. Billinger i. 484 

McAvoy v. Medina ii. 106 

McBride v. Gray iii. 75 

v. Hagan ' i. 210 ; ii. 827 

v. McBride i. 349 

v. McClelland i. 569 

v. M'Laughlin iii. 178, 183 

McCaffrey v. Woodin i. 552 ; iii. 302 

McCall v. Clayton i. 55 

v. Flowers ii. 134 

v. Hinckley iii. 382, 403 

McCall 's case i. 137 

McCallen v. Adams i. 401 

MeCan v. Baltimore, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 232 

McCandlish o. Newman i 561 

McCann v . South Nashville Street 

R. Co. iii. 322 

McCardel v. Peck ii. 361, 378 

McCargo v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 487 

v. N. O. Ins. Co. ii. 499 

McCartee v. Camel ii. 612, 613 

v. Teller i. 371 

McCarthy i: Goold i. 253 

v. Pope iii. 39 

McCartney v. Gambart ii. 370 

McCarty v. Emlen i. 234 

v. Blevins i. 560 

v. Murray i. 335 

McCaskill v. Ballard i. 329 

McCawley v. Furness R. Co. ii. 238 

McClain v. Davis i. 436 

McClane v. Fitch i. 318 

McClartey v. Gokey i. 573 

McClintick v. Cummins i. 446 

McClintock v. Lary ii. 406 

McCluer v. Girard Ins. Co. ii. 549 

McClung i: Kelley i. 564, 627 

v. McClung ii. 91 

McClure v. McClure iii. 314, 362 

v. Richardson ii. 177 

v. Williams iii. 130, 219 

McClures v. Hammond ii. 177 

McClurg v. Kingsland ii. 305, 321 

v. Terry ii. 87 

McClurg's Appeal ii. 893 

McCluskey v. Providence Ins. Co. ii. 475 

McColl v. Oliver i. 186 

McComb v. Wright i. 123 ; iii. 12 

McConicke c. N. Y. & E. R. R. Co. 

i. 565 
McConihe v. McMann i. 486 

McConnell v. Dunlap iii. 246 

v. Gibson i. 95 

v. Hampton iii. 188 

v. Hector i. 226 

c. Hughes i. 561 



cxl 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



McConochie v. Sun Ins. Co. 


ii. 511 


McCormick r. Barnum 


ii. 'XV.) 


v. Connoly 


ii. 02 


v. Demary 


ii. 07 


v. Drummett 


iii. 41 


v. DunviLLe 


iii. 21U 


p. Hadden 


i. 570 


v. Littler 


i. 434 


v. Manny 


ii. 315 


v. Seymour ii. 


305, 308, 328 


v. Sullivant 


ii. 701 


v. Talcott 


ii. 314 


v. Trotter 


i. 280 


McCoy v. Artcher 


i. 61G 


r. Hock 


iii. 267 


v. Huffman 


i. 355 


v. It & D. M. R. Co. 


ii. 174 



v. Metropolitan Ins. Co. ii. 592 

McCracken v. Haywood iii. 505, 511 

v. West ii. 021 

McCrea v. Purmort iii. 

McCready r. Freedly i. 12 

v. Goldsmith ii. 431, 432, 433 

v. Thorn ii. 380 

McCreary v. Van Hook ii. 10 

McCreery r. Green ii. 805 

MoCreight r. Aiken i. 434, 438 

McCrillis v. Bartlett i. 436, 438 ; iii. 414 

v. Carlton ii. 815 

v. How i. 353 

McCulloch r. Dashiell i. 238 

v. Eagle Ins Co. i. 514, 515; ii. 540 

v. Judd iii. 05 

v. McKee i. 51 

McCullough v. Cox ii. 663 

v. Henderson iii. 82 

u. Myers ii. 827 

u. Somerville i. 207 ; iii. 382 

r. Wainwright ii. 080 

McCullum r. Gourley ii. 700 

McCune i\ Belt i. 204 

McCurry ;.'. Hooper i. 438 

McCutchen u. McGahay i. 387, 393, 304, 

.305, 390 

McDaniel v. Cornvvell i. 407 

v. King ii. 710 

McDaniell v. Bell ii. 827 

McDaniels v. Barnum iii. 130 

v. Flower Brook Manuf. Co. ii. 6 

u. Lapham ii. 823 

v. Robinson ii. 157, 166 

MeDavid v. Adams i. 384 

McDermot ». Laurence i. 172 

McDoal v. Yeomans 

McDole v. Purdy 

McDonald v. Bacon ii. 830 

v. Bennett iii. 266, 207 

v. Black ii. 565 

v. Edgerton ii. 160, 162, 105 

v. Eggleston i. 122 

v. Hewett i. 566 

v. Hodge iii. 231 

i'. Law, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 550 

v. Magruder i. 35, 204 

v. Morton i. 437 



ii. 3, 
iii. 295, 2fr ' 



McDonald r. Napier iii. 285 

u. Red Wing iii- 496 

v. Richardson ii. 369 

v. Smith iii. 137 

v. Western R. R. Co. ii. 212 

McDonnell v. Pope i. 543 

McDougal v. Paton iii. 464 

McDougall v. Maguire ii. 881 

McDowall v. Wood i. 407 

McDowell v. Chambers iii. 9 

v. Lucas iii. 352 

v. Rissell ii. 146 

u. Simms i. 526 

v. The Blackstone Canal Co. ii. 765 

McDowle'e case ii. 54 

McDuffee v. Portland, &c. R. Co. ii. 187 

McElfatrick v. Hicks iii. 138 

McElroy ». Buck iii. 15 

v. Nashua & Lowell R R. Corp. ii. 244 

McElvey v. Lewis i. 219 

McElwee v. Collins iii. 156 

McEntire v. McEntire i. 621 

McEvers v. Mason i. 303 

McEwen v. Montgomery Ins. Co. ii. 584 

v. Morey i. 561 

v. Smith i. 639 

McFarland r. Newman i. 623 

McFee v. S. Car. Ins. Co. ii. 534 

McGahay v. Williams i. 396 

McGan v. Marshall i. 335 

McGee v. Mathis iii. 481 

v. Metcalf ii. 29 

McGill v. Dowdle i. 176 

,.. McGill i. 165 

v. Rowand ii. 186, 276, 277 

r. Ware iii. 123, 127, 143 

McGilvery p. Capen ii. 422 

McGinley v. U. S. Ins. Co. ii. 597 

McGinn v. Pontiac, The ii. 438, 440 

v. Shaeffer i. 370 

McGivnev ;■. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 562 

McGoon "v. Ankeny i. 563 ; ii. 105, 909 

McGowan r. Dyer i. 79 

v. St. Louis, &c. R. Co. ii. 47 

McGowin r. Remington iii. 330 

McGrath v. ( 'lark ii. 853 

v. Robertson i. 407 

McGregor r, Comstock i. 129 

v. Gardner i. 77 

v. Penn i. 623 

v. Rhodes i. 275 

McGregory r. McGregory i. 331 

McGrew v. Browder i. 550 

McGruder ?•. Bank of Washington i. 311 

McGuire v. Bosworth i. 274, 283 

(/. Newkirk ii. 15 

v. Ramsey i. 171 

McHenry v. Duffleld i. 72 

v. Railway Co. ii. 196 

McHose v. Fulmer iii. 223 

r. Wheeler i. 161 

McHugh t-. Wells iii. 332 

Mcllvaine p. Harris iii. 35 

p. Wilkins iii. Ill 

Mclneffe v. Wheelock ii. 774 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



cxli 



Mclntire v. Carver iii. 270 

v. Patton ii. 940 

Mclntyre v. Agricultural Bank iii. 377 

v. Browne ii. 195 

v. Parks i, 662 

v. Williamson ii. 634 

Mclver v. Humble i. 21 3 

v. Richardson i. 509 ; ii. 13 

McJilton v. Love i. 254 ; ii. 864 

McKanna v. Merry i. 337 

McKay u. Bryson ii. 52 

u. Carrington iii. 334, 340 

v. Green iii. 298 

McKeage v. Hanover Fire Ins. Co. i. 546 

MeKecknie t>. Ward ii. 28 

McKee v. Barley iii. 312 

v. Hamilton i. 209 

McKeen v. Allen ii. 829 

v. Gammon iii. 248 

v. Oliphant ii. 832 

MuKelvey v. Jarvis ii. 764 

McKelvy's Appeal i. 224 

McKenna v. George i. 32, 34 

McKenzie v, Durant i. 309, 322 

u. Hancock i. 636 

v. McLeod i. 538 

v. Stevens i. 342 

v. Sykes ii. 625 

McKeon v. Caherty ii. 897 ; iii. 426 

v. Citizens R. R. Co. iii. 186 

v. Mclvor ii. 197 

McKesson v. Stanbury i. 329 

McKibbin v. Brown iii. 310 

McKinlay v. Morrish ii. 410 

McKinley v. Watkins i. 470, 479 

McKinney v. Alvis i. 247 

o. Bradlee i. 581 

v. Crawford i. 290 

v. Fort i- 618 

v. Jewett ii- 253 

v. Neil ii. 234, 239, 244 

v. Page ii. 843 

v. Pinckard i. 523 

v. Snyder iii. 92 

McKinnon v. McEwan iii. 196 

McKinsey v. Anderson ii. 863 

McKissick v. Millowners' Ins. Co. ii. 575 

McKnight v. Devlin i. 616 ; iii. 219, 

224 

v. Dunlop ii- 649, 655, 792 ; 

iii. 57 

v. Hogg i- 351 

v. Ratcliff i. 243; iii. 199 

McLane v. Sliarpe ij- 250 

McLaren v. Watson ii. 3, 4 

McLauchlin v. Lomas ii. 134, 137 

McLaughlin v. Hill iii- 202 

v. Piatti in- 310 

v, Waite ii- 108 

McLean v. Burbank ii. 180 

v. Dunn i- 574 

v. Republic Ins. Co. ii- 802 

v. Richardson iii- 224 

McLearn v. McLellan iii- 293 

McLellan v.. Cumberland Bank i. 28 



McLemore v. Powell 


i. 323 


McLeod, The 


ii. 459 


ii. Burroughs 


iii. 490 


McLoughlin v. Bishop 


i. 530 


McLure v. Ashby 


iii. 107 


o. Rush 


ii. 660 


v. Wilson 


i. 483 


McMahan v. Franklin 


i. 97 


McMahon v. Field 


iii. 193 


v. McClernan 


i. 187, 219 


v. Portsmouth Ins. Co. 


ii. 541, 584 


v. Sloan 


ii. 104 


McManus v. Crickett 


i. 114 


o. L. & Y. Ry. Co. 


ii. 266 



McMaster v. Ins. Co. of N. A. ii. 580 

McMasters v. Westchester Co. Ins. 

Co. ii. 587 

McMicken v. Beauchamp ii. 860 

McMillan v. Bull's Head Bank ii. 3, 31 

,-. McNeil iii. 392, 390 

v. Michigan South. R. R. Co. ii- 265 

v. Peacock ii. 78 

v. Vanderlip ii- 39 

McMillen v. Lee _ i. 347 

McMinn v. Richmonds i. 335, 353 

McMullen v. Rafferty iii. 98 

McMurry v. The State ii. 783 

McNair v. Gilbert i. 332 

McNairy v. Bell i. 30'1 

v. Thompson ii. 633 

McNamara v. King iii. 184 

McNaught v. McClaughry ii. 8 

McNaughter v. Casally iii. 224, 226, 

354 

McNaughton v. Conkling ii- 4 

v. Partridge iii- 354 

McNear v. Bailey ii- 828 

McNeil v. Colquhoon iii. 409 

v. Knott i- 299 

v. Magee iii- 310 

v. Reed i. 478, 492; iii. 197 

u. Tenth Bank i- 252 

v. Williams ii. 348 

McNeill it. McDonald i. 290 

McNeille v. Acton i- 227 

McNeilly v. Patchin i- 35 

v. Reid .i- 175 

McNorton v. Akers ii- 928 

McPherson v. Cox i. 129, 443 ; ii. 668 ; 

iii. 40, 285 

v. Gale ■ ii- I 47 

v. Rathbone i- l l J7 

v. Rees i- 462 

v. Walters ij- 939 

McQueen v. Farquhar j- 526 

McQuewans v. Hamlin i- 209 

McRae v. Creditors iii- 293 

McRaven v. Crisler ii- 853 

McRea v. Central Bank i- 545 

McRoberts i'. Washburne jii- 484 

McShane v. Hazlehurst iii- 372 

McSherry v. Brooks i- 18>> 

McSparran v. Neeley i. 436 ; ii- 862 

McStea v. Matthews i- 226 

McVey v. Cantrell i- 408 



cxlii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



McWhortor v. McMahan iii. 14 

Me Williams v. Hopkins ii. 875 

M'Allister v. Reab iii. 110 

M' Arthur v. Seaforth iii. 212, 220 

M'Bride v. Marine Ins. Co. ii. 425, 447, 

513 

M'Cabe v. Morehead iii. 217, 218 

M'Carty v. Colvin ii. 758 

v. Decaix ii. 734 

M'CIarin v. Nesbit ii. 753 

M'Collum v. Gushing ii. 13 

M'Comb b. Wright iii. 12 

M'Combie w. Davics i. 93, 102; iii. 270 

M'Connel v. Hall ii. 781, 787 

M'Cormick v. Fitzmorris ii. 858 

M'Coy v. M'Coy ii. 91 

M'Crnney r. Alden iii. 125 

M'Crea v. Purmort ii. <j;-i2 

M'Culloch v. M'Culloch ii. 720 

v. Royal Excli. Ass. Co. ii. 470 

M'Daniel v. Hughes ii. 738 

M'Dermid v. Red path iii. 219 

M'Dermott p. S. G. Owens, The ii. 385 

v. U. S. Ins. Co. ii. 833 

M'Donald v. Carr ii. 617 

u. Rainor ii. 871 

u, Scaife iii. 218 

i'. Trafton ii. 913 

M'Donnell v. Branch Bank iii. 08 

M'Donough r. Dannery ii. 437 

M'Dowell v. Tyson ii. 877 

M'Elmoyle v. Cohen ii. 721 

M'Ewan v. Smith i. 652 ; iii. 444 

M'Fadden v. Jenkyns iii. 315 

M'Gaw t>. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 409, 414, 417, 

510 
M'Gillivray v. Simson ii. 882 ; iii. 259 
M'Gregor v. Ins. Co. of Penn. ii. 478, 609, 

677 

M'Guire v. Warder iii. 123 

MTIai-d u. Whetcroft ii. 77G 

MTntyre v. Carver ii. 148 

v. Parks ii. 700 

o. Scott ii. 400 

M'lver v. Humble ii. 390 

M'Kenzie v. Hancock iii. 227 

v. Xevins ii. 766 ; iii. 2.^3 

M'Kesson v. M'Dowell iii. 143, 145 

M'Kinstry v. Solomons ii. 828 

M'Lanahan v. Universal Ins. Co. ii. 523, 

525, 528 

M'Leles v. Hale iii. 43 

M'Lelhm v. Maine Ins. Co. ii. 520, 537 

M'Mechen's Lessee v. Grundy iii. 442 

M'Menomy !•. Ferrers iii. 382, 42H 

M'Millan v. M'Neil iii. 5H7 

v. Union Ins. Co. ii. 469, 527 

M'Nitt v. Clark ii. 790 

M'Queen v. Burns iii. 123 

M'Quirk v. Penelope, The ii. 460 

Meach v. Meach i. 265 

Mead v. Cliase iii. 45 

u. Davidson ii. 486 ; iii. 329 

v. Degolyer ii. 655, 792 

v. Small i. 308 



Mead v. Thompson 


i. 551 


v. Wheeler 


iii. 170 


v. Young 


i. 285 


Meade v. Brothers 


i. 61 


Meader v. Scott 


ii. 878 


Meador v. Hughes 


i. 215 


Meadows v. Meadows 


iii. 12 


v. Tanner 


iii. 370 


Meaghan, In re 


iii. 449 



Meaher v. Cox i. 215, 221 ; iii. 429 

Meany v. Head iii. 250 

Mears v. Humboldt Ins. Co. ii. 547 

v. Swomestedt i. 68 

Meason v. Cline iii. 321 

v. Kaine i. 185 

v. Philips iii. 231, 232 

Mechanics Bank v. Bank of Colum- 
bia i. 54 

u. Earp ii. 112, 113 

v. Edwards iii. 132 

v. Griswold i. 308 

v. Merchants Bank i. 91, 313 ; 

ii. 112 

v. New York, &c. R. R. Co. i. 43, 44, 
45, 331 
Mechanics Bank of Alexa. v. Seton 

iii. 325, 330, 331 
Mechanics & Farmers Bank v. Capron 

iii. 464 
Mechanics & Traders Bank v. Debolt 

iii. 486, 498 

!•. Gordon ii. 115, 193 

Mechanics, &c. Bank v. Farmers, &c. 

Bank i. 556 

Mechelen e. Wallace i. 485 

v. Williams iii. 19 

Medbury v. Hopkins ii. 700, 721 

v. Watrous i. 355, 360; ii. 40 

Metldlemore v. Goodale i. 259 

Medeiros r. Hill ii. 520 

Jledill i'. Collier i. 161 

Medina v. Stoughton i. 614 

Medley r Hughes ii. 416 

Medlin i'. Piatt County ii. 856 

Medora, The ii. 404 

Medway f. Needham ii. 723, 724, 729 

Meech !'. Robinson ii. 445 

o. Smith i. 72 ; iii. 110 

Meek v. Atkinson i. 444 

r. Kettlewell iii. 315 

Meeker v. Jackson i. 332 

Meert v. Moessard i. 245 

Megginson r. Harper iii. 92 

Meggs v. Binns i. 126 

Megrath r. Gray i. 324 ; iii. 411 

r. Robertson iii. 415 

Mehan v. Thompson ii. 756 

Meidel v. Anthis iii. 184 

Meigs v. Mut. Ins. Co. ii. 488 

Meincke v. Falk iii. 60 

Meist r. Penn. K. Co. ii. 242 

Meister v. Moore ii. 86 

Melan v. Fitz James ii. 719; iii. 391 

Melancon «. Robichaux i. 627 

Melchert v. American Un. Tel. Co. ii. 896 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



cxliii 



Meldrum v. Snow i. 581 

Melhado v. Porto Alegre, &c. R. Co. i. 155 

Melledge v. Boston Iron Co. ii. 756 

Mellen v. Boarman ii. 877 

v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 477, 493, 588 

v. Moore i. 58 

Mellerish r. Rippin i. 322 

Melley v. Casey i. 411 

Mi'llish i\ Andrews ii. 535 

v. Motteux i. 634 ; ii. 394 

r. Simeon i. 327 

Mellona, The ii. 434 

Mellor v. Spateman iii. 233, 234 

v. Watkins i. 543, 548 ; ii. 665 

Melius v. Silsbee ii. 305 

Melody v. Chandler i. 613 

Melville v. Brown iii. 201 

v. De Wolf ii. 43 

v. Hayden ii. 640 

Melvin u. Proprietors, &c. on Mer. 

River ii. 638 

Memphis, &c. R. R. Co. u. Blakeney 

ii. 817 

Menagh v. Whitwell i. 240 

Menard o. Scudder ii. 13, 16 

Mendel, Ex parte iii. 420 

Menetone v. Athawes ii. 140 

Menham v. Edmonson iii. 425 

Mentor, The ii. 460 

Mentz v. Renter i. 383 

Mercantile Ins. Co. v. Chase ii. 254 

v. Holthaus ii. 586 

v. State Ins. Co. ii. 478, 491 

Mercein v. Smith ii. 876 

Mercer v. Irving iii. 168 

v . Jones iii. 209, 210 

v. Selden iii. 103 

v. Whall ii. 43 

Merchant, The ii. 441 

Merchant Shipping Co. v. Armitage 

ii. 415 

Merchants Bank v. Bangs i. 579 

v. Easley i. 307 

v. N. Jersey Steam Nav. Co. ii. 255 

v. Spalding iii. 355 

v. Spicer ii. 765 

v. State Bank ii. 113 

v. Trenholm i. 102 

Merchants Dispatch Co. v. Hallock ii. 203 

v. Smith ii. 172 

Merchants Ins. Co. v. Clapp ii. 480 

v. Morrison ii. 531 

v. Shillito ii. 485 

Merchants Trans. Co. v. Bolles ii. 257 

Merchants, &c. v. Grant i. 364 

Merchants, &c. Co. v. Bolles ii. 187 

v. Goodrich ii. 897 

v. Story ii. 151 

Meredith v. Gilpin ii. 870 

v. Hinsdale "■ 719 

v. Meigh iii. 54 

Merele v. Wells _«■ 23 

Meres v. Ansell ji. 679 

Merest v. Harvey iii- 183 

Merethew v. Andrews iii. 347 



Meretony v. Dunlope 
Merewether v. Shaw 
Merithew v. Sampson 
Meriwether r. Bird 
Merkle v. Wehrheim 
Merle v. Andrews 
Merrell v. Tice 
Merriam v. Bayley 

v. Cunningham 

v. Field 

v. Granite Bank 



ii. 489 

ii. 77 

ii. 445, 446 

ii. 872, 873 

iii. 311 

i. 448 

ii. 332 

i. 463 

i. 338 

i. 626, 627 

i. 289 



v. Hartford, &c. Railroad Co. ii. 188, 

193 

v. Wilkins i. 305 

Merrick v. Avery ii. 392 

e. Gordon i. 176 

e. Santvord i. 161 

Merrick's case iii. 436 

Merrick's Estate iii. 409, 427 

Merril v. Frame ii. 647 

Merrill v. Bartlett ii. 391 

v. Boylston Ins. Co. ii. 534 

t: Gore ii. 633 

v. Grinnell ii. 239 

v. Merrill iii. 174 

v. Smith i. 385 

Merrills v. Law iii. 121, 125 

Merrimac Man. Co., The, v. Garner 

ii. 372, 373, 374, 378 

Merrimack, The ii. 519 

Merrimack Co. Bank v. Brown ii. 20, 768 

Merrimack Manuf. Co. v. Quintard iii. 210 

Merriman r. Col. Butts, The ii. 302 

v. Moore i. 245 

Merritt v. Benson iii. 145 

v. Brown iii. 338, 339 

v. Claghorn ii. 156, 157 

v. Clason i. 583 ; iii. 7, 9 

c. Day i. 225 ; iii. 90 

v. Earle ii. 171 

v. Johnson ii. 141, 380 

?.. Old Colony R. R. Co. ii. 197 

v. Pollys i. 219, 230 

t>. Seaman i- 146 

u. Todd i. 295 

Merry v. Prince ii- 474 

Merrywether v. Nixan i. 36, 37 

Mers v. Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 559 

Merse ». Seymour iii. 307 

Mershon r. Hobensack ii. 169, 171, 175, 434 

v. National Ins. Co. ii. 545 

Mertens i\ Adcock i. 574 

c. Winnington i. 326 

Merwin v. Butler ii. 179, 196 

t>. Playford i. 177 

Mesner i>. Suffolk Bank ii. 438 

Messenger v. Clarke i. 385 

r. Penn. R. Co. ii- 187 

v. Southey i- 322 

Messer v. Woodman i. 566 

Messerole v. Tynberg ii. 354, 355, 36_3, 

Messier v. Amery _ i. 105 

Messmore v. New Tork Shot Co. i. 627 ; 

iii. 199 



cxliv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Mestaer v. Gillespie 


iii. 357 


Metcalf v. Bruin 


ii. 21 


». Cooke 


i. 409 


c. Hess 


ii. 157 


v. Ives 


ii. 828 


v. Pilcher 


iii. 153, 1 50 


v. Scholey 


iii. 441 


v. Taylor 


ii. 063 



Metcalfe i: Britannia Iron Works ii. 418, 

419 
v. Parry ii. 534 

v. Pulvertoft iii. 317 

u. Richardson i. 322 

v. Shaw i. 388 

Methodist Episcopal Church v. Gar- 

vey i. 484 

Metropolitan Wash. Mach. Co. v. 

Earle ii. 321 

Mettler v. Moore iii. 233 

Metzer, Ex parte. iii. 421 

Meux v. Humphries i. 211 ; ii. 894 

Mews v. Carr iii. 13 

Mexborough v. Bower ii. 845 

Mey i-. So. Car. Ins. Co. ii. 487, 532 

Meyer, Ex parte iii. 421 

c Atkins i. 225 

«. Everth i. 589 

c. Hanchett i. 94 

v. Haworth i. 465 

v. Hehner i. 75 ; ii. 745 

v. Hibsher i. 307 

v. Isaac ii. 639, 640 

a. Johnston i. 613 

o. Lemcke ii. 188 

r. Peek ii. 410 

Meyerhoff v. Eroehlich iii. 76 

Meyerstein r. Barber iii. 274 

Meymot, Er parte iii. 416, 472 

Meynell v. Surtees i. 506 

Meyrick v. Anderson i. 147 

Miaghan v. Hartford Ins. Co. i. 83 

Michael v. Mills iii. 245 

». Tredwin ii. 531 

Michaell v. Stockworth i. 27 

Michaels v. N. Y. R. R. Co. ii. 172 

Michelen v. Wallace iii. 36 

Michell v. Burlington iii. 433, 481 

Mich. Cent. R. Co. v. Dolan ii. 46 

Michigan Central R. R. v. Hale ii. 203, 

208 

v. Ward ii. 203, 208 

Michigan Life Ins. Co. v. Bowes ii. 010, 

618 

Michigan State Bank v. Gardner i. 102 

v. Hastings iii. 480 

Michigan, &c. R. Co. v. Carrow ii. 274 

i . Caster iii. 207 

r. Coleman ii. 240 

v. Heaton ii. 270, 271 

i: McDonough ii. 174 

u. Mineral Springs Manuf. Co. ii. 232 

v. Oehm ii. 213 

r. Phillips i. 557, 568, 574 

Michoud v, Girod i. 95 

Mickey v. Burlington Ins. Co. ii. 562, 573 



Mickle v. Peet i. 185 

Mickles v. Colvin i. 292 

Micklewaite v. Winter ii. 129 

Middlebrook v. Corwin i. 545, 547 

Aliddlebury College v. Chandler i. 337 

Middlesex, The ii. 208, 415, 427 

Middleton r. Bryan iii. 218 

v. Findler i. 110 

v. Hill ii. 875 

u. Hoge i. 361 

u. Janverin ii. 723 

v. Weeks ii. 836 

v. Welles i. 93 

Middleton Bank v. Jerome i. 273 

Middlewood e. Blakes ii. 532 

Midgley v. Lovelace i. 22, 261 

Midland Ry. Co. v. Bromley ii. 190 

Mihills Manuf. Co. v. Day iii. 186 

Milan & R. Plank R. Co. v. Husted 

iii. 498 

Milbourn v. Ewart ii. 852 

Milburn v. Beach iii. 184 

v. Belloni i. 637 

v. Codd i. 184 

v. Gayther i. 196 

Mildmay v. Folgham ii. 477 

Miles v. Cattle ii. 168 

i'. Conn. Ins. Co. ii. 592 

v. Durnford i. 143 

v. Edelen i. 570 

v. Gorton i. 046, 653 ; iii. 262, 274 

v. Ogden ii. 765 

v. Williams iii. 437 

Miletus, The ii. 428 

Milford !'. Worcester ii. 87 

Milks v. Rich iii. 27 

Mill Dam Foundry v. Hovey ii. 603 

Millar v. Hall iii. 397 

v. Taylor ii. 329, 330, 336, 342 

Millard r. Eamsdell i. 229 

Millaudon v. Atlantic Ins. Co. ii. 566 

v. K. O. Ins. Co. ii. 570 

v. Western Ins. Co. ii. 578, 582 

Miller v. Adsit ii. 104 

u. Austen i. 279 

v. Baker i. 548 

v. Ball iii. 348 

v. Ballard i. 484 

v. Bartlet i. 180 

v. Berkey ii. 24 

v. Brigham i. 220 

v. Chetwood i. 522 

v. Cook iii. 17 

r. Covert ii. 751 

c . Drake i. 459, 478, 498, 578 

u. Eagle Life Ins. Co. ii. 005, 607 

v. Gaither ii. 880 

v. Gaston ii. 3 

v. Gilleland ii. 853 

v. Goddard ii. 39, 657_ 

v. Hackley i. 325 

v. Hannibal, &c. R. Co. ii- 647 

v. Hayes ii- 73 

v. Henlan iii. 372 

v. Hines i. 207 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



cxlv 



Miller v. Howell 


ii. 917 


v. Hull 


iii. 130 


v. Johnson 


ii. 871 


o. Kelley 


ii. 407 


o. Kendig 


i. 505 


v. Kennedy 


ii. 843 


v. Kreiter 


i. 258 


v. Lea 


ii. 882 


v. Levi 


i. 548 


v. Lynch 


ii. 901 


v. Manice 


i. 205 


r. Mariner's Church 


iii. 190 


v. Marston 


iii. 266 


v. lit Brier 


i. 540 


i: Me Gain 


ii. 787 


v. MeElroy 


ii. 348 



v. Miller i. 265, 266 ; ii. 834 ; iii. 91, 97 

v. Mut. Ben. Ins. Co. ii. 543, 591 

v. Pelletier iii. 10 

v. Pittsburg & Cleveland R. Co. ii. 664 

v. Piatt ii. 939 

v. Price i. 176 ; iii. 290 

v. Race i. 272, 289, 329, 330 

v. Reed ii. 861 

v. Rosier ii. 73 

v. Sawyer i. 34 

v. Shields i. 535 

r. Sims i. 354 

v. Smith i. 654 

v. State iii. 102 

v. Steam Nav. Co. ii. 172, 197, 211 

y. Stem ii. 28, 29 

v. Stewart ii. 16, 18 

v. Tassell i. 615 

v. Thompson ii. 640 

r. Travers ' i. 531 ; ii. 681, 693, 695 

r. Whittfer i. 251 

v. Young i. 622 

Millerd v. Thorn ii. 756 

Millett v. Parker ii. 10 

!•. Snowden ii. 242 

Milligan v. Cooke iii. 337, 357, 358 

v. The B. F. Bruce ii. 458 

r. Wedge i. 116 

Milliken v. Brown i. 27 ; ii. 750 

v. Dehon i. 108 ; ii. 129 

v. Loring i. 230 

v. Milliken iii. 364, 366 

v. Pratt ii. 700, 730 

v. Thorndike i. 531 

Millikin v. Brandon iii. 416 

Milliman v. N. Y. Cent., &c. R. Co. ii. 251 

Millington v. Fox ii. 362, 373, 377 

Millon v. Salisbury ii. 131 

Millot v. Lovett ii. 458 

Mills, Ex parte iii. 420 

v. Alderbury Union i. 496 

v. Ball i. 647 

v. Bank of U. S. i. 91, 322; ii 669, 

676 
v. Barber i. 200, 201, 207 

v. Bay ley i- 257 ; ii 658 

v. Bell 'ii- 242 

v. Catlin ii. 634, 638 

v. Dennis i- 149 

VOL. I. 



Mills v. Duryee ii. 740, 741, 742 

v. Farmers Ins. Co. ii. 576 

v. Fellows i. 187 

v . Fowkes ii. 763 ; iii. 79, 82 

v. Graham i. 358 

v. Graves ii. 939 

•>. Hunt i. 527 ; iii. 49 

!'• Hyde i. 34 

v. Jefferson iii. 113 

r. Ladbroke i. 16, 25 

v. Lee i. 468, 469 

v. Mills ii. 895 

v. Oddy i. 525 

v. Shult ii. 408 

v. United States Bank i. 313 

v. Voorhees iii. 337 

v. Williams iii. 483 

v. Wright ii. 645 

u. Wyman i. 351, 462 

Millward v. Littlewood ii. 69, 71 

Miln v. Spinola ii. 391, 400 

Milne v. Duncan i. 496 

v. Gratrix ii. 847 

v. Huber i. 489 
v. Moreton ii. 701 ; iii. 407, 409, 436 

Milner v. Harewood i. 371 

o. Milnes i. 383 

v. Tucker i. 638 

Milnes v. Cowley i. 466 

u. Duncan i. 496 

r. Gery ii. 845 ; iii. 332, 360 

v. Milnes iii. 407 

Miltenberger v. Beacom ii. 562, 567 

Milton v. Mosher i. 123, 611 

v. Rowland i. 036 

Milward v. Hibbert ii. 4^5 

Milwaukee, &c. R. Co. v. Arms iii. 186 

Mims c. Mitchell ii. 134 

Minard v. Mead i. 56, 392 

Minden v. Cox i. 348 

Miner v. Bradley ii. 651 

v. Gaw i. 208 

v. Harbeck ii. 463 

»■ Hoyt i. 290 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 543 

v. Tagert ii. 490 
Miners Bank v. United States iii. 486, 490 

Minerva, The ii. 437, 457, 466 

Minet, Ex parte iii. 15, 462, 464 

Minett v. Forrester i. 76 

Mingus !'. Pritchett ii. 784 
Minn. Oil Co. v. Collier Lead Co. i. 51-3 ; 

ii. 296 

Minnit v. Whinery i. 188, 202 

Minns v. Morse iii. 63 

Minock v. Shortbridge i. 354 

Minor r. Michie ii. 783 

v. Walter ii. 881 

Minot v. Joy i. 538 

v. Paine i. 159 

v. Tappan iii. 426, 431 

v. Thayer iii. 476 

Minter v. Pacific R. Co. i. 41 

Minturn v. Col. Ins. Co. ii. 491 

v. Fisher i. 315 



cxlvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Minturn v. Marmfact. Ins. Co. ii. 475 

v. Seymour i. 52-2 

v. Warren Ins. Co. ii. 483 

Mirabita r. Imperial Bank i. 579 

Miranda v. City Bank of N. Orleans i. 91 

Misner v. Granger i. 031 

Missouri, The ii. 392 

t\ Iowa ii. 039 

Missouri's Cargo, The ii. 436 

Missouri Ins. Co. v. Kittle iii. 117 

Missouri, &c. Co. u. Hannibal, &c. 

R. R. Co. ii. 190 
Missroon v. Waldo i- 027 
Mitchell r. Beal i. 569 
v. Billingsley iii. 183 
v. Burton ii. 19 
!■. Chambers ii. 389 
v. Cotten ii. 28 
v. Cragg ii. 823 
v. Cross i. 318 
r. Ball i. 188; ii. 763, 768 
v. Darthez ii. 647 
r. Degrand i. 318 
<■. Edie i. 650 ; ii. 504 
v. Fuller i. 287 
v. Gile i. 558 
v. Griffin iii. 27 
v. Harris ii. 844 
v. Hazen iii. 240 
v. Holmes i. 380 
v. Homfray i. 203 
v. Hughes iii. 426, 433, 437 
v. Kingman i. 434 ; ii. 685 
v. Lancashire & Yorkshire Rail- 
way ii. 210 
v. Lapage i. 588 
v. M'Lemore iii. 98 
v. M'Millan iii. 409 
v. Merrill ii. 786 
v. Mims i. 79; ii. 134 
v. Newhall ii. 670 
v. Cldfield ii. 875 
i'. Penn. R. R. Co. ii. 46 
z>. Reed i. 187 
v. Reynolds ii. 880, 891 
v. Roulstone i. 198 
v. Sellman iii. 72, 76 
v. Smith i. 489 
v. St. Andrew's Bay Land Co. i. 52 
v. Steinmetz iii. 334 
v. Taylor ii. 380 
v. Union Ins. Co. ii. 605, 606 
v. Warner i. 144, 260 
r. Wheaton ii. 751 
v. Williamson i. 458 
v. Wilson iii. 340 
r. Wjnslow iii. 424, 441 
v. Worden ii. 015 
Mitcheson v. Oliver ii. 396 
Mitford v, Mitford i. 381 ; iii. 424, 437 
<-. Walcot i. 326 
Mix !\ Bloomington Bank i. 293 
v. Shattuck i. 225; iii. 87 
v. Singleton ii. 5 
Mixer v. Coburn i. 495, 618 



Mixer v. Howarth 
Mizen v. Pick 
Moak v. Johnson 
Moale v. Buchanan 
Moar v. Wright 



iii. 60, 61, 62 

i. 401 

iii. 248 

iii. 343, 354 

i. 254 



Mobile, &c. R. R. Co. c. Jarboe ii. 270 

Mobley v. Clark i. 307 

v. Lombat i. 233 

Mock v. Kelley ii. 60 

Mockbee v. Gardner i. 616 

Mockman v. Shepherdson ii. 43 

Moddewell v. Keever i. 173, 201 

Moderwell i;. Mullison i. 168 

Moehring v. Mitchell ii. 613 

Moens v. Heyworth ii. 912, 913 

Moc-t r. Couston ii. 376 

Moffat r. M'Dowell iii. 382 

i\ Parsons i. 46; ii. 747, 774 

v. Smith i. 532 

v. Strong i. 541 

v. Ward ii. 487 

Moggridge, Ex parte iii. 465 

r. Davis iii. 470 

v. Jones i. 495 

Mohawk Bank v. Broderick i. 296 

v. Burrows ii. 875 

Mohawk Bank Bridge Co. v. Utica & 

Sch. R. R. Co. ii. 6.39 

Mohr !•. Boston, &c. R. Co. i. 647 

v. C, &c. R. Co. ii. 210 

Moies v. Bird i. 275, 283 

Moir v. Royal Exch. Ass. Co. ii. 521 

Moist's Appeal ii. 51 

Moley v. Brine . i. 354 

Molineux, Ex parte iii. 420 

Moller i>. Young ii. 413 

Mollet v. Brayne ii. 940 

Mollett v. Whackerbarth ii. 855, 856 

Molloy v. Egan iii. 309, 341, 372 

Molony v. Kernan i. 95 

Molson v. Hawley i. 293 ; iii. 451 

Molton v. Camroux i. 437 ; iii. 414 

Molwo, &c. Co. t>. Court of Wards i. 183 
Molyn's case ii. 636, 638 

Monadnock R. Co. v. Manufacturers 

Ins. Co. ii. 561 

Moncrief v. Ely i. 351 

Moncrieff v. Goldsborough iii. 310 

Moncure ;-. Dermott iii. 153 

Mondel v. Steel i. 494 

Monitor Ins. Co. o. Buffura i. 49 

v. Young i. 96 

Monk ?•. Clayton i. 41, 43 

Monmouth Ins. Co. v. Lowell ii. 639 

Monnell v. Burns ii- 44 

Monnett v. Sturges iii. 113 

Monro v. De Chemant i. 75 

Monroe »>. Conner i. 203 

v. Douglas ii. 742 

Montacute v. Maxwell ii. 77 ; iii. 14, 32, 

352 

Montague v. Benedict i. 388, 390 

v. Espinnasse i. 387 

v. Perkins i. 272 

v. Sewell iii. 117 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



cxlvii 



Montague v. Smith 




ii. 837 


Moore v. Hart 


ii. 77 


Montany o. Rock 




i. Oil 


v. Hendrick 


iii. 101 


Monte Allegre, The 




i. 02, 038 


v. Hershey 


i. 436 


Montefiori v. Montefiori 


ii 


73; iii. 471 


v. Hill 


i. 247 


Montelius v. Charles 




i. 302 


v. Hitchcock 


iii. 270 


Montesquieu v. Sandys 




i. 93 


v. Hylton 


iii. 126 


Montgomery v. Dillingham 


ii. 28 


v. Hyman 


iii. 75 


v. Hughes 




ii. 5 


v. Inhabitants of Abbot ii. 250 


v. Kellogg 




ii. 16 


o. Jones 


iii. 420 


v. Kirksey 




iii. 40:! 


v. Kendall 


ii. 907 


v. Lampton 




i. 403 


v. Lowrey 


i. 252 


v. Middleton 




i. 5yo 


c. Magrath 


ii. 634 


v. Robinson 




i. 513 


v. McKinlay 


i. 587, 6U3 


o. The T. P. Leathers 


ii. 437, 4:58, 


v. Meagher 


iii. 189 






442 


v. Moore 


i. 95 


v. Walker 




i. 294 


v. Mountcastle 


iii. 15 


Montgomery Co. v. American Emi- 


o. Murdock 


ii. 901 


grant Co. 




ii. 814 


v. Platte Co. 


iii. 173 


Montgomery County Bank 


v. Al- 


v. Randolph 


iii. 374 


bany City Bank i. 


303, 


305 ; ii. 112 


t\ Ross 


iii. 38 


Montgomery, &e. R. R 


Co. 


v . Ed- 


v. Sample 


i. 235 


monds 




ii. 270 


v. Small 


iii. 348 


Montova v. London Ass. 


Co. 


ii. 428, 497 


v. Stone 


i. 75 


Montreal, The 




ii. 469 


v. Taylor 


ii. 487 


Montreal Bank v. Page 




i. 225 


v. Turbeville 


ii. 915 


Montriou v. Jefferies 




iii. 206 


v. Vance 


iii. 118, 157 


Monys v. Leake 




i. 488 


v. Viele 


i. 464 


Mooar v. Harvey 




ii. 709 


v. Voughton 


iii. 112, 159 


Moody, Ex parte 




iii. 472 


(.. AVeber 


i. 531 


u. Baker 




iii. 194 


c. Woolsey 


ii. 610 


v. Blake 




i. 556 


Moorehead v. Gilmore 


i. 200 


v. Brown i. 


566; 


ii. 380, 650 


v. Wriston 


i. 215 


u. Fiske 




ii. 307, 314 


Moorhouse v. Crangle 


iii. 21 


v. Mahurin 




ii. 753, 779 


Mooring v. Mobile M. D. 


& M. I. Co. 


v. Payne 




i. 235 




ii. 757 


i: Threlkeld 




i. 280 


Moors v. Albro 


iii. 414, 4:2 


v. "Webster 




iii. 284 


Moorson r. Greaves 


ii. 420 


Moon v. Durden 




ii. 896, 897 


Moran v. Baudin 


ii. 458, 406 


v. Guardians of Whitney 


Union 


v. Miami Corns. 


ii. 943 






1.90; ii. 670 


v. Prather 


i. 210 


Mooney v. Lloyd 




i. 128 


Morancy v. Quarles 


ii. 852 


u. Musser 




i. 108 


Moravia v. Levy 


i. 185 


Moor v. Veazie 




i. 251 


Morcure v. Dermott 


iii. 129 


v. Wilson 




i. 73, 89 


Mordaunt v. Moncreiffe 


ii. 93 


Moore, Ex parte 




iii. 416 


Mordy v. Jones 


ii. 510 


v. Abernathy 




i. 367 


More v. Howland 


iii. 144, 158 


v. Adam 




iii. 194 


v. Mayhew 


i. 80 


v. American Transportation Co. 


Morean v. U. S. Ins. Co. 


ii. 509 






ii. 427, 455 


Moreau v. Edwards 


i. 172 


v. Barthop 




i. 571 


v. Sarlarans 


i. 168 


v. Blake 




iii. 372 


Morehouse v. Comstock 


i. 603, 026 


v. Campbell 


i. 


508 ; ii. 667 


Moreland v. Lawrence 


iii. 113 


u. Clementson 




ii. 745, 938 


Mores v. Conham 


ii. 120 ; iii. 253 


v. Coffield 




i. 308, 317 


o. Mead 


i. 618 


v. Collins 




iii. 382 


v. Missouri, The 


ii. 392 


v. Cornell 




i. 405 


Moreton v. Hardern 


i. 209 


v. Crofton 




iii. 316, 318 


Morewood v. Pollock 


ii. 209, 427 


v. Dalton 




i. 265 


Morford v. Bliss 


ii. 939 


v. Davis 




i. 176 


Morgan, Ex parte 


iii. 422 


v. Edwards 




iii. 347 


v. Bain 


ii. 813; iii. 224 


v. Evans 




ii. 256 


v. Biddle 


ii. 380, 395 


v. Fitzwater 




i. 468 


v. Bliss 


ii. 913 


v, Foley 




iii. 323 


v. Blitzenberger 


iii. 38 


v. Fox 




iii. 42 


v. Brundett 


iii. 442 


v. Gano 




i. 187 


v. Campbell 


i. 552 



cxlviii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Morgan v. Congdon 


ii. 148 


Morris v. Jones 


iii. 149 


i'. Davis 


i. 648 


v. Joseph 


i. 137 


v. Elford 


i. 110 


v. Langdale 


iii. 194 


v. Fenclier 


i. 615 


v. Lee 


i. 280 


v. Gregg 


iii. 212 


v. Lowell Manuf. Co. ii. 324 


r. Griffith 


iii. 38 


v. Martin 


i. 394 


v. Graff 


ii. 700 


v. Miller 


ii. 82 


r. Helier 


iii. 198 


v. Moore 


ii. 936. 939 


v. Ins. Co. of N. A. 


ii. 415 


v. Morris 


i. 149, 238 


r. Malleson 


i. 200 


v. Norfolk 


i. .>3 


r. Mather ii 


. 842; iii. 159 


v. Phelps 


iii. 243 


v. McUhee 


ii. 720 


v. Redfield 


ii. 58 


v. Milman iii. 


309, 350, 300 


i'. Robinson 


ii. 398, 456 


v. Kunes 


i. 185 


v. Shryoek 


i. 615 


v. Pebrer 


ii. 896 


u. Silter 


ii. 061 


V. l'C'L't 


i. 325 


v. Stacey 


iii. 15 


v. Kainsford iii. 


314, 317, 363 


u. Summerl 


i. 93 


i. Eeintzel 


i. 331 


v. Tillson 


i. 536 


c. Richards 


ii. 890, 900 


v. Thompson 


i. 616, 618 


v. Richardson 


i. 216 


v. Vanderen 


ii. 860 


u. Rowlands 


iii. by 


v. Way 


iii. 377 


v. Schermerhorn 


iii. 117, 136 


Morris Run Coal Co. v. 


Barclay Coal 


o. Spangler 


ii. 941 


Co. 


ii. 888 


f. Stearns 


i. 170 


Morrison v. Blodgett i 


232, 235, 200, 237 


i'. Stell 


i. 75 


v. Bowman 


i. 46 


v. Taylor 


i. 568 


v. Buchanans 


ii. 836 


v. Tener 


i. 90 


v. Davis 


iii. 194 


v. Thames Bank 


i. 385 


v. Deaderick 


i. 252, 253 


v. Thomas 


i. 140 


v. Dingley 


i. 664, 505 


v. Vale of Neath Co. 


ii. 47 


v. Galloway 


ii. 063 


(.-. Walton 


iii. 72, 92 


v. Kurtz 


i. 289 


v. Woodworth 


i. 328 


v. Moreland 


ii. 882 


r. Yarborough 


ii. 64, 65, 70 


v. Morrison 


ii. 91 


Mori arty v. Bailey 


i. 208 


v. Muspratt 


ii. 597, 598 


Morison v. Thompson 


i. 92 


u. Peay 


iii. 316, 348 


Morisone v. Arbuthnot 


ii. 78 


u. Salmon 


ii. 8(12 


Moritz v. Hoffman 


ii. 78 


v. Smith 


ii. 750 


v. Melhorn 


ii. 65 


v. Tenn. Ins. Co. 


ii. 561, 564, 574 


Morluy v. Attenborough 


i. 614, 615 


v. Woodley 


i. 505 


v. Inglis 


ii. b79 


Morriss v. Harvey 


i. 248 


v. Polhill 


i. 144 


Morriset r. King 


iii. 151 


Morly !'. Boothby 


i. 456; ii. 8 


Morrow v. Delaney 


i. 564 


Morning Light, The 


ii. 431 


(.-. Reed 


i. 504 


Morphett v. Jones 


iii. 66, 348 


u. Starke 


ii. 746 


Morphy v. Blanchin 


ii. 810 


v. Waltz 


i. 509 


Morrell v. Fisher 


ii. 681, 082 


Morse, A'.r parte 


iii. 420 


v. Frith ii. 624, 625 ; 


iii. 72, 74, 75 


v. Auburn 


iii. 177 


v. Irving Ins. Co. 


ii. 572 


v. Bellows 


i. 210, 254; ii. 746 


v. Trenton Ins. Co. 


ii. 605 


v. Brainard 


ii. 220 


Morrill v. Aden 


i. 338, 350 


v. Buffalo Ins. Co. 


ii. 547 


v. Colehour 


iii. 39 


u. Crawford 


i. 434 ; iii. 178 


u. Nightingale 


iii. 219 


v. Earl 


i. 383 


v. Wallace 


i. 023 


i: Faulkner 


ii. 933 


Morris, Ex parte 


iii. 420 


v. Goddard 


ii. 940 


In re 


iii. 409 


v. Gould 


iii. 506 


v. Abat 


iii. 242 


v. Hovey 


iii. 464 


v. Ashbee 


ii. 336, 344 


v. Lowell 


iii. 478 


i . Bowen 


i. 62 


v. Massachusetts Bank i. 301 ; ii. 113 


i. Clay 


i. 434 


v. Merest 


iii. 332, 338 


r. Cleasby i. 


100, 101, 497 


v. Royal 


i. 94 


n. Cornell 


ii. 405, 400 


t. Sherman 


i. 663 


v. Edgington 


i. 531 


c. Slue 


ii. 175, 182, 274 


v. Eves 


iii. 301 


v . St. Paul Ins. Co. 


ii. 544 


v. Grier 


i. 131 


v. Welton 


i. 349 


v. Husson 


i. 310, 320 


v. Wilson 


i. 178; iii. 152 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



cxlix 



Morss v. Elmendorf 

v. Gleason 
Mortimer v. Capper 
v. Orchard 
u. McCallan 
v. Mortimer 
Mortimore v. Wright 
Mortin t: Burge 
Mortlock v. Buller 



iii. 358, 359 

i. 220 

iii. 429 

iii. 309 

i. 500 

i. 397 

i. 340, 351, 475 

ii. 831, 833 

i. 466, 523; iii. 13, 

305, 357, 361 

Morton v. Dean iii. 12, 14 

v. Fenn ii, 72 

v. Lamb i. 578 

v. N. Y. Eye & Ear Infirmary ii. 303, 

311 
v. Thurber iii. 123 

v. Tibbett iii. 51, 53 

v. Webb ii. 860 

v. Weir i. 539 

v. Westcott i. 320 

Morville v. Am. Tract Soc. i. 158 

v. The Great Northern Railway 

Co. ii. 264, 268 

Mosby v. Wall ii. 871 

Mosdell v. Middleton i. 487 

Moseby v. Partee iii. 308 

Moseley v. Boush i. 251, 252 

v. Lord ii. 456 

v. Shattuck i. 579 

v. Virgin iii. 309, 326 

Moses v. Boston & Maine R. R. ii. 192, 

259 

v. Col. Ins. Co. ii. 502, 509 

v. Fogartie i. 388 

v. Macferlan i. 492, 522 

u. McDivitt iii. 130 

o. Mead i. 628, 632 

v. Norris ii. 177 

v. Norton iii. 23 

v. Pratt ii. 480 

v. Stevens i. 355 ; ii. 40 

v. San Ins. Co. ii. 497, 527, 529 

Mosher v. Smith i. 508 

v. Southern Express Co. ii. 226 

Moshier v. Kitehell iii. 26 

v. Shear ii. 842 

Moss v. Adams ii. 765 

a. Atkinson iii. 15 

v. Bainbrigge ii. 632 

v. Charnock iii. 443 

v. Hall i. 324 ; ii. 28 

v. Jerome i. 175 

v. Livingston i. 55 

v. Rossie Lead Mining Co. i. 49 

v. Smith ii. 506 

o. Sweet i. 581 

v. Townsend ii. 148 ; iii. 250 

Mosteller v. Bosh i. 290 

Moston v. Burn i. 470 

Mote v. Chicago, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 251 

Moth v. Frome iii- 431 

Motley v. Downman ii. 355, 359, 378 

v. Manuf. Ins. Co. ii. 563 

v. Motley i- 96 

Mott v. Comstock i- 401 



Mott v. Consumer's Ice Co. i. 113 

v. Mott ii. 893; iii. 174 

Motte v. Dorrell iii. 121 

Motteux v. London Ass. Co. i. 24 ; ii. 4s0, 

532 

Mottram v. Heyder i. 641, 647 

Motz v. Mitchell i. 446 

Mouflet v. Cole ii. 888 

Mouldsdale v. Birchall i. 474 

Moule, Ex parte iii. 414 

Moulor v. Am. Ins. Co. ii. 556, 592 

Moulten v. Posten ii. 28 

Moulton v. Bowker i. 130 

v. Greene iii. 270 

v. Trask ii. 40, 654 

Mounce v. Byars iii. 297 
Mound City Ins. Co. v. Twining ii. 618 

Mount v. Larkins ii. 532 

Mountaineer, The ii. 438 

Mountford v. Gibson i. 147 

v. Willes iii. 112 

Mountfort v. Scott i. 81 

Mountney v. Collier i. 540 

Mountstephen v. Brooke i. 210 ; ii. 749 ; 

iii. 70, 92 

v. Lakeman iii. 20 

Mount Wollaston Bank v. Porter iii. 478 

Mouse's case ii. 216 

Mouton v. Noble i. 457, 458, 483 

Mowatt v. Howland i. 91 

Mowbray, Ex parte iii. 427 

Mowers «. Fethers ii. 161 

Mowrey v. Walsh iii. 270, 290 

Mowry v. Bishop iii. 141, 159, 160, 161 

v. Bradley i. 170 

o. Home Ins. Co. ii. 597, 614 

v. Sliumway iii. 123 

v. Todd i. 254, 258 

Moxey, The ii. 430 

Moxhay c Inderwick iii. 363 

Moxley v. Moxley's Adm'r i. 612 

Moxon v. Atkins ii. 487, 524, 673 

Moynahan v. Hanaford i. 210, 275 

Moyses v. Little iii. 435, 454 

Mozley v. Tinkler i. 480, 509 ; ii. 12 

Mudd v. Harper i. 296 

v. Reeves ii. 753 

Mudge v. Wilmot iii. 411 

Mugford v. Richardson i. 542 

Muggridge, In re iii. 424 

v. Eveleth ii. 420 

Muhler v. Bohlens i. 101 

Muilman v. D'Equino i. 302 

Muir v. United Ins. Co. ii. 512 

Muirhead v. Kirkpatrick i. 469, 470 ; 

ii. 885 

Muldon v. Whitlock ii. 390 

Mulgrave, The ii. 442 

Mulhern v. McDavitt j. 349 

Mulherrin v. Hannum i. 309 

Mulholland v. Bartlett i. 470 

Mullasky v. Cedar Falls i. 160 

Mullen !>. Ensley ii- 137 

v. Gilkinson ii- 41 

v. Russell iii- 130 



cl 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Muller v. Pondir i. 107, 645 ; iii. 277 

Mullett v. Mason iii. 195, 219 

Mullick v. Radakissen i. 302 

Mullikin v. Aughinbaugh iii. 109 

Mulliner v. Florence ii. 167 ; iii. 265 

Mulloy i: Backer ii. 419 

Mulrey v. Barrow iii. 293 

Mulry v. Mohawk Valley Ins. Co. ii. 560 

Mulvehall t\ Millward ii. 75 

Mumford, Ex parte iii. 464 

v. Bowen i. 536 

r. t'omm. Ins. Co. ii. 517 

v. Hallett ii. 478, 483 

v. McPherson i. 633 ; ii. 679 

o. Nicholl ii. 387 

o. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 501 

v. Whitney iii. 37 

Munday v. Railway iii. 506 

Mundorff v. Kilbourn iii. 347, 362, 374 

v. Wickersham i. 51 

Mundy v. Culver iii. 168 

c. Joliffe iii. 310, 351 

Munet v. Gibson i. 283 

Munger v. Tonawanda R. Co. ii. 248 

Munn, In re iii. 417 

v. Baker ii. 27:!, 640 

v. Commission Co. i. 69; iii. 128, 153 

Munro v. Alaire ii. 828, N32 

v. De Chemant i. 75, 404 

u. Saunders ii. 726 

Munroe v. Connor i. 203 

v. Cooper i. 273 

v. Hamilton i. 220 

v. Holmes ii. 390 

v. Leach ii. 250 

v. Merchant i. 448 

v. Perkins ii. 085 

•>. Pritchett ii. 917, 927 

Munsey v. Goodwin ii. 57 

Mureh v. Concord R. R. Corp. ii. 248 

v. Wright i. 580 

Murden v. S. Car. Ins. Co. ii. 532 

Murdock v. Boston, &c. R. Co. ii. 904 ; 

iii. 187 

v. Chenango Co. Ins. Co. ii. 473, 
542, 552, 554, 555, 557 

v. Harris i. 547 

Murphy, In re iii. 449 

v. Abrarns i. 167 

v. Boese iii. 11 

v. Commissioners, &c. i. 118 

v. Hanrahan i. 248 

v. N. Y., &c. R. Co. iii. 209 

r. O'Shea i. 95 

v. Renkert ii. 10; iii. 22 

v. Simpson ii. 900 

u. Smith ii. 47 

('. Union Railway ii. 247 

v. Webber ii. 764 

v. Welch i. 58, 155 

Murray v. Alsop ii. 526 

v. Baker iii. 106 

v. Barlee i. 388 

o. Benbow ii. 337 

u. Blatchford i. 22, 26 



Murray v. Bogert 


i. 34, 174, 


183, 184 


o. Bogue 


ii 


342, 349 


v. Brooks 




i. 02 


v. Burtis 




iii. 128 


v. Carret 




i. 492 


v. Charlestown 




iii. 480 


v. Col. Ins. Co. 


ii. 479, 


484, 491 


v. De Rottenham 




iii. 301 


v. East India Co. 




i. 42 


v. Elliston 




ii. 333 


a. Gouveneur 




iii. 238 


v. Harding 




iii. 149 


v. Harway 




i. 539 


v. Hatch 


ii. 503, 


505, 511 


v. House 




i. 126 


v. Jennings 




iii. 219 


v. Johnston 




i. 228 


p. Judah 




i. 294 


c. Lylburn 




i. 254 


i/. Mann 




ii. 916 



v. Mechanics Bank iii. 75 

v. Mumford i. 222, 227, 229 

r. Murray i. 238 

v. Parker ii. 928 

v. Riggs iii. 382, 439 

v. United Ins. Co. ii. 479, 519, 525 

Murrill ••. Neill i. 231, 237, 238 

Murrin, In re iii. 455 

Murry v. Smith i. 581 ; ii. 666, 794 

Muscan Hair Man. Co. v. Amer. H. 

M. Co. ii. 324 

Muschamp v. L. & P. June. Railway 

Co. ii. 227, 230, 231, 232 

Muse v. Donelson iii. 90 

v. Lettermann ii. 939 

v. Swayne iii. 168 

Muser v. Holland ii. 253 

Musgrove v. Gibbs iii. 163 

Music Hall Ass. v. Cory i. 568 

Musier v. Trumpbour i. 185 

Mussen v. Price iii. 226 

Musser v. P. & A. Street Ry. Co. ii. 273 

Mussey c. Atlas Ins. Co. ii. 493 

a. Beecher i. 45 

v. Rayner ii. 14 

Musson v. Fales ii. 382 

Mutford v. Waleot i. 326 

Mutual Ass. Co. v. Mahon ii. 555 

Mutual Benefit Ass. v. Hoyt ii. 607 

Mutual Ben. Ins. Co. v. Brown i. 124 

v. Tisdale ii. 613 

c. Wise ii. 592 

Mutual Fire Ins. Co. v. Noyes i. 338 

Mutual Ins. Co. v. Cargo ii. 446, 451 

r. Coatesville ii- 552 

i\ Cohen ii. 506 

v. French ii. 615 

v. Hone i. 32 ; ii. 682 

v. Hunt i. 436 

v. Munro ii. 491, 503, 536 

v. Newton ii. 586 

v. Ruse ii. 017, 618 

u. Schmidt ii. 613 

v. Swift ' ii. 479 

Myatt v. Myatt ii. 87 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Cli 



Myatts v. Bell i, 227 
Myers, Ex parte iii. 402 
»• Edge ii. 4, 21 
v . First Bank ii. 28 
v. Girard Ins. Co. ii. 527, 528, 529 
v. Harriet, The ii. 440 
v. James ii. 78 
v. Keystone Ins. Co, ii. 471 
v. Mayfield i. 552 
v. McIIugh i. 120 
v. Meinrath ii. 904 
'■• Nell ii. 853 
v. Perry ii. 433 
v. Sanders i. 362 
v. Silljacks iii. 323 
v. Smith i. 230 
v. United Guarantee, &e. Com- 
pany i. 258 
v. Watson iii. 30G, 371 
v. Willis ii. 396, 400 
Myler 1: Fitzpatrick ii. 217 
Mynard 0. Syracuse, &c. E. Co. ii. 270 
Mynn v. Joliffe ii. 746 



N. 



Nailor v. Bowie 


i. 308, 311 


Naisl), In re 


iii. 149 


Naftzinger v. Roth 


iii. 351 


Nagle v. Baylor 


iii. 373 


v. Mailison 


iii. 185 


Naglee v. Ingersoll 


ii. 877 


v. Lyman 


i. 303 



Najac v. Boston, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 226 

Nance's Lessee v. Thompson ii. 838 

Nanson v. Gordon iii. 440, 475 

Napier v. McLeod i. 26 

v. Schneider i. 327 

Napoleon, The, v. Etter ii. 392 

Narragansett, The iii. 196 

Nash, Ex parte iii. 420 

v. Drew i. 61 

v. Harrington i. 318 

». Hodgson ii. 763; iii. 82, 85 

v. Lull ii. 320 

v. Nash iii. 437 

v. Russell i. 464 

v. Skinner i. 283 

v. Towne iii. 221 

v. Tupper ii. 719, 721 ; iii. 301 

Nashua Ins. Co. v. Moore ii. 539 

Nashville R. R. Co. u. Elliot i. 336; ii. 47, 

249 

v. Messino ii. 233, 245 

Nason v. Dinsmore ii. 900, 005 

Nathan v. Giles iii. 443 

Nathaniel Hooper, The ii. 413, 419, 426, 

439, 451, 452 

National Bank v. Graham ii. 07, 98 

v. Hall i. 505 

v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 552 

v. Insurance Co. ii. 113, 557 

v. Merchants Bank ii- 412 

v. Norton ' i. 83, 191 



National Bank v. Fassett i. 65 

National Bank of Greenfield v. M. 

& C. R. K. Co. ii. 213 

National Exchange Co. v. Drew i. 80 

National Fire Ins. Co. v. Loomis i. 526; 

iii. 10 

National Ins. Co. v. Allen i. 56, 65 

v. Minch i. 79 

v. Webster ii. 573 

National Mahaiwe Bank v. Peck ii. 767 

National Park Bank v. Ninth Nat. 

Bank i. 300 

Naugatuck R. R. Co. v. Waterbury 

Co. ii. 231 

Nautilus, The ii. 420 

Nave v. Home Ins. Co. ii. 569 

Navone v. Haddon ii. 505, 516 

Navulshaw v. Brownrigg i. 60, 102 

Nay v. Mograin iii. 66 

Naylor v. Dennie i. 640, 653 

v. Fall River Iron Works ii. 36 

v. Mangles iii. 256 

v. Moody ii. 20, 28 

v. Palmer ii. 499 

v. Taylor ii. 520 

Nazareth v. Lowe iii. 296 

N. C. R. Co. 0. Bastian i. 154 

Neal v. Bellamy ii. 10 

v. Clark " iii. 433 

v. Gilmore ii. 61 

v. Saunderson ii. 170 

v. Sheffield ii. 824 

v. Wilmington, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 203 
Neale v. Clantice i. 553 

v. Ledger ii. 844 

v. Mackenzie iii. 364, 365 

v. Turton i. 164, 186 

v. Wyllie i. 537 

Neate v. Ball i. 581 

Neave a. Moos ii. 929 

Nebraska City v. Campbell iii. 199 

Nedriffe v. Hogan ii. 875 

Nedrow v. Farmers Ins. Co. ii. 615 

Neel v. Deens i. 493 

Neelson !■. Sanborne ii. 7 

NefF>. Horner ii. 853 

Negley v. Jeffers iii. 38 

Negus, Ex parte iii. 200 

Neidlet v. Wales i. 537 

Neil v. Cheves ii. 685 

v. Cottingham iii. 406 

Neill v. Morley iii. 414 

Neilson v. Col. Ins. Co. ii. 509 

v. Harford ii. 310, 311, 624 

y. Morgan iii. 184 

v. Thompson ii. 324 

Neirinckx, Ex parte iii. 416 

Neldon v. Smith i. 595 

Nellie D., The ii. 435 

Nellis v, Clark i. 522 ; ii. 924 

Nelson, The ii. 402, 404 

v. Belmont ii. 447, 449, 450, 452 

v. Boynton ii. 11 ; iii. 26, 30 

v. Bridges iii. 323 

o. Brown i. 565 



clii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Nelson v. Carland 


iii. 388 


c. Carringtou 


iii. 243 


e. Cartwell 


iii. Ill 


v. Cowing 


i. (32 


<•. Eaton 


i. 370 


«. Fehler 


iii. Ill 


v. Garey 


ii. IJUG 


v. Hopkins 


ii. OH) 


v. Iverson 


ii. 103 


u. Leland 


ii. 431 


v. Lloyd 


i. 108 


r. Macintosh 


ii. 115 


v. Matthews 


iii. 243 


c. Morgan 


iii. 184 


t. Neely 


i. 205 


v. Powell 


i. 00 


v. Salvador 


ii. 520 


v. Surle 


i. 472, 473 


v. Stephenson 


ii. 409 


u. Suddarth 


i. 443, 445 


c. Suffolk Ins. Co. 


ii. 495, 499 


v. Woodruff 


ii. 400 


Nelthorpe v. Holgate 


iii. 308, 357 


Neponset Bank v. Leland 


iii. 282 



Neptune, The ii. 381, 437, 460, 461, 408 
Neptune Ins. Co. v. Robinson ii. 523 

Neptunus, The ii. 520 

Nereide, The ii. 520 

Neret v. Burnard i. 210 

Nerot v. Wallace i. 459, 489, 402 

Nesbit v. Burry i. 666 

Nesbitt v. Digby iii. 403 

v. Lushington ii. 499, 501 

v. Meyer iii. 321 

Nesmith c. Calvert ii. 318 

v. Dyeing i. 107, 108 

Nestor, The ii. 381, 384 

Netherland S. Co. v. Styles ii. 433 

Netherly v. Ripley iii. 347 

Nettles v. Railroad Co. ii. 196 

Nettleton r. Billings ii. 044 

v. Sikes iii. 34 

Nevada, The ii. 431 

Neve v. Hollands iii. 86 

Neves r. Scott i. 409 

Neville v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 4S9, 

540 

v. Wilkinson ii. 78, 026 

Nevins r. Rockingham Ins. Co. ii. 577 

v. Townsend i. 206 

Nevison v. Wliitley iii. 138 

Nevitt v. Clarke ii. 463 

New v. Swain i. 563; iii. 202 

Nevvall v. Elliott ii. 306 

v Hussey ii. 757 

Newark, The ii. 184 

New Bedford Turnpike v. Adams i. 483 
Newbeggin v. Pillans i. 407 

Newbert v. Cunningham i. 129; iii. 100 
Newbery i\ Wall iii. 15 

New Brunswick S. & T. Co. v. 

Tiers ii. 172 

Newburgh Bank v. Smith ii. 762 

Newbury v. Armstrong i. 480 ; iii. 17 

v. Brunswick ii. 729 



Newbury's case ii. 345 

Newby (>. Paynter iii. 358 

c. Vestal • i. 552 

Newcastle Ins. Co. v. Macmorran ii. 518, 

544 

Newcomb v. Boston, &c R. Co. i. 568, 570 

v. Brackett i. 580 

a. Cabell i. 568 

v. Clark i. 57 

v. Hale ii. 25 

v. Mutual Ins. Co. ii. 008 

v. Ramer iii. 35 

!'. Wallace iii. 233 

New Draper, The ii. 388 

Newel u. Keith ii. 50 

Newell v. Hamer ii- 28 

v. Hill i. 5)0 

v. Newton ii. 8i4 

v. Smith ii. 19S 

v. Turner ii. 022 

N. E. Bank c. Lewis ii 871 

N. E. Fire Ins. Co. v. Schettler ii. 543, 5-2 

N. E. Ins. Co. r. Robinson ii. 541 

v. Wetmore ii. 477 

N. E. Marine Ins. Co. v. De Wolf i. 51 ; 

ii. 421 
v. Sarah Ann, The ii. 396, 397, 398 
N. E. Mutual Ins. Co. o. Butler ii. 530, 800 
Newhall, Ex parte iii. 424, 420 

v. Buckingham i. 236 

v. Paige ii. 106 

v. Vargas i. 641, 043, 645, 649, 65ff 
v. Wright ii. 635 

Newham v. May iii. 359 

New Hamps. Ins. Co. e. Rand ii. 539, 579 
New Hamps. Savings Bank v. Col- 
cord i. 470 ; ii. 27 
New Haven County Bank v. Mitch- 
ell ii. 14, 20 
New Haven S. B. Co. a. Vanderbilt ii. 430 
Hew Haven, &c. Co. c. Campbell iii. 270 
New Hope, &c. Co. v. Perry i. 309 
v. The Phoenix Bank i. 83 
New Jersey, The ii. 435 
v. Wilson iii. 502 
N. J. Ins. Co. v. Baker ii' 591 
New Jersey Railroad Co. v. Kennard ii. 244 
New Jersey Steam Nav. Co. v. Mer- 
chants Bank ii. 264, 259, 267, 427 
Newlan r. Dunham i. 501 
Newhn v. Freeman i. 410 
r. Ins. Co. ii. 4S9 
Newman v. Alvord ii. 352, 354, 359, 363, 

371 
v. Bagley i. 232 

v. Bean i. 236 

v. British i. 59 

t-. Cazalet ii. 536 

v. Chapman iii. 299 

v. l)e Lorimer iii- 68 

v. Edwards ii. 943 

v. Jackson iii. 378 

v. Labeaume ii. 837 

i'. MeComas i. 225 

v. Meek ii. 765 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



cliii 



Newman v. Morris 


i. 166 


v. Newman 


i. 488 


i'. Rogers 


hi. 340 


v. Springfield Ins. Co. 


ii. 559 


v. Walters 


ii. 438 


v. Washington 


i. 129 ; ii. 59 


Newmarch v. Clay 


ii. 763 


Newnham v. Stevenson 


iii. 441 



New Orleans v. Gauthreaux i. 232 

New Orleans Bank v. Matthews i. 226 

New Orleans R. R. Co. u. Allbritton i. 117 
v. Bailey iii. 185 

v. Mills 1. 308 

v. Moore iii. 209 

a. Moye iii. 39 

New Phoenix, The ii. 45 

Newport v. Cook i. 347 

Newry & Enniskillen R. R. v. Coombe 

i. 373, 374, 376 

Newsom v. Thornton i. 328, 640, 651 ; 

ii. 127 

Newsome v. Coles i. 213 

v. Graham ii. 870 

Newton v. Bronson i. 53 

v. Chantler iii. 441, 442 

u. Foster ii. 880 

v. Galbraith ii. 780, 787 

o. Harland i. 550 

v. Kennerly iii. 113 

v. Luldiard ii. 937 

v. Lucas ii. 680, 683 

v. Mut. Ben. Ins. Co. ii. 603 

v. Newton i. 146 

v. Swazey iii. 347 

v. Trigg iii. 265, 416 

v. Wilson iii. 113 

New York, The, v. Rea ii. 431, 434 

New York Belting Co. v. Washing- 
ton Ins. Co. ii. 470 

New York Bowery Ins. Co. v. N. Y. 
Ins. Co. ii. 494, 558, 686, 919 

New York Central Ins. Co. o. Na- 
tional Prot. Ins. Co. i. 81 

New York Cent. R. Co., In re ii. 5 

N. Y. Cent., &e. R. Co. v. Standard 
Oil Co. ii. 253 

New York Fire Ins. Co. v. Bennett 

i. 210 

New York Fireman Ins. Co. v. Ely 

iii. 123, 139, 141 
v. Milne iii- 511 

New York Firemen's Ins. Co. o. Stur- 
(rgs iii. 12o 

New York Ins. Co. v. Clopton ii. 601 

v. Delavan ii. 580 

v. Hendren ii. 601 

v, Langdon ii. 544, 547 

v. Lawrence ii- 533 

v. Protection Ins. Co. ii- 494, 585 
v. Roberts ii. 480, 484, 490 

v. Robinson ii- 511 

v. Statbam "■ 601 

v. Thomas ii. 473 

New York Iron Mine v. Citizens Bank 

i. 41 



New York Life Ins. Co. v. Flaek ii. 594, 

609, 610 
New York R. R. Co. v. Schuyler i. 155 
New York & Bait. Trans. Co. v. Phil. 

&c. Steam Nav. Co. ii. 432 

New York & E. R. v. Skinner ii. 248 

New York & H. R. Co. v. Story iii. 198 
New York & N. Haven R. R. Co. v. 

Pixley i. 478 

New York & Va. Steamship Co. v. 

Calderwood ii. 431 

New York & Wash. Tel. Co. v. Dry- 
burg ii. 279, 280, 284, 294 
New York, &c. v. Hamilton Ins. Co. 

ii. 470 

New York, &o. Co. v. De Wolf i. 484 

Niagara, The, v. Cordes ii. 452 

Niagara Bank v. Rosevelt ii. 765 

Nias v. Adamson iii. 424 

Niblo v. North American Ins. Co. ii. 559, 

565, 578, 579 

Niboyet v. Niboyet ii. 734 

Nichol v. Bate i. 292, 316 

o. Godts i. 629 

v. Martyn ii. 52 

Nicholas v. Chamberlain i. 546 

v. Chapman ii. 837 

v. Clent iii. 277 

Nicholas ». N. Y., &c. R. Co. ii. 270 

Niohole v. Allen i. 342, 475 

Nicholls v. Stretton ii. 890 

v. Poulson ii. 60 

v. Wilson iii. 101 

Nichols, The ii. 435 

v. Bellows iii. 454 

u. Bucknam i. 500 

o. Chalie ii. 844 

v. Coolahan ii. 37, 44 

v. Cosset iii. 123 

v. Diamond i. 288 

v. Eaton iii. 429, 431 

a. Fayette Ins. Co. ii. 555, 561, 580 

v. Fearson iii. 125, 127, 152 

v. Freeman iii. 247 

v. Haywood i. 27 

v. Johnson ii. 475, 856; iii. 14, 19 

v. Lee iii. 125 

v. Luce ii. 664 

o. McDowell ii. 25 

v. Nichols ii- 93 

v. Norris i. 325 

v. Patten ii- 924 

v. Pool i. 309 

v. Raynbred i. 477, 479 

v. Rensselaer Mut. Ins. Co. ii. 831 

v. Rogers ii- 722 

v. Ruggles ii. 342 

v. Whiting ii. 787 

Nicholson v. Chapman ii. 105 

v. Leavitt i. 204 ; iii. 403 

v. May i- 473 

v. Paget ii. 640, 641 

v. Revill i. 210, 325 

v. Sykes ii- 833 

v. Willan ii. 253, 261 



cliv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Nickells v. Atlierstone 
Nickerson v. Bridgeport 
Co. 

v. Easton 

c Mason 

v. Soesman 

v. Tyson 
Nieklaus v. Dalm 
Niekolson v. Knowles 
Kickson c. Brolian 
Nieloson v. Wordsworth 
Nicol r. Carr 
Nicolai v. Lyon 
Nicoll v. Amer. Ins. Co. 

r. Burke 

r. Mumford 
Niell i: Morley 
Nightingale v. Chafee 

v. Scaimell 

n. Withington 
Nightingall r. Smith 
Niles r. Sprague 
Nimmiek v. Holmes 
Nimrod, The 
Nims r. Bigelow 

i'. Vaughn 
Kind ( . Marshall 
Niolon v. Douglass 
Niphon, The 
Nisbet v. Nash 

v. Patton 
Niven v. Belknap 
Niver v. Bossman 
Nix v. Bradley 

v. Olive 
Nixon, Ex parte 

v. Brown 

v. Bullock 

u. Carco 

v. Downey 

v. English 
Noakes, Ex parte 

v. Morey 
Noble v. Gookins 

v. Howard 

u. Kennoway 

c. Kersey 

v. Peebles 

r. Smith 

r. Tliompson Oil Co. 

v. United States 

v. Ward 
Nobles v. Bates 
Nobley v. Clark 
Nodine v. Doherty 
Noe >■. Hodges I 
Noice v. Brown 
Noke v. Awder 
Noke's case 
Nokes v. Kilmorey 
Noland v. Clark 
Nolin !•. Blackwell 
Nolte, E.r parte 
Noonan v. Illsley 

v. Lee 



i. 543; ii. 041 
Hydraulic 

iii. Iil3 

i. 'jo-j 

ii. 408 

iii. 100 

ii. 450 

i. -228 

ii. 218 

i. 41, 59 

iii. 334 

iii. 334 

i. 87 

ii. 554 

i. 56 

ii. 391 

i. 436, 437 

ii. 756, 757 

iii. 186 

i. 348, 301, 370 

ii. 082 

ii. 82 

ii. 444, 448, 450 

ii. 464, 405 

i. 185 

iii. 304 

ii. 034 

iii. 382 

ii. 460, 401 

i. 220 

i. 209 

ii. 938, 939 

iii. 173 

i. 409 

i. 647 

iii. 448 

i. 550 

ii. 787 

ii. 959 

i. 08 

i. 290 

iii. 421 

iii. 58 

i. 523 

ii. 874 

ii. 672, 673 

iii. 426 

ii. 828 

i. 263, 460 

i. 258 

i. 08 

iii. 57 

ii. 800 

i. 300 

ii. 904 

ii. 753 

ii. 72 

i. 261 

i. 631 ; ii. 047 

iii. 342 

ii. 119 

iii. 101 

i. 210 

u. 881 ; iii. 221 



Noonan t. Orton 

Norcross v. Ins. Co. 

Norman i: Cole 
v. Molett 
r. Morrell 
v. Phillips 

Norris v. Blair 
i'. Despard 
v. Graham 
v. Hall 
v. Harrison 
c. Langley 
v. Le Neve 
c. Mumford 
Spencer 



iii. 842 

ii. 501 

ii. 895 

iii. 4 

ii. 086 

iii. 51, 65 

iii. 15 

i. 308 

iii. 22 

i. 248 

ii. 477 

i 301 

i. 93 

iii. 409 

iii. 23 



ii. 694 



t'. Trustees of Abingdon Acad- 
emy iii. 486 
v. Vernon i. 200 
v. Wait i. 358 
v. Wilkinson iii. 297 
North i', Forrest iii. 57 
t'. Kershaw ii. 324 
v. Phillips ii. 896 
v. Wakefield i. 29, 45, 83 
N. A. Coal Co. v. Dyett i. 388 
N. A. Fire Ins. Co. v. Graham iii. 477 
N. A. Ins. Co. r. Throop ii. 543 
North Bennington Bank v. Tabor i. 330 
i: Wood i. 319 
North British Ins. Co. v. Lloyd ii. 9 
v. Moffatt ii. 476 
North Church v. Jevne iii. 293 
North Penn. Coal Co.'s Appeal i. 169 
North Penn. B,. B. Co. v. Adams iii. Ill 
North Biver Bank r. Aymar i. 45 
North Biver Meadow Co. v. Shrews- 
bury Church ii. 861 
North" Star, The ii. 429 
North Western Ins. Co. u. Bonner ii. 015, 

618 
v. Little ii. 618 

North Western By. v. McMichael i. 373, 
374, 375, 376 
r. Whinray ii. 18 

North of England, &c. Co. v. Arch- 
angel Ins. Co. ii. 476 
Northampton Bank v. Mass., &c. Co. i- 616 
v. Pepoon i. 65 
Northampton Gas Light Co. c. Par- 

nell ii. 658, 660 

Northampton Ins. Co. u. Tuttle i. 515 

Northcote v. Doughty ii. 65 

Northern v. Williams ii. 208, 416 

Northern Indiana, The ii. 433 

Northern B. B. v. Concord & Clare- 

mont B. E. iii. 494 

Northern B. B. Co. v. Fitchburg B. B. 

Co. ii. 232 

Northern, &c. E. Co. v. Canton Co. i. 545 
Northey r. Field i. 641, 647 

Northfield v. Vershire ii. 82 

Northington, Ex parte i. 433 

Northrup ?•. Cook iii. 221 

v. Foot ii. 900 

v. Graves iii. 354 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



civ 



Northrup v. Mississippi Valley Ins. 

Co. ii. 471 

v. Northrup ii. 603 

v. Phillips ii. 14(1 
v. Railway Passenger Ins. Co. ii. 619 

Norton, Ex parte iii. 446 

«. Acklane iii. 449 

v. Babeock iii. 242, 244 

v. Cook iii. 397, 507 

v. Coons i. 36, 37 

v. Eastman ii. 14 

v. Ellam iii. 98 

v. Fazan i. 395, 390 

v. Gale iii. 19 

v. Masoall iii. 310, 365 

v. Pickering i. 316 

v. Preston iii. 66 

u. Rensselaer Ins. Co. ii. 586 

v. Rose i. 254 

v. Seymour i. 125 

v. Shepard iii. 77 

v. Simmes i. 487 

v. Waite i. 292 

v. Webb ii. 790 

v. Woodruff ii. 143 

v. Young ii. 814 
Norway Plains Co. v. Boston & Me. 

R. R. ii. 184, 202, 203 

Norwich v. Norwich ii. 826 

Norwich Univ. v. Denny i. 90 

Norwood v. Stevenson i. 404, 405 

Nostra Senora del Carmine, The ii. 405 

Nostrand v. Atwood iii. 382 

Notara v. Henderson ii. 173, 417 

Notman v. Anchor Ass. Co. ii. 601 

Nott v. Downing i 212 

Nourse v. Barns iii. 246 

v. Henshaw i. 408 

v. Prime iii. 143 

Novelli v. Rossi ii. 738 

Novello v . Ludlow ii. 333 

Nowell v. Pratt i. 102 

v, Roake iii. 237 

Nowlan, Ex parte iii. 474 

v. Ablett ii. 85, 37 

Nowlin v. Pyne iii. 167 

Noyes v. Blakeman •■ 409 

v . Butler ii. 740 

</. Cushman i- 165 

v. Jenkins i- 560 

v. Marsh iii. 319, 374 

v. N. H., N. L., & S. R. R. Co. i. 210 

v. Phillips !»■ 187 

v. R. & B. R. R. Co. ii- 232 

v. Ward iii-. 176 

Noyes' Ex'rs v. Humphreys i. 486 ;_ iii. 26 

Nudd v. Burrows iii- 277 

u. Hamblin iii- 99 

Nugent v. Smith ii- 170, 195 

Nune v. Modigliani ii- 874, 875 

Nunn v. Wilsmore i- 401 ; iii. 382 

Nuova Loanese, The ii- 404, 453 

Nurse v. Craig ,.i- 401 

v. Seymour "J- ■*" 

Nussbaumer v. Becker i- 191 



Nutbrown v. Thornton i. 522 

Nutt i>. Bourdieu ii. 600 

Nutter v. De Rochemont iii. 103 

i'. Stover i. 289 
Nutting c. Conn. River R. R. Co. ii. 231 

v. Dickinson iii. 39 

Nye v. Merriam iii. 183 



o. 



Oades v. Woodward i. 77 

Oakes v. Munroe ii. 940 

Oakey v. Bennett iii. 409 

Oakley v. Aspinwall i. 176 

o. Morton ii. 655, 805 

Oakman ;;. Rogers iii. 14 

Oaks v. Weller ii. 16 

Oastler v. Henderson i. 541, 543 

Oates v. Bromell ii. 837 

v. Hudson i. 445, 446 

v. National Bank i. 291 

Oatman v. Bond iii. 507 

v. Walker iii. 248 

Obermyer v. Nichols ii. 663 

Obrian v. Ram i. 380 

O'Brien v. Boston, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 245 

v. Currie i. 354 ; iii. 414 

v. Gilchrist ii. 410, 686 

v. Smith i. 296 

Ocean Bank v. Olcott iii. 476 

Ocean Ins. Co. u. Carrington ii. 471, 540 

v. Fields ii. 491 

;;. Rider i. 129; ii. 60 

Ocean Queen, The ii. 435 

Ockenden, Ex parte iii. 288 

O'Conner v. Forster iii. 207 

O'Connor v. Adams ii. 45 

v. Arnold ii. 746 

v. Beckwith ii. 51 

v. Roberts ii. 47 

Odell i: B. & M. R. Co. i. 565 

v. Montross iii. 39 

v. Wake iii. 448 

Odin v. Greenleaf i. 33 

Odiorne r. Maxey i. 42, 102 

v. Sargent ii. 634 

v. Winkley ii. 314 

Odlin v. Ins. Co. of Penn. ii. 425, 501 

O'Donnell v. Brehen iii. 35 

v. Sweeney ii. 900 

Odour v. Odour ii. 92 

Oehlricks v. Ford i. 65, 67 ; ii. 672 

Oertel v. Schroeder i. 291 

O'Ferrall, Ex parte iii. 429 

Offley v. Clay ii._746 

Offley and Johnson's case i. 31 

Offly v. Ward i. 498 

Offut v. Stout i- 321 

Offutt v. Scott i- 167 

Ogden v. Astor iii- 96 

v. Barker ii- 425 

^.Cowley i. 306, 311 

v. General Ins. Co. ii. 409, 510 



clvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Ogden v. Jackson 


iii. 381 


u. Jennings 


i. 531 


v. Marshall 


i. 98 


v. New York Ins, Co. 


ii. 480, 501 


v. Ogden 


iii. 32, 33 


v. Raymond 


i. 72 



Saunders iii. 385, 392, 394, 396, 397 

409, 437, 449, 602, 507, 609, 510 

p. Stone iii. 381 

Ogg v. Shuter i. 567, 579 

Ogilvie v. Foljambe i. 524; iii. 7 

v. Hull ' i. 541 

Oglander t\ Boston iii. 437 

Ogle v. Atkinson ii. 152 

<.-. Ege ii. 324 

v. Wrangham ii. 389 

O'Hara v. Carpenter ii. 886 

Ohde v. Northwestern Ins. Co. ii. 618 

Ohio R. R. Co. v. McPherson ii. 941 

v. Muhling ii. 238 

Ohio & Miss. R. R. Co. v . Tindall ii. 46 

O. &M. R. Co. v. Yohe ii. 173 

Ohio, &c. College i\ Love i. 4S2 

Ohio, &.c. R. Co. v. Selby ii. 238, 270,271 

i: Swarthout ii. 273 

Ohl v. Eagle Ins. Co. ii. 387 

Oinson i). Heritage i. 396 

O'Keeffe v. Kellogg i. 503 

Okell v. Smith ii. 811 

O'Keson v. Barclay i. 468 

Olcott v. Tioga Railroad Co. i. 161 ; 

iii. 105 

Oldaker v. Lavender i. 229 

Oldershaw v. King ii. 6 

Oldfield v. Wilmers ii. 826, 831 

Oldham v. James ii. 375 

!'. Litchford iii. 353 

v. Turner iii. 153 

Oldknow, Ex parte i. 237 

Oliphant v. Mathews i. 204 

Oliver, Ex parte iii. 474 

v. Bank ofTenn. i. 307 

v. Com. Ins. Co. ii. 471, 474, 475 

v. Court i. 95 

v. Gray iii. 92 

c. Greene ii. 485, 525 

v. Houdlet i. 370 

v. Moore i. 108 ; iii. 275 

v. Munday i. 300 

v. Oliver i. 397 ; ii. 336 

v. Woodroffe i. 335, 352 

Olivera v. Union Ins. Co. ii. 601 

Oliverson v. Briglitman ii. 487 

Olivier v. Townes iii. 409 

Ollivant v. Bayley i. 030, 637 

Ollive v. Booker i. 602 ; ii 408 

Olmstead v. Beale ii. 36, 39, 42, 43, 655, 

057, 792 

v. McNall ii. 392 

o. Miller iii. 189 

Olmsted v. Hotailing i. 78 

Olney v. Howe i. 667 

Olyphnnt v. Baker i. 666 

!'. McNair i. 61 

O'Mara v. Hudson R. R. Co. iii. 209 



Omoa, &c. Co. v. Huntley i. 118 

Oneida Manuf. Co. v. Lawrence i. 623, 

628 
O'Neil v. Buffalo Ins. Co. ii. 546, 547, 

551, 687 

r. New York Mining Co. iii. 45 

Ongley o. Chambers i. 530 

Onion v. Robinson ii. 832 

Onondaga County Bank v. Bates i. 325 

v. De Pay i. 205 

Onslow v. iii. 328 

u. Corrie iii. 424, 418 

v. Eames i. 635 

v. Orchard i. 28 

Ontario Bank v. Lightbody i. 302 

v. Mumford i. 251, 252 ; iii. 424 

v. Root iii. 346 

v. Schermerhorn iii. 145 

v. Worthington i. 292 

Ooades v. Woodward i. 77 

Oom v. Bruce ii. 481 

Oppenheim v. Russell i. 648 ; iii. 257, 

268 

v. White Lion Hotel Co. ii. 159 

Oppenbeimer v. U. S. Ex. Co. ii. 260 

v. Edney ii. 277 

Orange Co. Bank v. Brown ii. 263, 275 

Orbona, The ii. 439 

Oi-cutt v. Nelson i. 573; ii. 713 

Ord v. Fenwick i. 146 

v. Noel iii. 361 

Ordinary v. Wherry i. 863 

Orear v. McDonald i. 304, 306, 307 

Oregon, The, c. Rocca ii. 433 

O'Reilly v. Royal Exch. Ass. ii. 533 

v. Guardian Ins. Co. ii. 580, 613 

v. Morse ii. 305, 308, 309, 310 

Orelia, The ii. 403, 404 

Organ u. Stewart iii. 58 

Oriental, The ii. 404 

Oriole, The ii. 386 

Orleans, The, v. Phoebus ii. 388 

Ormerod v. Tate ii. 838 ; iii. 286 

Ormond v. Anderson iii. 309, 365 

v. Holland ii. 45 

v. Hutchinson i. 96 

Ormrod v. Huth i. 629; ii. 916 

Orms v. Ashley i. 458 

Ormsbee v. Machir i. 564 

Ormston v. i. 311 

Orndorifu. Adams Ex. Co. ii. 270 

Orne, In re iii. 428, 457 

v. Townsend ii. 464 

O'Rourke v. O'Rourke ii. 902 

r. Percival iii. 372 

Orr v. Churchill iii. 170 

v. Hodgson i. 448 

v. Littlefield ii. 324, 325 

v. Tanner ii. 908 

v. Union Bank of Scotland i. 300 

... Ward i. 75 

v. Williams ii. 785 

Orrell v. Hampden Ins. Co. ii. 476, 477, 

576 
Orrick v. Colston i. 275 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clvii 



Orrok v. Commonwealth Ins. Co. ii. 447, 

606, 507, 508, 515 

Ortucan v. Dickson i. 456 

Orvis r. Kimball i. 304 

Ory !•. Winter iii. 397 

Osacar v. La. St. Ins. Co. ii. 488 

Osborn v. Adams iii. 396, 409 

v. Brennan i. 196 

v. Crosbern i. 29 

v. Etheridge ii. 879 

v. Gantz i. 580 

v. Governors of Guy's Hospital ii. 52 

v. Harper i. 20, 22, 35 

v. Hawley i. 279 

v. Humphrey iii. 498 

v. Rogers i. 503 

v. United States Bank i. 125, 126 

v. Wise ii, 689 

Osborne v. Bremar i. 525 

v. Knox, &c. R. Co. ii. 4 1 } 

Osceola, The ii. 457 

Osgood v. De Groot ii. 878 

v. Franklin i. 466, 522, 523 

v. Hutchins ii. 644 

v. Lewis i. 623, 624 

v. Nichols ii. 940 

v. Strode iii. 314 

Osmarili, The ii. 405 

Osmond p. Fitzroy i. 438 

Osprey, The ii. 433 

Ossulston v. Yarmouth iii. 159, 160 

Ostell v. Lepage ii. 864 

Osterhout v. Shoemaker ii. 940 

Osterman v. Baldwin i. 448 

Ostrander v. Brown ii. 196, 198, 206, 207, 

416 
Oswald n. Gray ii. 843 

i). Mayor, &c. of Berwick-upon- 
Tweed ii. 18 
Oswego Falls Bridge v. Fish iii. 490 
Oswego Starch Factory v. Lendrum 

i. 569 ; ii. 914 

Otis v. Gazlin i. 463 

v. Hussey i. 308 

v. Lindsey iii. 160 

v. Raymond ii. 918 

v. Sill i. 612 

v. Thorn ii. 392 

Otread v. Round iii. 369 

Otsego Co. Bank v. Warren i. 308 

Ottawa, The ii. 431 

Ottawa Bank v. Dudgeon ii. 6 

Otts v. Alderson i. 619, 623 

Ottumwa Woollen Co. v. Hawley i. 546 

Ougier v. Jennings ii. 478, 532, 669, 

676 
Ouimit v. Henshaw ii. 276 

Oulds v. Harrison i. 290 

Outcall v. Darling iii. 260 

Outcalt v. Van Winkle ii. 437 

' Outhwaite v. Porter i. 292 

Outram v. Morewood ii. 867, 869 

Outwater v. Dodge i. 566 ; iii. 51 

v. Nelson ii. 666 

Overbay v. Lighty i. 622 



Overend, &c. Co. v. Oriental Corpora- 
tion ji, 28 
Overholt v. Ellswell i. 404 
Overholt's Appeal i. i(j8 
Overseers of St. Martin v. Warren iii. 465 
Overton v. Freeman i. 116 
Owen, Ex parte i. 174 
o. Bartholomew ii. 929 
v. Bowen i. 248 
v. Burnett ii, 268 
v. Cawley i, 337 
v. Foulkes iii. 422 
v. Gooch i, 08 
v. Homan j, 32.3 
v. Johnson ji. 413 

"• Long i. 335 

v. Owen ii. 02 

v. Thomas ii. 680 ; iii. 19 

d. Union Match Co. iii. 20 j 
v. Van Uster j. 305 
v. White i. 344 
v. Wolley iii. 68 

Owens v. Claytor iii. 2-34 

l-. Collins i. 108 

i. Dickenson i. 388 

r. Lewis iii. 35 

v. Roberts j. 80 

e. Weedman j. 533 
Owensboro Bank v. Western Bank i. 49, 

87 

Owings v. Baldwin iii. 335, 349 

v. Hull i. 51 

v. Low i. 254 

v. Speed iii. 480 

Owings' case i. 434; iii. 316 

Owsley v. Cobin iii. 433 

Owston v. Ogle i. 25; ii. 387, 389 

Oxendale v. Wetherell ii. 654, 655, 785, 

791, 792 

Oxford v. Peter i. 113 

Oxford Bank v. Haynes ii. 31 

v. Lewis ii. 29 

Oyster v. Longnecker iii. 132, 134 

Ozeas v. Johnston i. 185 

Ozley v. Ikelheimer i. 408 



Pacific Ins. Co. v. Guse 


ii. 539 


Pacific R. Co. v. Maguire 


iii. 480 


Packard v. Dunsmore 


i. 570 


v. Getman 


ii. 193 


v. Hill 


ii. 628 


v. Nye 


i. 136 


v. Richardson 


i. 6; iii. 16 


Packer v. Gillies 


iii. 290 


v. Hinckley 


i. 75 


v. Hinckley Locomotive 


Works 




ii. 745 


v. Willson 


iii. 17 


Packet, The ii. 404, 447, 454, 456 


Packet Co. v. Sickles ii 


869; iii. 43 


Paddelford v. Thacher 


ii. 750 



clviii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Paddock v. Com. Ins. Co. ii. 499 

v. Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 484, 486, 528, 

529, 530 

v. Robinson ii. "'- 

v. Strowbridge i. G21 

Padelford v. Boardman ii. 446, 447 

Padwick v. Turner i. 313 

Page, Ex parte i. 238 

v. Arnim ii. 939 

t-. Bauer iii. 427 

v. Broom iii. 358 

v. Bussel iii- 464 

u . Carpenter i. 232, 236, 237 

v. Estes iii. 437 

v. Esty i. 532 

v. Ferry ii. 309, 315, 327 

r. Foster ii. 828 

v. Godden iii. 447 

v. Hill ii. 940 

... Parr i. 541 

r. Sheffield ii. 458 

v. "Way iii. 424 

Paget i'. Perchard i. 569 

Pahlman v. Graves i. 240 

v. Taylor i. 193 

Paiee v. Walker i. 58 

Paige r. McMillan i. 581 

v. Ott ii. 655, 792 

v. Smith ii. 184 

v. Stone i. 64, 60 

Pain v. Packard ii. 25, 26 

v. Smith iii. 2117 

Paine v. Cave i. 527 

v. Fulton iii. 58 

!'. Howells ii. 668 

o. Jones ii. 18 

v. Ringgold ii. 625 

v. Voorhees ii. 757 

Painter v. James ii. 413 

v. Newby iii. 358 

Paley's case ii. 333 

Palin v. Gathercole ii. 336 

Palliser r. Ord i. 89 

Palm v. Medina Ins. Co. ii. 640 

Palmer v. Andrews ii. 70 

v. Baker iii. 143 

v. Blackburn ii. 675 

v. Cheney i. 45 

a. City of New York ii. 900 

v. Davis ii. 833 

v. DeWitt ii. 331 

u. Dodge i. 219 

v. Edwards i. 269 

</. Eliot ii. 756 

o, Foley ii. 5 

v. Goodwin iii. 397 

v. Gracie ii. 421 

v. Green ii. 877 

v. Hand iii 274 

v. Harris ii. 370 

v. Hatch i. 62 

a. Largent ii. 853 

u. Lorillard ii. 413, 417, 425 

v. Marquette, &c. Mill Co. iii. 14 

v. Marshall ii. 532 



Palmer v. Merrill i. 254, 257 ; ii. 610, 751 

v. Myers i. 209 

v. Naylor ii. 499 

o. Xeave ii. 78 

v. Oakley i. 152 

< . Pratt i. 280 ; ii. 480 

v. Reynolds iii. 176 

v. Richards i. 285 

v. Scott iii. 365 

r. Sparshott i. 23 

v. Stebbins ii. 890 

v. Stephens i. 72 

v. "Warren Ins. Co. ii. 522, 639 

a. Whitney i. 319 

v. ii. 833, 837 

Palmerton v. Huxford ii. 823 

Palo Alto, The i. 515 

Pancoast !,•. Addison iii. 106 

v. Travellers Ins. Co. iii. 123 

Papayanni v. Hocquard ii. 533 

Pape v. Lister ii. 73 

Pappa v. Rose i. 91 ; ii. 833 

Paradine r. Jane i. 536, 598 ; ii. 199, 806 

Paradise r. Gerson i. 215 

i'. Sun Ins. Co. ii. 483, 500 

Parage i\ Dale ii. 507 

Paragon, The ii. 448, 069, 072 

Paramour r. Yardly i. 141 ; ii. 645 

Pardee v. Drew ii. 274 

r. Fish i. 295 

Pardington v. S. W. Ry. Co. ii. 260 

Parliam v. Green i. 34 

o. McGravy iii. 107 

v. Randolph i. 526 ; ii. 917, 927 

Parham, &c. Co. v. Brock ii. 756 

Paris !•. Strong iii. 41 

r. Stroud i. 337 

Parish v. Crawford ii. 195 

v. Sevon iii. 405 

c. Stone i. 266, 485 ; ii. GS5 

r. Wheeler iii. 216 

Park v. Bates iii. 242 

v. Hamond i. 93 

v. Thomas i. 2!H5 

Park Bank r. Ninth Bank i. 300 

Parke v. Eliason i. 571 

Parken v. Whitby iii. 374 

Parker v. Adams ii. 248 

o. Atwood iii. 476 

v. Baker i. 370 

v. Bamber ii. 327 

r. Barker i. 212, 213; ii. 8 

v. Brancker i. 74, 108; iii. 206, 253 

v. Bridgeport Ins. Co. ii. 556, 557 

v. Bristol, &c. Ry. Co. i. 86 ; ii. 1*5, 

ISO 

v. Brown iii. 240 

*•. Carter i. 402 

v. Colcord ii. 86ii 

u. Cousins i. 219 ; iii- 123 

u. Crole iii. 400 

v. Davis ii. 770 

o, Donaldson ii. 883 

v. Eagle Ins. Co. ii. 580 

v. Eggleston ii. 830 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clix 



Parker v. Ellis 




i. 341 


Parks ». Hall i. 639 , 


iii. 273, 291 


v. Fergus 




i. 182 


v. Ingram 


i. 282, 294 


v. Flagg 




ii. 172, 181 


v. Morris 


iii. 219 


v. Flint 




ii. 165 


Parmalee v. Hoffman 


ii. 546 


v. Gordon 




i. 303 


Parmelee u. Fisher 


ii. 276 


v. Gossage 




ii. 033 


Parmeter v. Cousins 


ii. 486 


v. Great Western Railway Co. ii. 185, 


v. Todhunter 


ii. 511 






187, 639 


Parmiter v. Coupland 


ii. 625 


v. Greele 




i. 303 


Parnell v. Price 


ii. 29 


v. Gregg 




i. 22 


Parr, Ex parte 


iii. 468 


v. Haworth 




ii. 314 


v. Eliason 


iii. 125, 127 


v. Heaton 




iii. 25 


Parrill v. McKinley 


iii. 343 


v. Hulme ii. 304, 


811, 


318, 327, 328 


Parris v. Roberts 


i. 578 


v . Jackson 




i. 228 


Parrish v. Koons 


iii. 309, 343 


v. Jones 




ii. 496, 497 


Parrott ». Kumpf 


iii. 487 


v. Kelly 




i. 255 


Parry, Ex parte 
v. Ashley 


ii. 391 


v. Kendall 




ii. 882 


ii. 477 


v. Lawrence 




i. 27 


v. House 


i. 540 


v. Leggett 




ii. 869 


v. Spikes 


ii. 13 


v. Manning 




iii. 426 


Parshall v. Shirts 


i. 523 


v. Nichols 




ii. 635 


Parslowe v. Dearlove 


iii. 461 


v. Norton 




iii. 465, 466 


Parson v. Sexton 


i. 637 


v. Parker 




iii. 4, 343 


Parsonage Fund v. Osgood 


iii. 83 


v. Parmele 




ii. 663, 790 


Parsons v. Aldrich 


ii. 828 


v. Patrick 




iii. 290 


v. Armor 


i. 48 


v. Fistor 




i. 234 


v. Briddock 


ii. 6 


v. Potts 




ii. 527, 529 


v. Camp 


i. 545 


.v. Pringle 




i. 636 


v. Carey 


iii. 82 


v. Ramsbottom i. 


190 


; iii. 116, 119, 


v. Crosby 


ii. 937 



125 

v. Redfield iii. 498 

v. Rochester ii. 887 

v. Rolls i. 126 

v. Russell ii. 810 ; iii. 201 

a. Sears ii. 324 

v. Simonds iii. 218 

v. Smith i. 76 

v. South Eastern R. Co. ii. 257 

v. Staniland iii. 35 

v. Stiles ii. 304, 308, 315 

v. Tainter iii. 15 

v. Wallis iii. 46 

«. Way i. 377 

v. Webb iii. 424 

v. Wells iii. 416 

Parkersburg, The ii. 435 

Parkhouse v. Foster ii. 155 

Parkhurst v. Dickerson i. 304 

v. Foster ii. 155 

v. Kinsman i. 222 ; ii. 304 

v. Smith ii. 626 

v. Sumner ii. 871 

v. Vail ii. 7, 8 

v. Van Cortlandt ii. 939; iii. 14, 18, 

343, 352 

Parkin v. Carruthers i- 76, 192 

v. Thorold iii. 312, 339, 341 

Parkinson v. Lee i. 618, 629 

v. Scoville _ iii. 395 

Parkist v. Alexander i. 88, 93 

Parks v. Alta California Tel. Co. ii. 279, 

280, 292, 391 

v. Barrowman iii. 369 

v. Boston iii. 209, 214 

v. General Interest Ass. Co. ii. 566 



v. Hardy ii. 172, 181, 198, 215, 419 

v. Hill i. 370 

v. Loucks iii. 45 

v. Lyman i. 135 

v. Martin i. Ill ; iii. 212 

v. Mass. Ins. Co. ii. 487 

v. Monteath ii. 172, 254, 255, 259, 268 

u. Parsons ii. 681 ; iii. 437 

v. Woodward i. 255 

Partin v. Luderlow i. 208 

Partlow v. Cooke ii. 52 

Parton v. Hervey ii. 86, 87, 89 

Partridge r. Colby ii. 274 

v. Dartm. Coll. iii. 271 

v. Davis ii. 4 

v. Dearborn iii. 421, 470 

t\ Dorsey's Lessee iii. 313 

ii. Hannum iii. 426 

v. Menck ii. 358, 363, 372 

v. Wooding i. 563 

Paschal, In re i. 129 

v. Terry ii. 842 

Paschall v. Passmore ii. 642 

Passenger R. Co. v. Stutlen i. 348 

Passmore v. West. Hn. Tel. Co. ii. 288 

Pastorious v. Fisher iii. 234 

Patapsco Ins. Co. v. Coulter ii. 483, 492, 

500, 573 

v. Smith ii. 472 

v. Southgate ii. 396, 606, 511 

Patch n. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 615 

Patchett v. Holgate i. 377 

Patehin v. Swift i. 458 

Pate v. Henry ii. 186 

v. Wright ii- 902 

Patee v. Pelton i- 616 



clx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Paterson v. Wallace ii. 45 

Pateshall v. Tranter i. 636 

Patience v. Townley i. 308 

Patman u. Vaughan iii. 416 

Patmor v. Haggard iii- 17 

Paton v. Brebner iii. 357 

v. Duncan i. 621 

v. Rogers iii. 336, 3.37 

Patrick, Ex parte iii. 143 

v. Coram. Ins. Co. ii. 511 

v. Green way iii. 234 

v. Leach i. 617 

v. Littell i. 408 

v. Ludlow ii. 486 

v. Marshall iii. 246 

v. Patrick ii. 77 

Patron v. Silva ii. 425 

Pattee v. Greeley ii. 900, 903 

Patten v. Browne iii. 416 

v. Ellingwood i. 463 

v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 55T 

v. Moses i. 161 

v. Rea i. 119 

v. Thompson i. 108 

Patterson v. Atherton i. 254 

v. Black ii. 498, 613 

v. Brown iii. 95, 96 

v. Chalmers ii. 386 

v. Gage ii. 43 

u. Gaines i. 377 

v. Gandasequi i. 66, 105 

v. Grimes i. 377 

v. Hardacre i. 272 

v. Lytle ii. 930 

v. Patterson ii. 58 

v. Stewart iii. 245 

v. Tash i. GO, 102 

v. Todd i. 284. 290 

Pattison v. Blanchard i. 176 

v. Hall ii. 765 

v. Syracuse National Bank ii. 98 

Patton v. M'Clure iii. 347 

v. Randolph, The i. 84 

v. Smith i. 569 

v. State Bank i. 331 

Paul v. Dowling iii. 416 

v. Frazier ii. 64, 74 

v. Hardwick i. 635 

v. Joel i. 322 

v. Jones iii. 464 

v. Perry i. 37 

v. Reed i. 578, 580 

v. Slason ' iii. 235 

v. Young iii. 370 

Pauli r. Simes i. 588 

Paulsen v. Dallett i. 110 

Pawling v. Bird ii. 736 

v. Pawling iii. 161 

v. Wilson ii. 732 

Pawson i'. Barnevelt ii. 473 

v. Watson ii. 518, 522, 523, 524, 526 

Paxton v. Newton iii. 327 

Payler v. Homersham ii. 633, 851 

Payne v. Allen ii. 465 

u. Baldwin iii. 487 



Payne v. Banner 
v. Bettisworth 
v. Cave 

v. Commercial Bank 
b. Cutler 
v. Preer 
v. Graves 
v. Haine 
v. Hutchinson 
v. Matthews 
v. Newcomb 



iii. 338 

ii. 663 

i. 510 

ii. 28 

i. 292 

iii. 152 

iii. 358 

i. 536 

ii. 487 

i. 238 

iii. 144, 145 



v. New South Wales Co. i. 479 

„. Rodden i. 616 

v. Rogers ii. 749 

v. Shadbolt k i. 564 ; iii. 274 

v. Trezevant iii. 127 

v. Waterston i. 110 

Paynter v. Walker ii. 877 

v. Williams i. 501 

Payson v. Whitcomb i. 309 

Peabody v. Proceeds of 28 Bags of 

Cotton ii. 437 

o. Speyers iii. 15, 57 

Peace, The ii. 441 

Peachey v. Rowland i. 116 

Peacock v. Cummings i. 217 

v. Dickerson ii. 779 

v. Evans iii. 316 

v. Jeffery ii. 874 

v. Monk i. 458 

v . N. Y. Ins. Co. ii. 592 

v. Peacock i. 177, 219, 220, 227; ii. 50 

v. Pembroke i. 382 

v. Penson iii. 361 

v. Purcell ii. 757 

v. Rhodes i. 272 

Peak v. Bull ii. 866 

Peake, Ex parte iii. 429 

Pearce, Ex parte iii. 469 

In re iii. 477 

v. Atwood ii. 901 

v, Blackwell i. 620 

v. Blagrave iii. 24 

v. Chamberlain i. 226 

v. Hennessy iii. 113 

v. Hitchcock i. 23 

v. Patton iii. 511 

u. Piper i. 230 

v. Wilkins i. 204 

Pearl r. Harris iii. 319 

v. Walls ii. 850 

Pearl St. Cong. Soc. v. Imlay ii. 5 

Pearsall v. Dwight ii. 700, 719, 721 

Pearse v. Green i. 96 

Pearson v. Archbold ii. 831, 833 

v. Commercial Ass. Co. ii. 550 

v. Davis iii. 242 

v. Duane iii. 209 

v. Duckham i. 33 

v. Graham i. 76; iii. 434, 454, 458 

v. Henry i. 143 

v. Humes i. 487 

v. Keedy i. 231 

v. Lemaitre iii. 179 

u. Mason i. 110; iii. 224 



IXDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxi 



Pearson v. M'Gowran 

v. Parker 

v. Pearson 

v. Rockhill 

v. Skelton 
Pease, Ex parte 

v. Dwight 

v. Hirst 

v. Mead 

v. Sabin 

v. Smith 

n. Turner 
Peasle v. Breed 



iii. 133 

i. 21, 35 

i. 460 

iii. 382 

i. 35, 37, 184 

iii. 261 

i. 273 

21 ; ii. 22 ; iii. 87 

i. 145 

i. 631 

i. 556 

i. 299 

i. 30, 35 



Peate v. Dicken i. 475; ii. 899; iii. 17 

Peay v. Pickett i. 279 

Pebbles ». Stephens i. 457 

Pechner v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 543 

Peck v. Barney ii. 16 

v. Briggs ii. 897 

v. Burr ii. 887 

v. Davia ii. 829 

v. Fisher i. 170 

v. Halsey ii. 088 

v. Hozier ii. 719 

v. Hubbard ii. 784 

v. Lusk i. 193 

c. Mayo ii. 714 

v. Neal ii. 244 

v. N. Y. Cent., &o. R. Co. ii. 246 

v. Peck ii. 82 

v. Ritchie i- 51 

v. Wakely ii. 829 

Pecker v. Hoit ii. 937 

v. Kennison ii. 719 

Peckham v. Balch iii. 349 

v. Faria iii. 22 

v. N. Parish in Haverhill i. 12, 20 

Pedder v. Watt ii. 758 

Pederson v. Lotinga i. 66 

Pedrick v. Bailey i- 160 

Peek v. North S. Railway Co. ii. 271 

Peel, Ex parte i. 207, 214 

v. Price ii- 408 

v. Shepherd ii. 746 

i>. Thomas i- 163 

Peele v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 504, 506, 507, 

608, 611, 512, 513, 615 

v. Northcote i- 101 

v. Suffolk Ins. Co. }}■ 508 

Peers v. Lambert iii- 356 

Peet v. Chicago «■ 227 

v. McGraw ii- 164 

Peeters v. Opie i. 578 ; ii. 660 

Peifer v. Landis iii- 348 

Peigne v. Sutcliffe }■ 35 6 

Peirce v. Boston ii- 879 

v. Butler ii- 669 

v. Corf iii- 12 

u. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 397, 398, 511 

v. Rowe »»• 1 @ 1 

v. Somersworth i»- 494 

Peisch v. Dickson »• 6 °° 

Peixotti v. McLaughlin «• 180 

Pellecat v. Angell »■ 894 

Pellew v. Wonford "• 797 



Pelly v. Wathen iii. 287 

Peltier v. Collins i. 608, 586, 589; iii. 13 

Pemberton v. King i. 548 

v. Oakes ii. 21 

v. Vaughan ii. 890 

Pemberton Bank v. Lougee i. 275 

v. Porter i. 298 

Pembroke v. Thorpe iii. 326, 343, 350 

Pembroke Iron Co. v. Parsons ii. 422 

Pena v. Vance iii. 58 

Pence v. Duvall iii. 242 

Pendar v. Am. Mut. Ins. Co. ii. 493, 583, 

584 

Pender v. Fobes i. 634 

Pendergrast v. Foley iii. 102 

Pendleton v. Dyett i. 541 

Pendrell v. Pendrell i. 377 

Penfold v. Universal Ins. Co. ii. 602 

Penley v. Record iii. 174 

v. Watts i. 537 ; iii. 229 

Penn v. Bennet i. 464 

v. Lord Baltimore i. 467 ; iii. 333 

Penn's Adm'r v. Watson iii. 96 

Pennell v. Alexander i. 590 

v. Hinman ii. 936, 943 

Penniman v. Hartshorn iii. 7, 9 

v. Norton iii. 477 

v. Patchin ii. 827 

v. Rodman iii. 333 

v. Tucker ii. 479 

Penniman's case iii. 503 

Pennington v. Baehr i. 270 

v. Gittings i. 263 ; iii. 318 

v. Taniere ii. 940 

Pennock v. Freeman iii. 107 

v. Dialogue ii. 305 

v. Tilford i. 623 

Pennock's Appeal i. 526 

Penn. Co. v. Roy ii- 2:J7 

Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Lynch ii. 46 

o. McCloskey ii. 268 

c. Miller ii. 212 

t. Titusville iii. ly6 

Pennsylvania & Ohio Canal v. 

Graham iii. 178 

Penn., &c. R. R. Co. v. Books ii. 270; 

iii. 186 

v. Delaware, &c. Co. iii. 304 

v. Henderson ii. 270 

v. Kerr ii- 249 

v. Schwartzenberger ii. 227 

Penny v. N. Y. Ins. Co. ii. 447 

v. Parham i. 274, 283 

Pennypacker v. Umberger ii. 702 

Pennypacker's Appeal i. 137, 151 

Penobscot, &c. R. R. Co. v. Bartlett ii. 713 

Penoyer v. Hallett ii. 424 

v. Watson ii- 21 

Penrose v. Curren i- 356 

Penshoer, The ii.,434 

Pensonmeau v. Bleakley i- 95 

Penton v. Robart i- 548 

Pentz v. Receivers of iEtna Fire Ins. 

Co. «■ 571 

People v. Baker ii- 737 



clxii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



People r. Bartlett ii. 810 

v. Chicago, &c. E. Co. ji. 203 

v. Commissioners, &c. iii. 484 

u. Conklin i. 448 

v. Gaslierie iii. 112 

v. Harvey i. 126 

v. Jansen ii. 25, 20 

a. Johnson i. 263 

v. Jurlges ii. 875 

v. Kendall i. 356 

v. Manhattan Co. iii. 486 

i: MeHatton ii. 29 

i>. Moores i. 355 

v. Morris iii. 483 

r. New York Common Pleas ii. 875 

v. Otis iii. 480 

v. Overseers i. 377 

c Pettit i. 890 

v . Shall i. 458 

v. Slack ii. 87 

v. St. Francisco ii. 928 

v. White ii. 28 

People's Bank v. Bogart i. 620 

v. Gridley i. 568 

u. Keech i. 318 

People's Ferry Co. v. Beers ii. 380 

People's Savings Bank v. Collins ii. 932 

Pepper v. Aiken ii. 823 

i: Haight ii. 663, 887 

Pequawket Bridge v. Mathes ii. 856 

Percival v. Blake i. 638 ; iii. 50 

u. Frampton i. 292 

i'. Maine Ins. Co. ii. 556 

v. Phipps ii. 336, 347 

Percy, In it i. 126 

v. Millaudon ii. 115 

v. Percy ii. 713 

Perham v. Raynal iii. 87 

Perine v. Dunn ii. 908 

Perkins v. Augusta Ins. Co. ii. 511, 533, 

635 

v. Boothby i. 51 

v. Burbank iii. 70 

v. Cady i. 66 

v. Catlin i. 284 

v. Challis i. 291 

t . Clay ii. 888 

v. Cummings i. 480 

v. Dana i. 535 

v. Douglass i. 581 

v. Eastern & B. & M. R. R. Cos. 

ii. 248 

c. Eaton ii. 760, 761 

i: Franklin Bank i. 312 

v. Gilman ii. 30, 850 

v. Hart ii. 61, 649 

v. Hersey ii. 74 ; iii. 188 

v. Littlefield iii. 24 

o. Lyman ii. 890 ; iii. 174 

u. New Eng. Ins. Co. ii. 497 

v. N. Y. Cent. E, E. Co. ii. 238 

u . Parker i. 256 

r. Perkins i. 129 

v. Prout ii. 928 

v. Thompson i. 95 



Perkins v. Washington Ins. Co. ii. 471, 

540 ; iii. 329 

v. Whelan i. 616; iii. 99 

v. Wright iii. 306 

Perley v. Balch i. 495 ; ii. 815, 922 

Perren v. Monmouthshire E. Co. ii. 773 

Perrin v. Noyes i. 329 

v. Protection Ins. Co. ii. 495, 497, 573 

Perrine v. Cheeseman i. 458 

v. Fireman's Ins. Co. ii. 27 

Perring v. Hone i. 164 

Perry, Ex parte iii. 414 

v. Barrett i. 283 

v. Green i. 308, 317 

v. Jackson iii. 102 

v. Jones iii. 431 

c. Mays i. 290 

c. Osborn ii. 420 

v. Randolph i. 188 

v. Roberts i. 254 

v. Smith iii. 232 

v. Thompson ii. 260 

v. Truefltt ii. 362, 363, 372 

u. Worcester ii. 943 

Perry Co. Ins. Co. v. Stuart ii. 545, 561, 

576 

Perry Manuf. Co. v. Brown iii. 397 

Perryclear v. Jacobs i. 382 

Perryer, E.r parte iii. 420 

Persch v. Quiggle ii. 106 

Persia, The ii. 439 

Person v. Chase i. 350 

j>. Warren i. 434 

Persons v. Jones iii. 107 

Perth Amboy Man. Co. v. Condit ii. 624 

Peru v. Turner i. 511 

Petchell v. Hopkins iii. 106 

Peter v. Beverly i. 150; ii. 757 ; iii. 378 

v. Compton iii. 42 

v. Craig ii. 848 

r. Rich i. 34 

v. Steel ii. 50 

Peterborough Bank v. Childs iii. 124 

Peters v. Anderson ii. 762 

v. Ballistier i. 61 ; ii. 456; iii. 48 

r. Brown iii. 92 

(.-. Delaware Ins. Co. ii. 492, 582 

v. Fleming i. 336, 337 

v. Gooch ii. 815 

v. Hobbs i. 312 

v. Lord i. 355 ; ii. 52, 54, 56 

v. McKeon iii. 245 

c,-. Newkirk ii. 842, 843 ; iii. 464 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 507, 530 

v. Ryland iii. 1S4 

v. Warren Ins. Co. ii. 447, 448, 499, 

931 ; iii. 192 

v. Westborough ii. 49 ; iii. 42, 43 

Peterson v. Ayre ii. 843 ; iii. 320 

v. Humphrey ii. 361 

Petkin v. Tompson i. 383 

Peto v. Blades i. 615 

v. Hague i. 79 

v. Reynolds i. 308 

Petrie v. Bury i. 14, 22 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxiii 



Petrie v. Clark 




i. 292 


Pettee v. Tenn. Manuf. Co. 




ii. 879 


Pettegrew v. Pringle 




ii. 521 


Pettengill v. Elkins 




i. 508 


v. Hinks 




ii. 587 


Pettibone v. Roberts 




i. 492 


Pettingill v. McGregor 




i. 130 


Pettis v. Kellogg 




i. 012 


v. Ray 




ii. 818 


Pettit, Ex parte 




iii. 427 


v. Braden 




iii. 20 


Pettitt v. Johnson 


iii 


377, 378 


Petty i'. Anderson 




i. 391 


v. Cooke 




ii. 19 


Pettyt v. Janeson 




i. 229 


Pevey e. Skinner 




i. 531 


Peyroux v. Howard 


ii 


382, 384 


Pey toe's case 


ii 


788, 818 


Peyton v. Bladwell 




ii. 78 


Peytona, The ii 


209, 


415, 416 


Pezant v. National Ins. Co. 


ii. 


507, 515 


Pfau v. Reynolds 




ii. 817 


Pfeffer v. Steiner 




i. 228 


Pfeiffer v. Maltby 




i. 175 


Phalen r. Virginia 




iii. 510 


Phalen's ease 




iii. 510 


Pliares v. Barbour 




ii. 6 


Phebe, The 


ii. 


420, 454 


Phelan v. Currency Bank 




i. 289 


a. Douglass 




ii. 796 


v. Moss 




i. 289 


v. Phelan 




ii. 92 


Phelps v. Auldjo 




ii. 533 


v. Bellows 




iii. 117 


v. Comstock 




ii. 319 


v. Hubbard 


i. 668; 11 


v. McDonald 




iii. 434 


v. Paris 




ii. 880 


v. Pierson 




iii. 136 


v. Riley 




iii. 233 


u. Townsend 




i. 479 


v. Viseher 




i. 275 


v. Williamson 




iii. 72 


v. Worcester i. 


336, 


338, 350 


Phetteplace v. Steere 




i. 476 


Philadelphia v. Lockhardt 




i. 255 


v. Maryland 




iii. 498 



Philadelphia, &c. R. Co. ii. 634 
Philadelphia Life Ins. Co. u. Amer. 

Life Ins. Co. ii. 611 

Philadelphia R. R. Co. v. Havre de 

Grace Steamboat Co. ii. 907 

Philadelphia, W. & B. R. R. Co. v. 

Howard ii. 943 

Philadelphia & Read. R. R. Co. e. 

Derby i. 114; ii. 237 

Philadelphia, &c. R. Co. a. Larkin ii. 246 ; 

iii. 181, 187 

Philbrick v. Preble ii. 827 

Philbrook v. Belknap ii. 792 ; iii. 63 

a. Delano iii- 297 

v. New England Mut. Fire Ins. 

Co. ii- 631 

Philips v. Bank of Lewiston i. 258 

o. Biggs i. 37 



Philips v. Bury 


iii. 482 


' v. Hunter ii, 738 


739- iii. 406 


v. Knightley 


ii. 826, 834 


v. Morrison 


ii. 794 


v. Williams 


iii. Ill 


Phillimore v. Barry 


iii. 4 


Phillips v. Allan 


iii. 397 


v. Barber 


ii. 497 


v. Bateman 


i. 466 ; ii. 4 


v. Berger 


iii. 319, 331 


v. Berick 


ii. 751 


v. Bistolli 


iii. 46, 50 


v. Bonsall 


i. 12 


v. Bridge 


i. 232 


v. Broadley 


iii. 101 


v. Bullard 


ii. 755 


v. Clagett 


ii. 749 


v. Cockayne 


iii. 125 


v. Condon 


ii. 117 


v. Cook 


i. 235 


v. Crammond 


i. 171 


v. Duke of Bucks, The 


iii. 308 


v. Earle 


ii. 190 


v. Foxal 


ii. 30, 33 


v. Germon 


iii. 286 


v. Green 


i. 366 


v. Headlam 


ii. 627 


v. Higgins 


ii. 833 


v. Howell 


i. 73 


v. Innes 


ii. 901 


v. Ives 


ii. 897 


w. Jones 


ii. 50, 58 


v. Knox Co. Ins. Co. 


ii. 555, 561 


v. Lawrence 


iii. 183 


v. London, &c. R. Co. 


ii. 241 


v. Merrimac Ins. Co. 


ii. 580 


v. Moore 


i. 448, 578 


v. Moses 


ii. 763 


v. Ocmulgee Mills 


i. 565 


v. Page 


ii. 308 


v. Phillips 


i. 168 


v. Purington i. 


198 ; ii. 387 


v. Rounds 


ii. 28 


v. Smith 


iii. 242 



v. Stanch iii. 370 

v. Stevens i. 536 

v. Sun, &e. Co. i. 538 

t-. Thomas Scattergood, The ii. 459 

u. Thompson iii. 66, 347, 358 

v. Wright ii. 383 

Phillipson v. Hayter i. 388 

Phillpott v. Jones ii. 765 

Phillpotts v. Evans ii. 809 ; iii. 225 

Philpot v. Bryant i. 323 

v. Hoare iii. 448 

v. Wallet ii. 68 

Philpott v. Elliott iii. 354 

Phipps, Ex parte iii. 416 

v. Anglesea ii. 716 

v. Chase i. 316 

v. Jones i. 482 

Phcenix v. Assig. of Ingraham iii. 381, 

442 

Phoenix Bank v. Hussey i. 326 

Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Badger ii. 588 



clxiv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Phoenix Ins. Co. o. Cochran ii. 495 

v. Doster ii. 802 

v. Dunham ii. 608 

v. McLoon ii. 491 

u. Michigan, &e. R. Co. ii. 583 

Phosphate Co. r. Green i. 53 

P. H. White, The, v. Levy ii. 302 

Phyfe v. Eimer i. 538 

v. Wardell iii. 319 

Pliyn v. Royal Exch. Ass. Co. ii. 499 

Physick's Estate ii. 85 

Pianciani v. L. & S. W. Ry. Co. ii. 266 

Piatt r. Eads i. 306 

v. Oliver i. 168 

Pickard v. Low i. 613 

.-. Sears ii. 936, 944 

v. Valentine i. 311 

Pickas r. Guile ii. 109 

Pickering v, Appleby iii. 50 

v. Banks iii. 129 

v. Barkley ii. 174 

u. Bishop of Ely iii. 323, 365 

„.. Busk i. 42, 47, 59, 63, 109; ii. 938 

v. Cease ii. 896 

v. Dowson i. 589, 634; ii. 679 

v. Fisk ii. 719 

v. Holt ii. 421 

v. Pickering i. 142, 386 

Picket v. Crook iii. 1K4 

Pickett v. King iii. 82 

v. Memphis Bank i. 130 ; ii. 703 

v. State iii. 68 

Pickford v. Grand Junction Railway 

Co. ii. 184, 185, 187, 190 

Pickman v. Woods ii. 407, 413 

Pickrel v. Rose i. 507 

Pickup v. Thames Ins. Co. ii. 528 

Picquet v. Cormick ii. 881 

v. Curtis i. 309 

v. Swan i. 410 

Pidcock v. Bishop ii. 8, 919 

Bidding v. How ii. 363, 378 
Piddington v. South Eastern R. R. 

Co. i. 446 

Pidge v. Pidge ii. ill 

Pidgin v. Cram i. 343, 345 

Piedmont Ins. Co. v. Ewing ii. 540 

Piehl v. Balchen ' ii. 457, 462 

Pier £'. Carr i. 541, 543 

Pierce, In re i. 384 

u. Andrews ii. 936, 943 

v. Benjamin iii. 211 

v. Boston Savings Bank i. 265 

v. Boston, &c. Bank iii. 113 

v. Brown ii. 940 

v. Bryant i. 242 

v. Burnham ii. 94 

v. Butler ii. 669 

v. Cameron i. 495 

v. Fuller ii. 890 

v. Gilkey i. 304 

v. Jackson i. 209, 231, 232 

c Johnson i. 66 

i: Kennedy i. 284 

u. Kittredge i. 304 



Pierce v. Knight ii. 766, 767 

v. Milwaukee, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 187 

v. Minturn i. 540 

v. Nashua Ins. Co. ii. 478, 576 

v. O'Keefe i. 116 

v. Parker ii. 850 

v. Pendar i. 319 

v. Schenck ii. 143, 144 

v- Selleck ii. 664 

v. Seymour iii. 76 

v. State, The ii 625 

v. Struthers i. 320 

v. Thornely iii. 424, 437 

v. Tobey iii. 91 

v. Travellers Ins. Co. ii. 602 

a. Trigg i. 168, 170 

... Whitney i. 316 

v. Wood ii. 923 

v. Woodward ii. 890 

Pierce, Clark, & Co. v. Knight ii. 762 

Pierpont v. Fowle ii. 339, 349 

v. Graham i. 201, 207, 220; iii. 382 

Piers v. Piers ii. 83 

Pierson v. Dunlop iii. 2b'0 

u. Eagle Screw Co. ii. 321, 327 ; 

iii. 176 

v. Hooker i. 26, 201, 210 

v. Hutchinson i. 331 

v. McCahill i. 468 

Pigeon v. Osborn ii. 883 

Pigott, v. ii. 185 

v. Bagley i. 226 

v. Thompson i. 497 

Pigott's case ii. 853, 854, 855, 850 

Pike v. Balch ii. 398 

v. Gage ii. 830 

u. Galvin ii. 933 

v. Irwin ii. 8 

v. King ii. 901 

v. McDonald iii. 463 

v. Munroe ii. 638 

v. Nicholas ii. 340, 349 

v. Vaughn i. 564 

v. Warren iii. 88 

Pilcher v. Arden i. 129 

Pilford's case iii. 236 

Pilkington v. Scott ii. 37, 49, 890 

Pillans v. Van Mierop i. 7, 303, 457, 459 

Pilmore v. Hood ii. 921 

Pirn v. Curell i. 531 

v. Downing i. 151 

v. Reid ii. 558 

Pinckney v. Hagadorn i. 55 

Pincombe v. Rudge iii. 241 

Pindall i>. The North Western Bank ii. 753, 

754 

Pinder r. Morris iii. 286 

Pine v. Smith i. 292 

Pingree v. Comstock iii. 383 

Pinhorn v. Tuckington iii. 159 

Pinkerton ;■. Caslon ii. 828 

v. Marshall i. 272 

v. Woodward ii. 160, 164 

Pinkham v. Macy i. 322 

v. Mattox, iii. 51 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxv 



Pinkston v. Brewster 




ii. 940 


v. Huie 




iii. 246 


Pinnel's case i 


249; ii. 


749, 751 


Pinney v. Barnes 


ii. 868 


; iii. 202 


v. Gleason 




iii. 232 


Pinnock v. Harrison 




iii. 251 


Pintard v. Tackington 




i. 332 


Pinto v. Santos 




i. 96 


Pipe c. Bateman 




i. 240 


Piper v. Manny 


ii. 


156, 166 


v. Smith 




i. 228 


Pipon v. Cope 




ii. 500 


v. Pipon 




iii. 406 


Piqua Bank v. Knoup 




iii. 498 


Pirie v. Anderson 




ii. 395 



Piscataqua Bridge v. New Hamp- 
shire Bridge iii. 490, 493, 494, 497, 498 
Pitcairn v. Ogbourne ii. 78 

Pitcher v. Bailey i. 36 

</. Barrows i. 169 

v. Livingston iii. 175, 240, 242 

v. Tovey iii. 424, 448 

v. Wilson ii. 49 ; iii. 41 

Pitchford v. Davis i. 163 

Pitkin v. Brainerd ii. 420 

v. Flanagan i. 35 

v. Pitkin i. 226 

o. The Long Island E. R. Com- 
pany iii. 41 
v. Thompson iii. 397 
Pitman v. Hooper ii. 459, 460 
Pitney v. Glen's Falls Ins. Co. ii. 543, 582 
Pits v. Wordal ii. 826 
Pitsinowsky v. Beardsley i. 62 
Pitt v. Albrithow ii. 152 
v. Berkshire Ins. Co. ii. 615 
v. Petway i. 95 
v. Purssord i. 32, 501 
v. Smith i. 435; iii. 414 
v. Yaldan i. 126 
Pittam v. Foster i. 441 
Pitts v. Beckett i. 586; iii. 10, 13 
v. Congdon i. 324 
v. Hall ii. 305, 327, 328 
v. Mangum i. 460 
v. Waugh i. 188 
v. Wemble ii. 307 
v. Wemple ii. 315 
Pittsburgh, &c. E. Co. v. Alleghany i. 158 
v. Hazen ii. 198 
v. Heck iii. 224 
v. Hollowell ii. 198 
v. MeClurg ii. 817 
v. Shaeffer ii. 29 
Pixley v. Boynton ii. 896 
Place v. Delegal i. 24; ii. 21 
v. Sweetzer i. 236 
Plahto v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 490 
Plaisted v. B. & K. Steam Navigation 

Co. ii. 171, 183, 435 

Planche" v. Colburn ii. 654, 813 

v. Fletcher ii. 534, 700, 894 

Plank Road v. Griffin i- 483 

Plant, Ex parte iii- 424 

v. Condit i- 636 



Planters Bank v. Markham ii. 669 

u. Merritt i. 296 

v. Sellman i. 323 

v. Sharp iii. 482, 486, 507 

u. Snodgrass iii. 139 

v. St. John i. 226 

v. Stockman ii. 765 

v. Wilmington Bank i. 327 

Planters Ins. Co. v. Deford ii. 543, 586 

v. Myers ii. 543 

Plate v. Central K. R. Co. ii. 931 

Plath v. Minn., &c. Ins. Co. ii. 557, 576 

Piatt v. Button ii. 348 

v. Drake i. 322 

v. Hibbard ii. 134, 149, 151, 153, 192 

o. New South Wales ii. 708 

v. Squire ii. 941 

Playford v. United K. Tel. Co. ii. 280, 

281, 282, 295 

Pleasants ;>. Pendleton i. 577 

Plevins v. Downing iii. 57 

Plimmer v. Sells i. 47 

Plimpton v. Curtiss iii. 41 

Plitt, Ex parte iii. 286 

Plomer v. Long ii. 765, 767 

Plowman v. McLane ii. 785 

Pluckwell v. Wilson ii. 250 

Plumer v. Gregory i. 203 

Plumleigh v. Dawson iii. 234 

Plummer v. Jarman i. 381 

v. Keppler iii. 373 

i>. Lyman i. 304 ; iii. 28 

u. McKean iii. 170 

v. Wildman ii. 447 

Plunkett v. Methodist Epise. Society 

iii. 310 
Poe v. Luck iii. 395, 396, 508 

Poillon v. Secor i. 193 

Poindexton v. Blackburn iii. 437 

Point Street Iron Works v. Simmons 

iii. 353 

Polak v. Everett ii. 19, 937 

Poland v. Glyn iii. 442 

Pole v. Ford i. 323 

Polglass v. Oliver ii. 753 

Polhemus v. Heiman i. 617 

Polhill v. Walter i. 71, 72; ii. 916 

Polk v. Oliver i. 191 

Pollard, Ex parte iii. 461, 469 

v. Baylor iii. 125, 126 

v. Baylors iii. 125, 126 

v. Gibbs i. 52 

v. Scholy iii. 116, 125 

v. Shaaffer i. 536, 537 

v. Somerset Ins. Co. ii. 475, 577 

v. Stanton i. 188 

Pollen v. Le Roy iii. 225 

Pollfexen v. Moore iii. 293 

Pollock v. Babcock ii- 4!)6 

v. Donaldson ii- 480 

v. Hall ii- 847 

v. Landis ii. 162 ; iii. 267 

v. Maison iii- 109 

v. Pratt iii- 464 

v. Stables i. 60, 87; ii. 669 



clxvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Pollock v. Stacy 
Polly v. McCall 
Polydore v. Prince 
Pomeroy v. Burnett 

v. Donaldson 

v. Smith 



ii. 635 
iii. 68 
ii. 731 
iii. 244 
ii. 181 
ii. 129 



Pomfret v. Ricroft i. 535 ; ii. 136, 664 

Pond v. Lockwood i. 292 

v. Underwood i. 86 

v. Williams i. 27 ; ii. 763; iii. 83 

Ponder v. Carter i. 36 ; iii. 98 

v. Graham iii. 500 

Pondrom v. Ch. & A. R. R. Co. ii. 817 

Pool v. Pratt i. 370 ; ii. 06 

v. Welsh ii. 464 

Poole v. Hill i. 24 

v. Palmer ii. 937 

v. Protection Ins. Co. ii. 509 

v. Rice ii. 75G 

v. Tumbridge ii. 770, 771 

Poole's case i. 546, 548 

Pooley v. Budd iii. 319, 330 

v. Driver i. ISO 

v. Harradine i. 294 

Poor v. Hazleton i. 382 

v. Humboldt ii. 546 

i. Oakman ii. 665 

Poorman v. Mills i. 279 

Pope v. Albion Bank ii. 113 

f. Brett ii. 827, 835 

e. Carl ii. 330, 336 

a. Chaffe ii. 858 

v. Duncannon iii. 333 

v. Harkins ii. 940 

v. Jackson i. 546 

v. Linn ii. 901, 904 

v. Nance i. 301 

v. Nickerson ii. 396, 397, 403, 405, 

454, 456 

v. Onslow iii. 424, 427 

v. Randolph i. 186, 264 

v. R. B. Forbes ii. 435 

v. Risley i. 230 

v. Tunstall ii. 819 

Popham o. Eyre iii. 308, 342, 340 

Poplewell v. Wilson i. 282 

Poppenhausen u. N. Y. G. P. C. Co. 

ii. 309, 328 

v. Falke ii. 313 

Pordage i: Cole ii. 658, 600 

Port v. Jackson iii. 200 

<-. Port ii. 82, 84 

v. Turton iii. 416 

Port Carbon Co. v. Groves i. 631 

Porter v. Androscoggin & Ken. R. R. 

Co. i. 156 

v. -Ballard i. 257 

v. Bank of Rutland i. 83 

v. Barry i. 200 

v. Blood ii. 794 ; iii. 253 

v. Briggs i. 388 

v. Bussey ii. 470 

v. Dougherty iii. 306 

v. Hldebrand ii. 275 

v. Judson i. 316 



Porter v. Kemball 


i. 315 


v. Lane 


ii. 875 


v. Langhorn 


ii. 12 


v. McCollum 


i. 272 


u. Morris 


ii. 884 


v. Munger 


iii. Ill 


v. Pettengill 


i. 578 


v. Providence Ins. Co. 


ii. 444 


v. Sawyer 


ii. 897 


v. Stewart 


ii. 79.3 


v. Taylor 


ii. 746 



v. Vorley iii. 426, 452, 454 

v. White i. 200 

v. Wilson i. 198 

Porterfield v. Augusta ii. 712 

Porthouse t'. Parker i. 211, 321 

Portis v. Cummings ii. 941 

Portland Bank, Ex parte i. 205 

v. Apthorp iii. 498 

v. Brown ii. 765, 768 

v. Hyde i. 186 

v. Stacey ii. 380, 395 

o. Stubbs ii. 395, 400, 410, 418 ; 

iii. 443 

Portwood v. Outton iii. 432 

Post v. Jones ii. 397, 440, 442, 456 

v. Kimberly "i. 183, 195, 198 

v. Phcenix Ins. Co. ii. 533 

u. Post i. 549 

v. U. S. i. 627 

Postlethwait v. Garrett iii. 121, 130 

i\ Parkes ii. 75 

Postmaster-General v. Furber ii. 766 

v. Norvell ii. 768 

v, Reeder ii. 19 

Pothonier v. Dawson iii. 253 

Pott u. Clegg iii. 77 

v. Eyton i. 182 

v. Todhunter ii. 686 

r. Turner iii. 416 

Potter v. Brown ii. 731 ; iii. 406 

c. Chicago, &c. R. R. Co. iii. 235 

v. Deboos ii. 67 

v. Holland ii. 307, 308, 315, 318 

r. Irish ii. 386 

v. Kerr iii. 395 

v. Marine Ins. Co. ii. 492 

v. Mayo i. 129 ; ii. 60 ; iii. 286 

u. McCoy . i. 212 

u. Merchants Bank i. 75 

u. Morland ii. 668 

v. Muller ii. 324 

v. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 447, 615 

v. Ontario & Livingston Mut. Ins. 

Co. ii. 584, 630 

v. Parsons i. 130 

v. Providence Ins. Co. ii. 502, 517 
r. Sanders i. 514 

v. Spilman iii. 455 

v. Suffolk Ins. Co. ii. 497 

v. Taggart ii. 770 

v. Thompson ii. 129 ; iii. 253 

v. Tyler i. 289 

v. Whitney ii. 324 

v. Yale College iii. 121 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxvii 



Pottinger v. Wightman ii. 712 
Potts v. Aechternacht i. 110 
v. Henderson i. 08 
v. New York, &c. R. Co. iii. 270 
v. Whitehead i. 515 
Poucher v. Holley ii. 874 
v. Norman ii. 60 
Pougett v. Tompkins ii. 89 
Poughkeepsie Bank v. Phelps iii. 17, 98 
Poulter v. Killingbeek iii. 35 
Pounsett v. Fuller iii. 223 
Pourie v. Fraser i. 48 
Poussard v. Spiers ii. 809 
Poutz v. La. Ins. Co. ii. 481 
Powder Co. v. Burkhardt i. 558 
Powell, Ex parte iii. 419 
v. Biddle ii. 681, 692 
v. Bradlee ii. 915 
v. Brown i. 459 
v. Conant iii. 335 
r. Divett ii. 854, 855 
o. Edmunds i. 524 
v. Graham i. 113 
v. Hinsdale ii. 216 
v. Horton ii. 667 
v. Hyde ii. 501 
v. Little ii. 746 
v. Lyles i. 615 
v. Manson Manuf. Co. i. 406 
v. Myers ii. 213 
v. M. & B. Manuf. Co. iii. 237, 239 
v. Newburgh iii. 206 
v. Salisbury iii. 195 
v. Smith iii. 200 
v. Thomas i. 283 
v. Tuttle i. 89 
v. Waters iii. 129, 153 
Power v. Barham i. 622 
v. Finnie i. 286 
v. Kent iii. 286 
v. Whitmore ii. 447, 537, 609 
Powers v. Bellinger i. 564 
v. Fowler iii. 16 
v . Hale iii. 316, 371 
v. Nash i. 32 
v. North Eastern Ass. ii. 592 
v. Russell i- 386 
v. Ware ii. 858 
Powhattan Steamboat Co. v. Appo- 
mattox R. R. Co. ii. 190, 907 
Powis v. Smith i- 22 
Powles v. Hider i- 114 
v. Innes ii. 476 
v. Page i- 83 
Powley v. Walker i- 537 
Pownal v. Ferrand i- 500 
Praeger v. Bristol, &c. R. Co. ii. 251 
Prankard, Ex parte *'.':. *^ 
Prather v. "Vineyard "i- 28 
Pratt v. Adams iii. 116, 118, 123 
v . Bates iii- 23 
v. Beaupre i- 58 
v. Bryant ii. H6 ; iii. 213 
v. Chase iii- 49, 411 
v. Curtis iii- 4 4 1 



Pratt v. Elgin Baptist Soc. i. 483 

v. Flamer i. 377 

v. Foote ii. 757 

v. Hackett ii. 827, 837 

v. Hubbard ii. 722 

v. Huggins iii. 108 

v. Humphrey iii. 24 

v. Hutchinson i- 162 

v. Landon i. 177 

v. Law iii. 358 

v. Maynard i. 664 

v. Paine ii. 646 

o. Parkman i. 594, 595 ; ii. 395 

v. Railway Co. ii. 227 

v. Reed ii. 381, 382, 453 

v. Richards, &c. Co. i. 543 

v. Russell i. 463 

v. Willey iii. 117 

Pratt's case iii. 417, 474 

Pray v. Clark i. 532 ; iii. 309 

v. Gorham i. 348 

v. Maine i. 297 ; ii. 6 

v. Mitchell iii. 56 

Prebble v. Boghurst i. 466 ; iii. 373 

Preble v. Baldwin iii. 24, 38 

Precious v. Abel i. 59 

Prentice v. Achorn i. 435 ; iii. 373 

v. Reed ii. 840 

v. Zane i. 292 

Prentiss v. Danielson i. 308 

v. Graves ' i. 273 

v. Russ ii. 918 

v. Savage ii. 713 

v. Sinclair i. 191 

v. Stevens iii. 77 

Presbrey v. Williams ii. 797 

Presbury v. Morris i. 627 

Presb. Church v. City of New York 

ii. 807 

Presb. Congr. v. Williams ii. 941 

Presbyterian Soc. v. Beach i. 483 

Prescot, Ex parte iii- 439 

t7. ii. 644 

Preseott, Ex parte iii. 424, 468 

v. Brinsley i- 285 

v. Brown i. 385 

v. Elms i- 548 

v. Flinn i. 47 

<>. Holmes i- 615 

v. Hull i- 257 

v . Locke i. 564, 567 

v. Norris i- 338 

w.Parker iii. Ill 

v. Perkins i- 35 

v. Trueman iii- 244 

President, The Brig ii- 381 

President, &c. v. Ogle ii- 884 

Preslar v. Stallworth iii- 109 

Presley v. Davis i- 347 

Preston v. Boston _i- 496 

v. Christmas ii- 823 

u. Dayson _j- 316 

v. Greenwood ii- 487 

v. Jackson iii- 129 

v. Merceau ii- 679 



clxyiii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Preston v. Preston 


iii. 311 


Prior v. Hembrow 


i.145; ii. 848 


v. Tubbin 


iii. 200 


Priscilla, The 


ii. 405 


v. Walker 


iii. 160 


Pritchard i\ Brown 


ii. 932 


v. Whitney 


i. 578, 579 


v. Howell 


iii. 72 


Prestwick v. Marshall 


i. 47, 302 


v. Martin 


ii. 43 


Prettyman v. Unland 


i. 552 


o. Merchants Ass. Soc. 


ii. 618 


Prevost v. Gratz 


ii. 860 


v. Norton 


ii. 712 


Prevot v. Lawrence 


i. 540 


v. Ovey iii. 323, 


324, 329, 338 


Prewett v. Carruthers 


i. 460 


o. Schooner Lady Horatia i 1 


Prewitt v. Wilson 


i. 460; ii. 76 


Pritchett v. Ins. Co. 


ii. 484 


Price v. Alexander 


i. 122 


Probart v. Knouth 


i. 338 


v. Asheton 


iii. 364 


Proctor v. Jones 


iii. 47 


v. Barker 


i. 325 


v. Keith 


i. 536 


v. Benington 


i. 437 


v. Moore iii. 


394, 397, 409 


v. Corporation of Penzance iii. 309 


v. Nicholson 


ii. 161, 167 


v. Dyer 


iii. 371 


v. Sargent 


ii. 890 


v. Easton 


i. 406 


Profllet v. Hall 


ii. 160 


v. Green 


iii. 169, 170 


Propert r. Parker 


iii. 6 


v. Griffith 


iii. 309, 337 


Proprietors of Canal Bridge v. Gor- 


v. Hartshorn 


ii. 200 


don 


i. 154 


v. Harwood 


ii. 941 


Proprietors of Ken. Purchase v. La- 


v. Hewett 


i. 357 


fa oree 


iii. 511 


u. Hicks 


i. 167 


Proprietors of Trent Navigation v. 


v. Hopkins 


iii. 511 


Wood ii. 


169, 170, 180 


v. Justrobe 


iii. 231 


Proprietors, &c. Credit Co 


. «. Ar- 


v. Lavender 


i. 274 


duin 


i. 508 


v. Lea 


iii. 40 


Prosser u. Edmonds 


i. 251, 253 


v. Macauley 


iii. 370 


v. Hooper 


1.638; ii. 811 


v. Neale 


i. 300 


Protection Ins. Co. u. Hall 


ii. 491 


v. Page 


ii. 688, 095 


v. Montefiore 


ii. 297, 525 


u. Powell 


ii. 208, 416 


v. Wilson 


iii. 482, 490 


v. Ralston 


iii. 439 


Prouty v. Roberts 


i. 204 


v. Richardson 


iii. 17 


v. Ruggles 


ii. 315 


v. Seaman 


i. 474 


Providence, The 


ii. 458 


v. Severn 


iii. 188 


Providence Bank v. Billings 


iii. 486, 488, 


v. Trusdell 


ii. 6, 11 




498, 502 


v . Tyson 


ii. 849 


v. Frost 


iii. 123 


v. TJpshaw 


iii. 95 


Providence Life Ins. Co. v. Martin ii. 619 


Prickett v. Badger 


i. 97 


Providence, &c. Co. ^. Phoenix Ins. 


Pride v. Earl of Bath 


ii. 88 


Co. 


ii. 490 


Prideaux v. Burnett 


i. 631 


Providence, &c. R. Co. v. 


Yonkers 


Pridgen r. Andrew 


iii. 113 


Ins. Co. 


ii. 549 


v. Hill 


iii. 96 


Providentia, The 


ii. 519 


Prieger v. Exchange Ins. 


Co. ii. 552 


Provincial Ins. Co. v. Leduc 


i. 65 


Priest v. Citizens Ins. Co 


ii. 587 


Provost v. Wilcox 


ii. 392 


v. Cone 


i. 408 


Prugnell v. Gosse 


ii. 888 


Priestley v. Foulds 


ii. 639 


Pruman v. Hardin 


i 579 


v. Fowler 


ii. 45, 40 


Pruyn v. Milwaukee 


iii. 113 


Priestley's case 


ii. 337 


Pryke v. Waddingham 


iii. 335 


Prime v. Cobb 


i. 556 


Puckett t>. Reed 


i. 668 


o. Koehler 


ii. 10, 11; iii. 27 


v. Smith 


iii. 201 


Primrose v. Bromley 


iii. 421 


v. United States 


i. 638 


Primus, The 


ii. 519 


Pudor v. B. & M. R. R. Co. 


ii. 277 


Prince !-. Clark 


i. 88 


Pugh v. Bussell iii. 


391, 395, 508 


v. Fuller 


ii. 878 


v. Chesseldine 


ii. 789 


v. Ocean Ins. Co. 


ii. 397, 506 


v. Currie 


i. 168, 170 


Prince Albert v. Strange 


ii. 330, 332, 342 


v. Duke of Leeds ii. 486 


635, 795, 797 


Prince Edward v. Trevellick ii. 466 


v. Durfee 


i. 202 


Prince George, The 


ii 450 


v. Good 


iii. 348 


Prince Regent, The 


ii. 405 


Pulbrook v. Lawes 


iii. 38 


Princessa, The 


ii. 520 


Pulcifer v. Page 


ii. 145 


Princeton v. Gulick 


i. 192 


l'ullen v. Shaw 


ii. 859 


Pringle v. Dunn 


i. 81 


Pullian v. Pensonneau 


ii. 840 


v. M'Clenachan 


ii. 838 


Pulling !•. Great Eastern R. 


Co. i. 144 


v. Phillips 


i. 289 


v. Tucker 


iii. 442 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxix 



Pullman Palace Car Co. 


v. Smith ii. 156 


v. Taylor 




ii. 237 


Pulsifer v. Hotchkiss 




i. 495 


Pulte v. Derby 




ii. 838 


Pulteney v. Shelton 




iii. 328 


Pultney v. Keyiner 


i. 102 


; iii. 293 


Pulver, In re 


iii. 


428, 457 


Pulvertoft v. Pulvertoft 




iii. 317 


Pupkey v. Resolute, &c. Ins. Co. 


ii. 477 


Pureeli v. Miner 




iii. 347 


Pureliell v. Salter 


ii. 


882, 938 


Purdew v. Jackson 




iii. 437 


Purdy v. Delavan 


ii. 831, 


832, 834 


v. Philipa 




iii. Ill 


Purser v. Brain 




ii. 371 


Pursley v. Hays 




i. 367 


Purvianee v. Sutherland 




i. 212 


Purvis v. Rayer 




ii. 334 


Pusey v. Clemson 




ii. 852 


v. Pusey 




iii. 329 


Putnam v. Dutch 




ii. 395 


v. Farnham 




ii. 10 


v. French 




ii. 745 


v. Home Ins. Co. 


i. 59 


; ii. 471 


v. Putnam 




ii. 724 


a. Ritchie 




iii. 238 


v. Story i. 


253, 474 


, iii. 431 


v. Sullivan 




i. 308 


v. Tennyson 




i. 384 


v. Tillotson 


ii. 


409, 668 


v. Wise 


i. 


174, 183 


v. Wood 


ii. 


422, 423 


Pye, Ex parte 




iii. 315 


v. Daubuz 




iii. 427 


Pyke v. Thomas 




ii. 890 


Pyle, &c. o. Cravens 




i. 334 



Q. 



iii. 605 

i. 183 

iii. 68, 108 

iii. 126 

ii. 801 

i. 458 

i. 118, 119, 120 

ii. 576 



Quackenbush v. Danks 

v. Sawyer 
Quantock v. England 
Quarles v. Brannon 

v. George 

v. Quarles 
Quarman v. Burnett 
Quarrier v. Ins. Co. 
Quebec Ins. Co. v. St. Louis ii. 564 

Queen v. Inhabitants of Stoke-upon- 

Trent ii. 668 

v. L. & S. Railway Co. ii. 938 

v. Nevill ii. 634 

Queiroz v. Trueman i. 102; iii. 258, 278 
Quelin v. Moisson 
Quick v. Ludborrow 
Quigley v. De Haas 

v. Thompson 
Quimby v. Hazen 

v. Putnam 

v. Cook 
Quince v. Callender 
Quincey v. Quincey 

v. Sharpe 
Quincy, Ex parte 



iii. 406 

ii. 664, 852 

i. 69; ii. 648 

ii. 909 

iii. 254 
iii. 91 

iii. 161 
ii. 715 
ii. 693 
iii. 76 
i. 547 



Quincy v. Hall iii. 105 

v. Quincy i. 895 

v. Tilton i. 654 ; ii. 812 

Quincy Bank v. Ricker i. 300 

Quinebaug Bank v. Tarbox ii. 866 

Quinn v. Davis i. 556 

v. Fuller i. 211 



K. 



Raba v. Ryland iii. 290 

Rabaud v. De Wolf ii. 78 

Rabone v. Williams ii. 883, 884 

Racehorse, The ii. 426 

Raekham v. Marriott iii. 75 

Rackstraw v. Imber i. 185 

Radford v. Smith i. 572, 680 

Radley v. Manning iii. 124, 135 

Rae v. Grand Trunk R. Co. ii. 184 
Rafferty v. New Brun. Ins. Co. ii. 546, 547 

Raffin, Ex parte iii. 298 

Ragan v. Kennedy i. 569 

Ragg v. King ii. 459 

Ragsdale v. Memphis R. Co. ii. 47 

Rahilly «. Wilson i. 558 
Rahway Sav. Inst. v. Irving St. 

Church i. 546 

Raiguel v. Ayliff i. 280 

Raikes v. Todd iii. 16, 17 

Railroad Co. v. Aspell ii. 248 

v. Barrow ii. 236 

v. Campbell ii. 232 

v. Finney iii. 187 

v. Georgia iii. 487 

v. Hecht iii. 506 

v. Lockwood ii. 270 

v. Manuf. Co. ii. 257 

v. National Bank i. 291 

R. R. Co. v. Trimble ii. 319 

Railton v. Hodgson i. 66 

v. Mathews ii. 9, 918 

Railway Co. v. Vallely ii. 246 

Rainbolt v. Eddy ii. 853 

Rainey v. Capps . ii. 900 

Rainsford v. Fenwick i. 337 

v. Smith ii. 931, 932 

Rainwater v. Durham i. 338 

Raisin v. Clark i. 94 

Raitt v. Mitchell ii 669; iii. 264, 271 

Rake v. Pope iii. 44 

Raleigh v. Atkinson i. 74 

Ralli v. Janson ii. 489 

Ralph v. Brown ii. 866 

Ralston v. Smith ii. 308 

v. The State Rights ii. 434 ; iii. 185 

v. Union Ins. Co. ii. 507 

Ramaley v. Leland ii. 160 

Ram Coomar Coondoo v. Chunder 

Canto Mookerjee ii. 908 

Ramdulollday v . Darieux i. 307 

Ramires v. Kent i. 448 

Rammelsberg v. Mitchell i. 172 

Ramsay v. George i- 383 

v. Joyce i. 411 



clxx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Ramsbotham v. Cator 


i. 280 


Rapier v. Holland 


ii. 877 


Ramsbottorn v. Gosden 


iii. 312 


Rapp, Ex parte 


iii. 420 


Ramsdale v. Horton 


ii. 753 


v. Latham 


i. 209 


Ramsdell v. Maxwell 


i. 541 


v. Palmer 


ii. 672 


z>. Morgan 


iii. 137 


v. Rapp 


ii. 624 


v. Sigerson 


iii. 382, 403 


Rashleigh, Ex parte 


iii. 470 


Ramsden v. Hylton 


ii. 034 


Ratcliffe v. Allison 


iii. 343 


Ramsour v. Thomas 


ii. 705 


v. Planters Bank 


i. 308 


Ranay v. Alexander 


i. 580 


Rateau v. Bernard 


i. 570 


Rand t; Hubbard 


i. 271 


Rathbone v. Orr 


ii. 318 


v. Hubbell 


i. 159 


Rathbun r. Payne ii 


247,248,431 


v. Mather 


i. 486 ; iii. 20 


Rattary v. Cook 


i. 663 


v. The Barge 


ii. 392 


Rattoon v. Overacker 


i. 146 


Randall v. Harvey 


i. 471 


Ratzer v. Ratzer 


i. 174 


v. Howard 


ii. 914 


Raubitschek v. Blank 


iii. 18 


v. Kehlor 


i. 62 


Raux v. Brand 


iii. 78 


v. Kelsey 


iii. 23 


Ravee v. Farmer 


ii. 836 


v. Lynch 


ii. 425 


Raw v. Cutten 


iii. 421, 428 


v. Moon 


ii. 750 


Rawley v. Rawley 


ii. 882 


v. Morgan 


ii. 76 ; iii. 33 


Rawlings v. Bell 


ii. 916 


v. Newson 


i. 630 ; iii. 219 


Rawlins r. Goldfrap 


i. 352 


v. Randall 


i. 390 ; ii. 92 


v. Jenkins 


ii. 633 


v. Raper 


iii. 227 


v. Van Dyke i. 


347, 393, 401 


v. Rhodes 


i. 633 


Rawlinson v. Oriet 


ii. 863 


i'. Snyder 


i. 58 


v. Pearson 


iii. 416 


v. Sweet 


i. 338 


v. Shaw 


ii. 852 


v. Van Vechten i. 


52, 72, 122, 155 


v. Stone 


i. 271 


f. Wilkins 


iii. 103 


Rawson v. Johnson 


i. 577, 578 


v. Willis 


iii. 362 


v. Spencer 


iii. 483 


Randel v. Chesapeake & 


Delaware 


v. Walker 


iii. 426 


Canal Co. 


ii. 844 


Rawstorne v. Gandell 


ii. 749 


Randle e. Harris 


ii. 11; iii. 27 


Ray, Ex parte 


iii. 467 


v. Fuller 


ii. 875 


v. Bank of Kentucky 


iii. 354 


Randleson, Ex parte 


i. 7G3 


v. Catlett 


ii. 900 


v. Murray 


i. 120 


v. Sherwood 


ii. 727 


Rangely v. Spring 


ii. 940 


a. Wiyht 


iii. 471 


Ranger v. Carey 


i. 290, 290 


Raymond v. Bearnard 


ii. 773 


Ranken v. Reeve 


ii. 535 


v. Fitch 


i. 144 


Rankin v. Am. Ins. Co. 


ii. 478, 497 


v. Loyd i. 


337, 344, 348 


i; Blackwell 


ii. BOO 


i\ Pritchard 


iii. 368 


v. Huskisson 


iii. 331 


v. Proprietors of Crown & Eagle 


v. Lodor 


iii. 382 


Mills 


i. 68 


v. Matthews 


i. 524 


c. Roberts 


ii. 634 


v. Potter 


ii. 505 


r. Tyson 


ii. 413 


v. Scott 


iii. 254 


Rayne v. Orton 


i. 29 


v. Simpson 


iii. 343 


Rayner v. Grote 


i. 70 


v. Woodworth 


iii. 100 


v. Mitchell 


i. 113 


Ranking v. Barnard 


iii. 429 


v. Stone 


iii 327 


Rann v. Home Ins. Co. 


ii. 551 


Raynes v. Bennett 


i. 387 


v. Hughes 


i. 7, 457 


Raynor v. Linthorne 


iii. 11 


Ranney v. Edwards 


ii. 843 


v. Nims 


iii. 181 


Rannie r. Irvine 


ii. 890 


Rea v. Cutler 


ii. 445 


Ransom v. Mayor of N. Y. 


ii. 315, 327 


i . Durkee 


i. 394, 396 


Ransome !'. Bentall 


ii. 355 


i>. Gibbons 


ii. 837 


Ranson p. Mack 


i. 321 


Reab v. Moor 


ii. 36, 39 


v. Sherwood 


i. 284 


Read, Ex parte 


iii. 421 


Rapelye v. Anderson i. 291 ; iii. 153, 156 


v. Bonham 


ii. 511 


k. Bailey 


ii. 23 


v. Cutts 


ii. 32 


?■■ Mackie 


i. 566 


v. D upper 


ii. 875 


Raphael v. Bank of Eng. 


i. 289 


v. Earle 


i. 387 


v. Birdwood 


iii. 409 


v. Goldring 


ii. 773, 777 


v. Boehm 


i. 137 


v. Granberry 


ii. 667 


v. Pickford 


ii. 196 


o. Hull of a New Brig 


ii. 384 


v. Thames Valley R. 


Co. iii. 307 


r. Legard 


i. 390 


Rapid, The 


ii. 443 


v. Long 


iii. 316 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxi 



Read v. Nash 

v. Passer 

v. Power 

v. Rann 

v. Spaulding 

v. Taft 

v. Teakle 
Reade v. Com. Ins. Co. 

v. Lacy 

v. Lamb 

i). Livingston 
Reading v. Blackwell 
Ready v. Noakes 
Reakert v. Sanford 
Real Estate Co. v. Keech 



iii. 26 

ii.82 

iii. 337 

i. 110; ii. 654 

ii. 172 

i. 486 

i. 391 

ii. 533 

ii. 342, 343 

iii. 64 

i. 410 

i. 150 

iii. 316 

i. 392 

iii. 124 

Real Estate Ins. Co. v. Roessle ii. 470, 540 

Ream v. Rank iii. 240 

Reaney v. Culbertson i. 41 

Reay v. White ii. 770 

Rebecca, The ii. 183, 407, 432, 454 

Reddick i\ Jones i. 292 

Redding v. Hall i. 537 ; ii. 136, 138 

v. Wilkes iii. 350 

Redfield v. Holland ii. 561 

v. Middleton ii. 348 

Redhead v. Cator ii. 32 

Redman v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 552 

v. Redman ii. 78 

v. Wilson ii. 495, 529 

Redmon v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 554 

Redmond v, Liverpool, &c. Steamship 

Co. ii. 208 

Red Oak Bank v. Orvis i. 312 

Redpath v. West. Un. Tel. Co. ii. 287 

Red Rover, The ii. 442 

Reece v. Allen iii. 378 

Reech v. Kennegal iii. 353 

v. Kennigate iii. 353 

Reed v. Ashburnham R. Co. i. 48 

v. Bartlett ii. 823 

u, Boardman ii- 763 

v. Bostick iii. 285 

v. Canfield ii. 463 

v. Chambers iii. 338 

v. Clark ii. 73 

v. Cole ii. 476, 494 

v. Cutter ii. 304, 308 

v. Evans iii. 17 

u. Fullum ii. 17 ; iii. 15 

v. Garvin ii. 4 

v. Hodges iii. 332 

v. Holcomb iii. 22 

v. Howard i. 235 

v. Jewett i. 569, 611 

v. Kilburn Co-operative Society 

ii. 790 
v. Latham i. 75 

v. Marsh i. 303 

v. Merchants' Ins. Co. ii- 550 

u. Moore i- 393 

v. Murphy i- 268 

v. Noe i- 525 

v. Pacific Ins. Co. ii- 74 

v. Rann »• 654 

v. Royal Exch. Ass. Co. ii. 606 



Reed i>. Shaw 




ii. 


849 


v. Shepardson 


i. 


231, 


234 


v. Smith 




iii. 


129 


v. Taylor 




iii 


400 


v. Upton 




ii. 


756 


v. White 




ii. 


390 


v. Williamsburg Ins. Co. 




ii. 


561 


v. Wilmott 




i. 


569 


u. Wilson 




i. 


313 


v. Wood 


i. 


589, 


633 


Reeder v. Craig 




ii 


933 


v. Purdy 




iii. 


188 


v. Sayre 




i. 


548 


Reedie v. Lond. & North Western Rail- 




way Co. 


i. 


116, 


120 


'.'. Seixas 




i. 


322 


Rees v. Lines 




ii. 60 


v. Overbaugh 




ii. 


856 


Reese v. Bradford 




i. 


231 


Reeside, Schooner ii. 183, 


427, 


671, 


677 


v. Knox 




i. 


280 


Reeve v. Bird 


i. 


543, 


544 


v. Parkins 




i. 


230 


Reeves v. Capper ii. 125, 


128, 


101; 




iii. 


254, 


288 


v. Hearne 




ii. 


819 


t\ Reeves 




ii. 88 


r. The Ship Constitution 


ii. 


131, 


428 


Regina v. Ambergate, &c. R. 


Co. 


ii. 


943 


v. Basingstoke 




ii. 


938 


v. Millis 




ii. 84, 85 


v. Smith 




ii. 44, 54 


v. Welch 




ii. 49 


v. Wheeler 




i 


547 


Relioboth v. Hunt 




iii. 


481 


Reid v. Barber 




i. 


616 


v. Darby 




ii 


398 


v. Fairbanks 




ii 


380 


r. Harvey 




ii 


522 


v. Hollinshead' i. 166, 


176 


; iii 


289 


v. Hoskins 


ii 


425, 


808 


v. McNaughton 




iii. 89 


v. Morrison 




i 


311 


u. Rensselaer Glass Factory 


iii. 


110, 
111 


Reif v. Page 




ii 


802 


Reilly v. Jones 


iii 


172 


174 


v. Smith i. 


230 


; iii 


370 


Reiman v. Hamilton 




i 


387 


Reimers v. Ridner 




i 


597 


Reinheimer v. Hemmingway 




i 


236 


Reinicker v. Smith i. 


43E 


; iii 


373 


Reish v. Thompson 




ii. 66 


Reitz v. People 




iii 


463 


Relf v. Ship Maria i. 442 ; ii. 


464, 46 ■ 


466 


Reliance, The 




ii 


461 


Relle v. W. U. Tel. Co. 




ii 


294 


Remelee v. Hall 




iii 


203 


Remer v. Downer 




i 


318 


Remick r. O'Kyle 




i 


309 


v. Sanford i. 685; 


iii. 50, 51 


Remington v. Harrington 




i 


318 


v. Palmer 




ill. 38 


Remington Sewing Machine Co. o. 




Kezertee 






ii. 8 



clxxii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Remnants in Court 
Remon v. Hayward 
Renard v. Sampson 
Renaux v. Teakle 
Renew v. Butler 
Reniger v. Fogossa 
Rennell v. Kimball 



ii. 384 

ii. 686 

ii. 420, 678 

i. 388, 389 

i. 137 

i. 6 ; ii. 665 

ii. 390, 453 



Renner v. Bank of Columbia i. 313; ii. 669 

Rennick v. Ficklin i. 396 

Rennie r. Robinson ii. 940 

Reno v. Hogan ii. 256, 267 

Renoud v. Daskam i. 532 

Renteria c. Ruding i. 328 

Renton v. Chaplin i. 221 

Renwick v. Williams i. 293; iii. 451 

Reppert v. Colvin iii. 91 

Repplier v. Orrich iii. 382 

Rerick v. Hearn iii. 314 

Reserve Ins. Co. a, Kane ii. 606 

Resh v. Bank ii. 113 

Resor v. Johnson ii. 52 

Resultatet, The ii. 442 

Reusse v. Meyers ii. 396 

Reutcli v. Long iii. 39 

Reuter v. Electric Tel. Co. ii. 291 

v. Sala i. 572 ; ii. 790 

Rerens r. Lewis ii. 389, 454 

Revenue Cutter, The ii. 384 

Rew v. Pettet i. 136 

Rex r. Adderley ii. 797 

v. Allen iii. 125 

v. Bellringer i. 160 

i7. Birdbrooke ii. 37 

r. Bower i. 160 

r. Brampton ii. 39, 729 

v. Brotherton ii. 898 

v. Butterton ii. 939 

v. Carlile ii. 930 

v. Christ's Parish ii. 36 

v. Cole i. 354 

v. Collector of the Customs ii. 387 

v. Cording iii. 253 

v. Cumberland ii. 797 

v. De Hales Owen ii. 55 

v. Friend i. 347 

v. Girdwood ii. 625 

(.. Great Borden ii. 36 

... Great Wigston i. 354 

v. Gutch i. 114 

v. Hanger ii. 129 

v. Harborne ii. 613 

p. Hay ii. 613 

v. Hertford ii. 99 

v. Humphery ii. 154 ; iii. 284 

d. Ivens ii. 161 

v. Laindon ii. 687 

v. Lolley ii. 736 

c. Loudonthorpe i. 547 

v. Mainwaring ii. 633 

v. Manning i. 234 

v. Mary Mead i. 398 

v. Miller i. 160 

v. Munden i. 351 

!■. Nutt i. 114 

v. Pedley i. 120 



Rex v. Robinson ,_ iii 449 

o. Scammonden ii- 685, H87 

v. Sedgley ii- 616 

v. Shatton i. Ill 

v. Stevens ii- 797 

v, St. Mary's ii- 644 

v. Twyning ' ii. 612 

b. Varlo i. 160 
v. Webb i. 162 
i'. Westwood i. 160 
v. Whitnash ii. 899 

Reyman v. Mosher iii- 66 

Reynell v. Lewis i. 48, 163 

Reyner t\ Hall ii. 5:;6 

Reynolds, Ex parte iii. 420, 422, 428 

v. Commerce Ins. Co. ii. 544 

v. Douglass i. 326 ; ii. 16 

v. Doyle iii. 98 

u. Fenton ii. 738 

c. Lounsburg ii. 936 
v. Magness ii. 687 
v. McCurry i. 363 
v. Mutual Fire Ins. Co. iii. 436 
v. Nelson iii. 341 
v. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 445, 508, 537 
v. Pinhowe ii. 823 
v. Railroad i. 642 
v. Robinson i. 385 
v. Rowley i. 42 
v. Ruckman i. 172 
v. Shuler i. 548, 553 
c. Stevenson ii. 901 
v. Sweetzer i. 346 
v. Toppan i. 181 ; ii. 194, 195 
». Waller i. 435 

Rhea v. Rhenner i. 407 

Rhine r. Ellen ii. 934 

Rhinelander v. Ins. Co. of Penn. ii. 501 

Rhines v. Phelps i. 612 

Rhoades v. Castnet iii. 18 

Rhode?, Ex parte ii. 875 

r. Amsinck i. 206 

v. Forwood i. 75 

v. Ibbetson iii. 371 

.-. Lindly i. 279 

v. Rhodes iii. 348, 350 

i. Thuaites i. 566 

Rice, Ex parte iii. 418 

v. Austin i. 108, 232 

r. Barnard i. 168, 231 ; ii. 745 

v. Barrett i. 193 

v. Bixlee i. 468 

*, Churchill ii. 783 

v. Courtis ii. 719 

v. Dwight Man. Co. ii- 39 

v. Forsyth i. 616 

v. Gist ii. 896 

r. Gordon i. 523 

v. Groffman i. 59 

v. Hart ii. 210 

v. Homer ii. 505 

v. King iii. 201 

v. Mather iii. 153 

v. Maxwell iii. 477 

v. MoMartin i. 231 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxiii 



Rice v. New England Ins. Co. ii. 523, 524 

v. Peet i. 434 

v. Richards i. 227 

v. Sims i. 478 

v. Stearns i. 299 

v. Tavernier i. 131 

v. Tower ii. 489, 676 

v. Welling iii. 125 

v. Wood i. 94 

Rich v. Aldred ii. 103 

v. Basterfield i. 120 
v . Jackson i. 524; iii. 312, 354 

v. Kneeland ii. 180 

v. Lambert ii. 184, 407 

v. Lippincott ii. 314, 315 

v. Lord ii. 634, 851 

v. Parker ii. 518 

v. Smith i. 538 

v. Topping iii. 118 

Richard Busted, The ii. 381, 383, 385 

Richards v. Brockenbrough ii. 826, 827 

v. Brown iii. 116, 149 

v. Clark ii. 797 

v. Drinker ii. 828 

v. Hazzard iii. 382 

v. Hudson iii. 409 

v. James ii. 882 
v. London, &c. Railway ii. 189, 202, 

212 

v. Maryland Ins. Co. iii. 427 

v. Merriam iii. 427 

v. Porter iii. 5, 6 

v. Richards ii. 91 

Richardson, Ex parte iii. 474 

In re iii. 460 

v. Boright i. 367, 368 

v. Brown i- 622 

v. Clark ii. 394 

v. Duncan i. 443, 444 

v. Farmer i- 189 

v. Feu iii. 69, 70 

v. French i. 205 

v. Goddard ii. 200, 208, 416 
v. Goss i. 647, 654; iii. 257, 271, 283 

v. Hogg }■ 242 

v. Jackson ii. 779 

v. Johnson i- 617 

v. Langridge i- 548 

v. Lester i- 200 

v. Lincoln i. 299 
v. Maine Ins. Co. ii. 425, 496, 501, 531 

v. Martyr i. 281 

v. Mellish i. 469 

v. Moies i- 48 
v. New York Central R. R. Co. ii. 249 

v. Nourse ii. 840 

v. Pierce iii- 43 

v. Rardin i- 568 

v. Richardson i. 266 ; iii. 106 

v. Rickman ii- 820 

v. Ridgley iii- 293, 295 

v. Robbins iii- 29 

v. Scott River Co. i- 153, 156 

v. Stodder i- 411 

v. Strong i. 436 ; iii. 414 



Richardson v. Watson 


ii. 690 


v. Whiting 


ii. 454 


v. Williamson 


i. 69 


o. Wil. & Man. R. R. Co. 


ii. 248 


v. Wyatt 


i. 170 



Riches v. Brigges ii. 108, 109 

Richmond v. Dubuque, &c. R. Co. iii. 319 

v. Roberts ii. 66 

v. Smith ii. 156, 157, 159 

v. Union Steamboat Co. ii. 207 

Richmond Manuf. Co. v. Stark i. 52 

Richmond R. R. Co. v. The Louisa 

R. R. Co. iii. 490, 493, 494 

Richmond Trading, &c. Co. ca Farquar 

i. 624 
Richmondville Seminary v. McDonald 

i. 161 
Richmondville Union Seminary v. 

Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 557, 582 

Richter v. Poppenhusen i. 227 

Rickard v. Kohl ii. 881 

Ricker v. Cross ii. 395 

Rickert v. Snyder iii. 240, 243, 244 

Rickets v. Dickens i. 615 

Ricketson v. Compton i. 132 

Ricketts v. Bell iii. 371 

v. Pendleton i. 312 

v. Weaver i. 144 

Rickford v. Ridge ii. 755 

Rickman v. Carstairs ii. 484 

Ricks r. Dillahunty i. 615, 616, 623 

Ricord v. Bettenham ii. 447 

Riddell v. Sutton i. 143 

Riddle v. Backus iii- 41 

v. Bowman i. 32 

v. Brown iii- 37 

v. Littlefield i. 530 

■,. Rosenfeld ii. 764 

v. Varnum i. 566 

v. Welden i- 553 

Riddlesbarger v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 588 

Riddlesden v. Wogan ii. 88 

Rider v. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 876 ; iii. 288 

v. Pond ii. 661 

Rider and Fisher, In re ii. 829 

Ridgeley v. Crandall i. 335 

Ridgeway v. Day i. 316 

v. Kennedy i. 579 

Ridgway v. English ii. 52 

v, Hungerford Market Co. ii. 36, 43 

v. Ingram iii- 4, 15 

v. Philip i. 193 

u. Wharton iii. 18, 343 

Ridgway's Appeal i- 175 

Ridley v. Gyde iii- 442 

v. McNairy iii- 347 

Ridout v. Brough iii- 439, 469 

Rigby v. Hewitt ii. 250 ; iii. 192 

Rigden v. Martin ii. 842, 843 

v. Wolcott iii. 180 

Riggs v. Dooley iii- 102 

v. Murray iii- 383 

v. Price i- 280 

v. Waldo i. 275, 284 

Right v. Bawden i. 549 



clxxiv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Eight v. Bueknell 


ii. 932 


u. Cuthell 


i. 49 


v. Darby 


i. 548 


v. Proctor 


ii. 931 


Rigs v. Cage 


i. 76 


Eiley v. Carter 


ii. 885 


v. Cuthell 


i. 50 


v. Farnsworth 


iii. 12, 15 


v. Gerrish 


i. 275 


v. Home 


ii. 261, 273 


v. Mallory 


i. 361 


v. Wiiliam9 


iii. 15 



Riley's Adm'rs v. Vanhouten ii. 632 

Rinehart r. Olwine iii. 226 

King r. Franklin ii. 396 

Ringgold v. Ringgold ii. 150 

Bipka >: Pope i. 309 

v. Sergeant iii. 234 

Ripley v. Chipman ii. 39, 792 

v. Colby i. 1(35 

v. Davis iii. 211 

v. Etna Ins. Co. ii. 470, 522 

v. Kingsbury i. 194, 204 

v. McClure ii. 809 

v. N. J., &c. R. Co. ii. 246 

v. Scaife ii. 422 

v. Waterworth i. 109 

v. "Woods iii. 437 

Rippey v. Miller iii. 186 

Bisdale v. Newnham ii. 521 

Rising v. Granger iii. 292 

Rising Sun, The ii. 441 

Risley, Succession of ii. 610 

o. Plienix Bank i. 256 

v. Eisley i. 25a 

Rison v. Wilkerson ii. 608 

Riston v. Cobb ii. 681 

Ritchie v. Atkinson i. 493 ; ii. 414, 658 

v. Smith ii, 894 

v. U. S. Ins. Co. ii. 508 

v. Williams ii. 852 

Ritson v. Dodge iii. 311 

Rittenhouse v. Leigh i. 193 

Ritter v. Cushman ii. 127 

v. Phillips iii. 113 

v. The Jamestown ii. 392 

Eittinhouse v. Ind. Line of Tel. ii. 290, 301 

Eitts v. Hall ii. 318 

Eivers v. Walker ii. 842 

Rix v. Adams i. 472 

v. Strong ii. 787 

Eixford v. Nye ii. 827, 835 

v. Smith ii. 173 

Eoach v. Chapman ii. 381 

v. Garvan ii. 739 

v. Perry i. 229 

v. Quick i. 337, 383 

v. Thompson i. 33 

Eobalina v. Armstrong i. 377 

Bollards >: Hutson i. 407 

Eohb v. Halsey iii. 123 

r. Montgomery ii. 660, 663 

Bobbins v. Alexander ii. 749 

v. Bacon i. 245, 249, 257 

v. Cooper i. 232 



Bobbins v. Eaton i. 363, 364, 367, 368, 374 

o. Farley iii. 75 

v. Fennel i. 90 

v. Fuller i. 218 

v. Hayward i. 137 

v. Luce ii. 781 

v. Mount i. 356, 5S2 

Bobert c. Garnie ii. 763, 765 

v. West i. 409 

Eobert Fulton, Ship ii. 385, 863 
Robert Morris, The, u. Williamson ii. 392 
Boberts v. Barker i. 545; ii. 669, 677 
v. Beatty ii. 783, 784, 785, 787, 794 

v. Berry iii. 339, 341 

v. Chenango Co. ii. 473, 553 

v. Cocke ii. 587 

v. Connelly ii. 76 

o. Continental Ins. Co ii. 543 

v. Eberhardt 221, 230 

v. Eden i. 285 

v. Fisher ii. 756 

v. Fitler i. 184 

v. Goff iii. 136 

v. Hammon iii. 82 
v. Havelock i. 493 ; ii. 652, 653 

v. Hughes i. 618 

v. Jenkins i. 635 

r. Kelley i. 387 
v. Kelsey i. 222 ; iii. 322 

v. Mackoul ii. 875 

v. Mariett ii. 836 

v. Marston i. 500 

v. Mason i. 316 

v. Morgan i. 623 

u. Myers ii. 333, 338 

i-. Ogilby ii. 218 

<•. Peake i. 280 

v. Eiley ii. 256 

v. Bockbottom Co. ii. 49; iii. 43 

r. Smith ii. 47 

v. Spicer iii. 456 

v. Taft i. 319 

v. Thompson ii. 120 

v. Tremoille iii. 149 
r. Trenayne iii. 121, 125, 147 
v. Tucker ii. 50 ; iii. 14, 43 

v. Turner ii. 149, 191 

v. Ward ii. 307, 309 

v. Wyatt ii. 128, 137 

Bobertshaw v. Hanway i. 170 

Bobertson v. Baker ' i. 168 

f. Breedlove i. 290 

u. Clarke ii. 668 

v. Col. Ins. Co. ii. 481 

v. Deatherage i. 37 

v. Ewell i. 569 
v. French ii. 478, 626, 033, 647 

v. Jackson ii. 667, 672 

v. Kennedy ii. 175, 179 

i'. Kensington i. 286 

v. Ketchum i. 41 

v. Liddell iii- 441 

v. Livingston i. 60 

v. March i. 483 
v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co, ii. 617 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxv 



Robertson v. Money 

v. Smith 

v. St. John 

v. Struth 

v. United Ins. Co. 

v. Vaughan 

v. Western Ins. Co. 
Robeson v. French 
Robinet v. Cobb 
Robinson v. Abell 

v. Alexander 

v. Anderton 

v. Ashton 

v. Baker 

v. Bakewell 

v. Bank of Attica 

v. Batchelder 



ii. 668 

i. 12, 28, 211 

j. 532 

ii. 872 

ii. 480 

Iii. 45, 62 

ii. 478 

ii. 902 

ii. 837 

i. 274, 284 

iii. 96 

i. 615 

i. 170 

ii. 223 ; iii. 268 

iii.. 176 

iii. 443 

ii. 685, 781, 782 



v. Bland ii. 700, 701, 713, 714, 719, 
887; iii. 112, 165 

v. Blen i. 306 

v. Campbell iii. 237 
v. Commonwealth Ins. Co. ii. 396, 505, 

509 

v. Cone ii. 248, 250 

v. Cook ii. 775 
v. Crowder i. 200, 201 ; iii. 409 

v. Davison ii. 805 

v. Day i. 308 

v. Doolittle ii. 70-3 

v. Dunmore ii. 176, 189 

v. Elliott i. 613 

v. Fiske ii. 631 

v. Frost ii. 129 

v. Gardner ii. 104 

v. Garth iii. 12 

v. Georges Ins. Co. ii. 844 

v. Gleadow i. 66 

v. Green ii. 019 

v. Greinold i. 386 

v. Harman ii. 165, 246 

v. Harvey i. 617 

v. Hawkesford i. 296 

v. Hindman ii. 35 

v. Hofman i. 211 

v. Jones ii. 520, 931 

v. Kettletas iii. 352 

v. Knights ii. 415 

v. Larrabee iii. 254 

v. Lotus, The ii. 392 

v. Lyall i.'84 

v. Lyle i. 38 

v. Lyman i. 290 

v. Mansfield iii. 291 

v. Manuf. Ins. Co. ii. 491 

v. Marine Ins. Co. ii. 419, 420 

v. McDonnel i- 558 

v . Mollett i|- 672 

v. Moore i'- 827 
o. Musgrove i. 524, 525, 582 
v. Nahon i. 394, 395, 404 

i\ New York Ins. Co. ii- 58 

v. Noble iii. 208, 233 

v. Norris •■ Hi 

v. Offutt ii- 27 

v. Page iii- 371 



Robinson i>. Perry 




ii. 876 


v. Prescott 




ii. 740, 744 


v. Price 




ii. 447 


v. Rapelye 




iii. 382 


v. Red Jacket, 


The 


ii. 392 


u. Reed 




ii. 18 


v. Reynolds 




i. 300, 407 


c. Rice 




i. 616 



v. Robinson i. 137, 406 ; ii. 877 ; 
iii. 200, 316 

v. Skipworth i. 556 

v. Snyder ii. 640 

v. Taylor iii. 455 

v. Thompson i. 217 
v. Threadgill i. 477 ; ii. 110, 112 

u. Tobin ii. 474 

o. Turpin ii. 204 

v. Vale iii. 470 

v. Walker i. 12 

v. Walter ii. 167 

v. Ward i. 126 

e. Webb i. 116 

v. Weeks i. 362 

v. Wilkins ii. 348 

v. Wilkinson i. 189 

v. Yarrow i. 47 

Robinson Machine Works v. Vorse i. 87 
Robinson Works v. Chandler i. 515, 618, 

030 

Robison v. Gosnold i. 395 

v. Lyle i. 37 

Robson v. iii. 427 

v. Bennet i. 312; ii. 755 

v. Collins iii. 344 

u. Curlewis i. 322 

v. North Eastern R. Co. ii. 251 

Rocco v. Hackett ii. 743 

Rochester Bank v. Harris i. 296 

Rockford Bank v. Gayiord ii. 31 

Rockwell v. Adams ii. 939 

i: Hobby iii. 297, 432 

v. Hubbell iii. 506 

v. Lawrence iii. 358 

Rodes v. Blythe iii. 161 

Rodger v. Comptoir D'Escompte i. 651 

Rodgers ;>. Jones iii. 50 

v. Niles i. 630 

u. Nowill ii. 373, 376 

v. Smith i. 615 

». Torrant ii. 319 

Rodman v. Hedden iii. 200 

v. Zilley i._ 522 

Rodney v. Strode i. 28 

Rodocanachi v. Buttrick i. 283 

v. Elliott ii. 470, 501 

Rodrigues v. Habersham i. 633 

v. Melhuish _ ii. 469 

Rodriguez v. Hefferman i. 60, 102 

Rodwell v. Phillips iii- 35 

Roe, The ii- 438, 439 

v. Archbishops ii- 940 

u.Harrison i. 639; ii. 20 

v. Hayley i- 261 

v. Prideaux i- 88, 549 

v. Tranmarr ii. 635, 636, 637 



clxxvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Roe d. Durant v. Doe i. 548 
Roehner v. Knickerbocker Ins. Co. i. 281 ; 

ii. 797 

Roelandts v. Harrison ii. 521 

Roffey, Ex parte iii. 467 

Roger Williams Ins. Co. o. Carring- 

ton ii. 471 

Rogers v. Allen iii. 409 

v. Atkinson ii. 679 

v. Bachelor i. 208 

v. Boehm i. 97 

o. Bradshaw iii. 494 

v. Bumpass i. 380 

v. Clifton ii. 48; iii. 177 

v. Coleman ii. 740 

u. Colt ii. 624 

v. Currier ii. 383 

v. Eagle Fire Ins. Co. ii. 635 

v. Fales iii. 176 

v. Hackett i. 325 

v. Hanson iii. 223 

v. Hurd i. 335, 363 

v. Kneeland i. 49; iii. 17 

v. Langford i. 298 

v. Ludlow i. 409 

v. March i. 55 

v. Maylor ii. 536 

v. Mechanics Ins. Co. ii. 451, 484, 485, 

660, 672, 674 

v . Miller i. 332 

v. Novvill ii. 370, 373, 376 

v. Painter i. 172 

v. Palmer i. 81 

v. Parrey ii. 888 

v. Pitcher ii. 940 

u. Rathbun iii. 130 

v. Rogers i. 150 ; ii. 93 

v. Rutter ii. 780 

v. Saunders iii. 342 

v. Smith i. 408 

u. Snow i. 539 

v. Spence iii. 215, 453 

v. St. Charles, The ii. 429, 431, 433 

v. Stephens i. 463 

v. Taintor ii. 369 

v. Traders Ins. Co. i. 252; ii. 482 

o, Thomas i. 639, 641, 643 

v. Weir ii. 153 

v. Western Union Tel. Co. ii. 903 

v. Wheeler ii. 184 

Rogers, &e. Works v. Lewis i. 579 

Rogerson v. Ladbroke ii. 882 

Rollback v. Pacific R. R. Co. ii. 47 

Rohl k. Parr ii. 428 

liohr v. Kindt iii. 247 

Rohrback v. Germania ii. 561 

Roland v. Gundy i. 556 

Rolfe v. Abbot i. 340 

v. Rolfe iii. 323, 330, 331 

Roller v. Woodridge i. 130 

Rolleston v. Hibbert iii. 443 

v. Smith iii. 443 

Rollins n. Columbian Ins. Co. ii. 574 

v. Marsh i. 152, 473 

v. Moody i. 642 



Rollins v. Mooers 


iii. 403 


v. Stevens 


i. 210 


Rolls, Ex parte 


iii. 420 


v. Yate 


i. 15, 31 


Rolt v. Watson 


i. 331 


Romaine v. Allen 


iii. 212 


Roman ;>. Serna 


ii. 3 


Romig v. Romig 


iii. 210 


Rommel v. Wingate 


i. 515, 565 


Romp, The 


ii. 400 


Ronaldson v. Tabor 


i. 540 


Rondeau v. Wyatt 


iii. 59, 60, 62 


Rood o. Jones 


i. 470 


v. Winslow 


i. 444 


Roff e. Stafford 


i. 334 



Rooke v. Midland Railway Co. ii. 212 

Roosevelt v. Hopkins i. 539 

v. Kellogg ii. 710 

v. Mark iii. 75, 463, 464 

Root v. Ball ii 933 

<.-. Crock ii. 933 

v. Godard i. 301 

v. Great Western R. Co. ii. 227 

v. Lord i. 578 

v. Lowndes iii. 179 

u. Renwick ii. 840 

v. Taylor ii. 876 

Rooth v. North Eastern R. R. Co. ii. 270 

... Quinn i. 202 

Taylor ii. 870 

v. Wilson ii. 100 

Roots v. Lord Dormer i. 525 

Roper v. Johnson ii. 810 ; iii. 223 

v. Stone i. 458 

v. Williams iii. 331 

Rosa v. Brotherson i. 292 

Roscorla v. Thomas i. 475, 502, 621 

Rose, The ii. 431 

v. Beatie i. 027, 628 

i: Bowler i. 143 

v. Clarke i. 251 

!•. Cunynghame iii. 14 

v. Daniel i. 370 

u. Dickson iii. 117 

u. Hart iii. 439, 469 

v. Haycock iii. 441 

v. Izard i. 167 ; iii. 440 

v. Poulton i. 21, 180 

v. Sims iii. 439, 469 

v. Spark ii. 835 

v. Story i. 579 

v. U. S. Tel. Co. ii. 295 

v. Williams ii. 28 

Rosetto i'. Gurney ii. 418, 495, 510 

Rosevelt v. Fulton ii. 925 

v. Hopkins i. 539 

Ross, Ex parte iii. 469 

v. Active, The ii. 446, 456 

v. Bradshaw ii. 593 

v. City of Madison i. 154 

v. Cornell i. 185 

v. Green ii. 896 

u. Henderson i. 167 

v. Hill ii. 169 

v. Howell i. 206 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxvii 



Eoss v. Johnson 


ii. 154 


v. Knight 


ii. 878 


v. Parkyns 


i. 174 


v. Ross 


ii. 701 ; iii. 72 


v. Sadgbeer 


ii. 891 


v. Thwaite 


ii. 484 


v. Turner 


i. 260 


v. Welch 


iii. 35 



Ross's Ex'r v. McLauchlan's Ad. i. 467 

Rosse v. Bramsteed ii. 167 

Rossiter u. Chester ii. 215,419 

v. Miller iii. 14 

v. Rossiter i. 64, 69 

v. Trafalgar Life A. i. 90 

Roswell v. Vaughan i. 615 

Rotch !>. Edie ii. 501 

v. Hawes ii. 137 

Rotoh's Wharf Co. v. Dudd i. 155 

Roth v. Buffalo, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 212 

17. Colvin i. 289 

Rothery v. Munnings iii. 101 

Rothschild v. Corney i. 296 

v. Currie i. 313, 314 

v. Michigan, &o. R. Co. ii. 203 

Rothwell v. Humphreys i. 203 

Rouch v. The Great Western Co. iii. 434, 

454, 458 

Rouquette v. Overmann i. 308, 313 

Rourke v. White Moss Colliery Co. ii. 46 

Rouse v, Ins. Co. ii. 531 

Rousset v. Ins. Co. ii. 476 

Routh v. Thompson i. 49 ; ii. 389, 474, 

479, 480, 482 

Routledge v. Burrell ii. 473, 521 

v. Grant i. 527, 562 

i). Ramsay ii. 471 ; iii. 72 

Roux v. Salvador ii. 503, 506, 512 

Rovena, The ii. 467 

Rover, The, v. Stiles ii. 392 

Row v. Dawson i. 251 ; iii. 300 

u. Pulver ii. 24, 26 

Rowan v. Kirkpatrick i. 136 ; iii. 422 

Rowan's Appeal iii. 362 

Rowe v. Bellaseys iii. 149 

„. Brig ii. 437, 440 

v. Galliers iii 449 

v. Hamilton i. 406 

v. Pickford i. 647 

v. Stevens i. 94 

v. Tipper i. 323 

v. Ware i- 46 

v. Young i. 309 ; ii. 770 

Rowena, The ii- 216 

Rowland v. Bull's Ex'rs iii. 143 

v. State i. 130 

Rowlandson, Ex parte i. 180 

Rowley v. Ball i. 331 

v. Bigelow i. 328, 643, 650 ; ii. 409, 

937 
v. Empire Ins. Co. ii- 543 

v. Gibbs iii- H5, 217 

... Houghton . ii- 370 

v. Stoddard i- 27, 28 

Rowning v. Goodchild ii- 155 

Roworth v. Wilkes «• 342 

VOL. i. 



Rowton, Ex parte iii. 427, 438, 452 

o. Willink iii. 357 
Royal Bank of Scotland v. Cuth- 

bert iii. 406 

Royal Stewart, The ii. 404 

Royal, &e. Co. v. Braham i. 153 
Royalton v. The R. & W. Turnpike 

Co. iii. 201 

Royce v. Barnes ii. 883 

Royster v. Johnson i. 228 

Ruan v. Gardner ii. 483 

Rubber Company v. Goodyear ii. 312, 321 

Rucher v. Conyngham iii. 147 

Ruchizky v. De Haven i. 362 

Rucker v. Allnut ii. 535 

u. Cammed er iii. 12, 13 

(/. Donovan i. 642 

v. Hannay iii. 69 

ii. London Ass. Co. ii. 488 

Ruckman v. Bergliolz i. 94 

v. Bryan ii. 897 

v. Cowell iii. 477 

a. Merchant Ins. Co. ii. 397, 505, 507, 

508 

v. Mott ii. 420 

v. Pitcher ii. 760 

Rudd v. Planters Bank iii. 129 

Rudder v. Price iii. 165 

Rudderow v. Huntington ii. 373 

Rudge v. Birch ii. 884 

Ruding v. Smith ii. 698, 702, 729 

Rudolph v. Wagner ii. 777 

Rudston v. Yates ii. 829 

Ruff ii. Bull iii. 102 

Ruffin, Ex parte i. 227, 228, 240 

Rufford, Ex parte iii. 468 

Ruggles v. Bucknor ii. 423 

ii. General Ins. Co. ii. 524, 525 

v. Keeler ii. 721 ; iii. 104 

v. Patten i. 309 

Rugh v. Ottenheimer iii. 499 

Rumball v. Metropolitan Bank ii. 936 

Rumney v. Keyes i. 342, 394, 401 

Rumsey v. Berry ii. 896 

Rundale v. La Fleur ii. 829 

Rundel ». Keeler i. 353 

Rundell v. Murray ii. 339, 348 

Rundle, Ex parte iii. 467 

v. Moore i. 87, 353 

Runquist ti. Ditchell i. 59; ii. 408 

Runyan v. Caldwell ii. 134 

v. Nichols i. 128 

Runyon v. Montford i. 316, 320 

Rupart v. Dunn i- 627 

Rusby v. Scarlett i. 47, 48, 52 

Ruse v. Mutual Ins. Co. ii. 607, 614 

Rush v. Baker iii- 426 

Rushforth v. Hadfield ii. 129, 672, 675 

Rushton v. Crawley ii- 309 

Rusk ii. Fenton i- 437 

Russel v. Asa R. Swift, The ii. 385 i 

v. Field ii- 864 

u. Russel iii- 297 

ii. Union Ins. Co. ii- 525 

Russell v. Allard i. 549 



I 



clxxviii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Russell r. Babeock 


ii. 7 


v. Bell 


iii. 439, 469 


v. Branham 


ii. 915 


v. Brooks 


i. 385 


v. Buck 


i. 474 



i.. Carrington i. 564, 565, 567 ; ii. 146 

v. Clark ii- 917 

v. Coffin ii- 635 

!>. Cowles ii- 66 

v. De Grand i. 489 ; ii. 479, 481, 886 

v. Doty iii- 464 

v. Failor i. 32 

v. Fillmore i. 612 

v. Hankey i. 91 

v. Langstafle i. 272, 306 

v. Livingston ii. 178 

v. Miller ii. 876 

c. Nichols i. 595 

u. Nicoll i. 566, 603, 604, 606, 780 

v. O'Brien i. 568; ii. 395 

v. Ormsbee ii. 784, 795 

v. Palmer i. 529 ; iii. 204 

< . Pellegrini ii. 845, 847 

,-. Perkins ii- 520 

v. Phillips i- 304 

v. Pyland ii. 897 

r. Skipwith i- 450 

v. Slade iii. 41 

v. AViggin i. 303; ii. 485 

v. Woodward iii- 382 

Rust v. Gott ii. 897 

v. Larue i. 128 ; ii. 908 

v. Nottidge ii. 49 

Ruston v. Dun woody ii. 847 

Rutenberg r. MaiD iii- 11 

Rutgers v. Hunter i- 523 

v. Lucet ii. 51, 110 

Ruth, Er parte iii. 452 

Rutherford v. Ruff i. 435 ; iii. 373 

Rutland Bank v. Buck i. 292 

Rutland Railroad v. Cole i. 65 

Rutland & Burlington R. R. Co. v. 

Crocker ii. 635 

Rutter r. Blake i. 636 

Ryall v. Rolle ii. 128, 401, 443 ; iii. 427 

Ryan t>. Cumb. Valley R. R. Co. ii. 46 

v. Dorr iii. 3 

v. Goodwin ii. 306, 307, 316 

v. Hall ii. 683 

v. Martin i. 132 ; iii. 169 

v. Rand ii. 686 

v. Sans i. 47, 404 

v. Tondinson iii. 64 

u. Trustees ii. 5 

a. Ward iii. 749 

v. Wilson i. 536 

Eyberg v. Snell i. 328, 652 ; iii. 444 

Ryder, In re i. 345, 347, 348 

v. Hathaway iii. 213 

v. Hulse i. 383 

v. Mansell i. 541 

v. Thayer iii. 205 

r. Wombwell i. 337 

Ryerson v. Eldred i. 540 

Ryerss v. Farwell ii. 940 



Ryland v. Smith 
Ryle v. Brown 
Ryram v. Hunter 



iii. 437 

iii. 316 

i. 308 



S. 

Sabel v. Slingluff 
Saccura v. Norton 
Sackett v. Andross 

c. Johnson 
Saco v. Casanueva 
Saeo Bank v. Sanborn 



i. 381 

ii. 848 

iii. 385, 388 

ii. 56 

ii. 934 

i. 319 

Saddington v. Kinsman i. 381 ; iii. 437 

Sadler v. Evans i. 85, 86 

v. Henlock i- 113, 114 

v. Hobbs i. 29 

v. Leigh iii. 460 

o. Nixon i. 31, 34, 184 

p. Robins ii. 738 

Sadlers' Ins. Co. u. Badcock ii. 476, 574 

Sadlier v. Biggs i. 532 

Safford v. McUonough iii. 50 

v. Stevens ii. 836 

Sage v. Brooklyn ii. 832 

c. M'Guire ui. 348 

v. Sleutz i. 579 

v. Strong ii. 18 

v. Wilcox i. 6, 471 ; ii. 7 ; iii. 17 

Sageman v. Brandywine, The ii. 459 

Sager o. Portsmouth, &c. R. R. Co. 

ii. 174, 256, 259, 266 

Sainsbury v. Jones i. 522; iii. 359 

v. Matthews iii. 34 

v. Parkinson i. 271 

Saint v. Pilley i. 545 

St. Alban Steamboat Co. v. Wilkins ii. 39, 

792 

St. Albans Bank i: Wood iii. 137 

St. George v. Wake i. 411 

St. Jago de Cuba ii. 381, 382, 459 

St. John r. Am. Ins. Co. ii. 572, 573, 606 

v. Benedict iii. 374 

v. Diffendorf iii. 285 

v. Garrow iii. 92 

c. Purdy ii. 757 

v Quitzlow i. 541 

v. St. John i. 397 

v. Van Santvoord ii. 230 

St. John's Parish v. Bronson i. 388 

St. Lawrence, The ii. 384 

St. Louis Ins. Co. u. Glasgow ii. 573 

St. Louis, &c. Co. v. Parker i. 59 

St. Louis, &c. R. Co. v. Lamed ii. 227 

St. Mary's Church, case of i. 160 

St. Saviour's Churchwardens v. 

Smith i. 260 

Sainter v. Ferguson ii. 890; iii. 168, 174, 

307 
Salem Bank v. Gloucester Bank i. 42 ; 

ii. 112 

v. Thomas i. 203 

Sales v. Western Stage Co. ii. 236 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxix 



Salisbury, In re 

v. Hatcher 

v. Howe 

v. Marshall 

v. Renick 

v Stainer 
Salkeld, Ex parte 
Sallery v. Prindle 
Salley Magee, The 
Sallinger v. Simmons 
Salmon v. Davis 

v. Smith 

v. Wooton 



i. 149 

iii. 386, 366 

ii. 919 

i. 632, 633 

i. 317 

i. 628 

iii. 416 

i. 304 

i. 103; ii. 411 

ii. 231 

i. 210 

i. 541 

ii. 864 



Salmon Falls Manuf. Co. v. Goddard 

iii. 15 

v. Tangier ii. 208, 415, 416, 427 

Salomon v. Hathaway i. 580 

Saloucci v. Johnson ii. 519 

Salte v. Field i. 75, 653, 654 

Salter v. Burt 1. 313, 321 ; ii. 783, 799 

v. Ham i. 166 

v. Kidley ii. 932 

Saltmarsh v. Planters & Merchants 

Bank iii. 153 

v. Tuthill i. 289 ; ii. 900 

Saltourn v. Houstoun ii. 642 

Salt Springs Bank v. Burton i. 311 

Saltus v. Everett ' i. 328 ; ii. 223 

v. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 418, 505, 510 

Salvador v. Hopkins ii. 532 

Samms v. Stewart ii. 178 

Samon's case ii. 829, 830 

Sampayo v. Salter ii. 413, 419 

Sampson v. Clark iii- 478 

v. Easterby ii. 642 

v. 01) Iyer i. 130 

v. Pattison iii. 378 

v. Security Ins. Co. ii. 560 

v. Smith ii. 465 

Sams v. Stockton i- 337 

Sam Slick, The ii. 384 

Samson v. Thornton i. 274 

Samuel, The ii. 437, 439, 443 

o. Berger ii. 359, 363 

v. Eoyal Ex. Ass. Co. ii. 488 

Samuel Book, In re i. 354 

San Antonio v. Lane i. 330 

San Bernardo, The ii. 439 

Sanborn v. Benedict i. 560 

v. Fireman's Ins. Co. ii. 470, 544 

v. Flagler iii- 9 

v. French i. 466 

v. Little i. 254, 258 

v. Murphy ii. 838 

Sander v. Hoffman ii. 893 

v. Sander iii. 414 

Sanders ». Branch Bank ii. 751 

v. Etcherson ii. 16 

v. Filley i. 498 

v. Keber i. 579, 580 

v. Knox ii- 762 

v. Logan ii. 305, 325, 328 

v. Pope iii- 327 

v. Spencer ii- 160 

v. Stuart iii- 193 



Sanderson v. Aston 
u. Bell 
v. Bowes 
u. Bradford 
v. Busher 



ii. 33 

ii. 747 ; iii. 266 

i. 309 

iii. 409 

ii. 408 



v. Cockermouth & W. Ey. Co. iii. 309, 

327 

v. Graves iii. 38 

v. M'Cullom ii. 474 

v. Milton Stage Co. i. 219 

v. Simonds ii. 474 

Sandford v. Sandford ii. 91 

Sandham, Ex parte i. 215 

Sandiland, Ex parte i. 398 

Sandilands v. Marsh i. 207, 215 

Sandiman v. Breach ii. 634, 899 

Sands v. Church iii. 132 

v. Lyon ii. 783, 797, 799 

v. Matthews i. 276 

v. N. Y. Ins. Co. i. 78 ; ii. 601, 615 

v. Sanders ii. 539 

v. Taylor i. 574 ; iii. 225 

Sanford v. Bulkley ii. 779 

v. Dodd i. 492 

v. Eighth Av. R. R. Co. ii. 246 

u. Handy ii. 919 

v. Hayes iii. 83 

v. Mechanics Ins. Co. ii. 541, 546 

v. Mickles i. 295, 296 

v. Norton i. 284, 289 

v. Raikes ii. 680 

v. Trust Fire Ins. Co. ii. 540 

Sanger v. Dun i. 90 

v. Eastwood i. 612 

San Jose Indiano, The i. 226 

San6ee v. Wilson i. 572 

Sansom v. Ball ii. 447 

v. Rhodes ii. 794 

Sappho, The ii. 428 

Sapsford v. Fletcher ii. 873 

Sarah, The ii. 440 

Sarah Ann, The i. 78; ii. 397, 398 

Sarah Starr, The ii. 382 

Saratoga, The ii. 464 

Saratoga R. R. o. Row ii. 923 

Sard v. Rhodes ii. 819 

Sargeant v. Butts ii. 898 

Sargent v. Chubbuck ii. 78 

v. Currier i. 616 

v. Franklin Ins. Co. iii. 113, 209, 212, 

220 

v . Gile i. 578, 579 

u. Graham ii. 776 

v. Howe iii- 376 

v. Lamed ii- 316 

v. Seagrave ii. 305, 324 

v. Southgate i- 290 

Sari v, Bourdillon iii. 8 

Sarratt v. Austin iii. 439 

Sasportas v. Jennings i. 445 

Sasscer v. Farmers Bank i. 320 

Sasseen v. Clark ii. 161 

Satterlee v. Frazer ii- 908 

v. Groat ii- 178 

v. Matherson iii- 506 



clxxx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Satterthwaite v. Mut. Ben. Ins. Ass. 

ii. 558 

Sauer v. Schulenberg ii. 75 

Sauerwein v. Brunner iii. 1-7 

Saul v. His Creditors ii. 698, 704, 706 

Saulsbury v. Blandys iii. 329 

Saunders v. Bartlett i. 108, 232 ; iii. 275 

v. Frost ii. 776 

u. Graham ii. 775 

v. Hatternian ii. 915 

v. Johnson i. 22 

v. Smith ii. 337, 341, 348 

v. Topp iii. 50 

v. Wakefield i. 6 ; iii. 16, 18 

v. Williams iii. 407, 409, 437 

Saunderson v. Gregg iii. 458 

v. Griffiths i. 49 

v. Jackson i. 586 ; iii. 4, 7, 8, 18 

v. Judge i. 310 

t,. Marr i. 335, 337 

v. Piper i. 281 ; ii. 693 

v. Rowles iii. 416 

Saurez v. Sun Mut. Ins. Co. ii. 506, 508 

Savage v. Aldren i. 286 

v. Carroll iii. 309, 348 

v. Everman ii. 824 

v. Howard Ins. Co. ii. 575 

v. King i. 285 

v. Rix i. 39, 56, 68, 73 

Savage Man. Co. v. Armstrong i. 575 

Savannah, &c. R. Co. v. Callahan iii. 172 

Savary v. Clements ii. 466 

v. Goe ii. 783 

Saveland v. Green i. 51 

Saville v. Robertson i. 195, 198 

Savings Bank v. Bates i. 313 

v. Ela ii. 29 

Savory v. Stocking iii. 478 

Savoury v. Chapman ii. 746 

Saward v. Austey ii. 634 

Savvin v. Guild ii. 316 

Sawrey v. Rumney ii. 682 

Sawtell v. Sawtell ii. 732 

Sawyer, In re iii. 411 

v. Coasters Ins. Co. ii. 518, 523, 525, 

526 

v. Cutting ii. 221 

u. Dodge County Ins. Co. ii. 549 

v. Fisher i. 557, 579 

v. Gerrish iii. 267 

v. Hammatt ii. 635, 666 

v. Hoovey i. 290 

v. Joslin i. 646 

v. Maine Ins. Co. ii. 399 

u. Mayhew i. 92 

v. Mclntyre iii. 248 

v. Patterson ii. 28 

v. Tappan ii. 764 

v. Turpin iii. 415, 421 

o. Twiss i. 547 

v. Wagstaff ii. 820 

Say v. Barwick iii. 373 

Sayer i>. Bennet i. 76, 223 

//. Chaytor i. 11 

Sayles v. Wellman ii. 905 



Sayre v. Flournoy 




i. 380 


v. Frick 




i. 312 


v. Moore 


ii. 


334, 344 


Sayward v. Stevens 


ii. 


413, 414 


Scale v. Fothergill 




ii. 834 


Scales v. Anderson 




i. 552 


v. Universal Ins. Co. 




ii. 597 


Scampellini v. Atcheson 




i. 382 


Scanlan v. Geddes 




iii. 15 


v. Wright 




ii. 692 


Scaramanga v. Stamp 




ii. 533 


Scarborough v. Lyrus 




ii. 401 


v. Reynolds 


i. 131 


; ii. 825 



Scarfe v. Morgan ii. 899, 907 ; iii. 261, 

266 
Scarman v. Castell ii. 44 

Sceales v. Scanlan i. 617 

Schank v. Schank ii. 91 

Scheifflin v. Stevens i. 191 

Schenck v. Schenck i. 136 

Schenkl v. Dana i. 228 

Schenley's Appeal i. 552 

Schermerhorn v. Schermerhorn ii. 874, 

875 

v. Vanderheyden i. 458 

Schieffelin v. Carpenter ii. 941; iii. 249 

v. N. Y. Ins. Co. ii. 418, 517 

v. Stewart i. 136, 137 ; iii. 422 

Schilling v. Holmes i. 542 

Schimmelpennich v. Bayard i. 4S 

Schlesinger v. Stratton i. 581 

Schley v. Lyon iii. 212, 2i6 

Schlizzi r. Derry ii. 425 

Schlosser's Appeal i. 245 

Schmaling, Ex parte iii. 465 

Schmalz v. Avery i. 69 

Schmidlapp v. Currie i. 240 

Schmidt i: Blood ii. 134, 153 

i. Livingston i. 522 

Schmitz v. Langhaar ii. 32 

Schneider v. Cochrane i. 326 

f. Foster i. 575 

v. Heath i. 63, 634 ; ii. 3a4 

v. Norris i. 586 ; iii. 8, 9 

v. Provident Life Ins. Co. ii. 817 

v. Schifiman i. 274, 275, 283, 876 

Schnewind v. Hacket ii. 853 

Schnitzer v. Oriental Works i. 628 

Schnuckle v. Bierman i. 396 

Schoch v. Garrett ii. 51 

Schofield v. Corbett ii. 876 

Scholefield v. Eichelberger i. 223, 226, 316 

Scholes v. Murray, &c. Co. ii. 712 

Scholey v. Goodman i. 399 

Schollenberger v. Nehf i. 284 

Schomer v. Hekla Ins. Co. ii. 543 

Schomp t>, Schenck ii. 908 

Schondler v. Wace iii. 435 

School Dist. o. Bragdon i. 356 

Schoole v. Noble ii- 875 

Schoonover v. Rowe iii- 180 

Schopn.an v. B. & W. R. R. Co. ii. 184, 

232 
Schotsmans v. Lancashire R. R. Co. i. 679, 

642, 650 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxxi 



Schreger v. Carden 




ii. 773 


Scott v. Rivers 


ii. 874 


Schroeder v. Harvey 




i. 301, 558 


v. Scholey 


iii. 441 


v. Johns 




iii. 100 


v. Scott 


i. 616 ; ii. 7 


Schroepel v. Hopper 




iii. 338 


v. Seymour 


ii. 718 


Schroeppel v. Corning 




iii. 137 


v. Shepherd 


iii. 195 


Schroyer v. Lynch 




ii. 154, 155 


v. Simons 


i. 542 


Schuehardt !>. Aliens 




i. 62, 563 


o. Stanford 


ii. 336, 342, 344 


Schultz v. Pacific R. R. 


Co. 


ii. 47 


v. Surman 


iii. 301, 424, 438 



Schumitsch v. American Ins. Co. ii. 555 

Schurmeier v. St. Paul, &c. R. R. Co. 

iii. 484 

Schuyler v. Hoyle i. 381 

v. Russ i. 617, 634 

v. Van Der Veer ii. 829 

Schuylkill Nav. Co. v. Moore ii. 633 

Schwabacker v. Ri Idle i. 209 

Schwartz v. Germania Ins. Co. ii. 014 

v. Gilmore i. 115 

v. U. S. Ins. Co. ii. 481 

a. Yearly i. 110 

Schwartzel v. Holenshade ii. 328 

v. Holenshall ii. 327 

Scioto, The ii. 428, 429, 430 

Scofield v. Day ii. 715 

v. Tompkins iii. 172 

Scorell v. Boxall iii. 35 

Scotia, The ii- 435 

Scotland, The ii. 435, 455 

Scott, In re iii. 411 

v. Alexander i. 318 

v. Avery ii. 845, 846 

a. Barnes ii. 827 

v. Bevan i- 328 

v. Billgerry iii. 304 

v. Bourdillion ii. 667 

v. Buchanan i. 335, 366, 367 

v. Bush iii- 38 

v. Caruth i. 185 

v. Chester Valley Bank ii. 99 

o. Colmesnil i. 189, 191 

v. Corporation of Liverpool ii. 431 

u . Crane ii. 103 

v. Fisher ii- 763 

v. Franklin iii- 281 

v. Godwin i- 14, 23 

v. Haddock iii. 102, 103 

v. Harmon "• 908 

v. Irving ii- 672, 67o 

v. James '• 380 

v. Jester iii- 285 

v. Kittanning Coal Co. ii- 648 

v. Lewis «>■ W® 

v. Libbey "• 415, 425 

v. Lifford '■ 319 

v. Littledale "• 92 ° 

v. Lloyd iii- H 6 . 149 

v. Miller "• 453 

v. Nesbit ii. 887 ; iii. 136 

a. Nichols iii- 98 

v. Pettit '• 6 48 

v. Pilkington "• 872 

v. Plymouth, The «• 392 

v. Porcher i. 248; iii. 301 

«■ ^y .!!■ 764 

v. Rayment ni. i^ 



v. The Eastern Counties Rail- 
way Co. iii. 49 
v. Thompson ii. 533 
v. Trent ii. 746 
v. White iii. 29 
Scotthorn v. South Staffordshire R. R. 

Co. ii. 214, 231, 232 

Scottin v. Stanley ii. 391 

Scottish Mar. Ins. Co. v. Turner ii. 507, 

610 

Scouton v. Eislord i. 463, 464 

Scoville v. Griffith ii. 198 

v. Tolland ii. 335 

Scrace v. Whittington i. 129 

Scranton, The ii. 435 

v. Baxter ii. 118 

v. Clark i. 616 

Screws v. Roach i. 560 

Scribner v. Collar i. 94 

v. Fisher iii. 508 

Scrimshire v Alderton iii. 439 

o. Scrimshire ii. 726, 729 

Scripps v. Reilly iii. 183 

Scripture v. Lowell Ins. Co. ii. 569, 571 

Scruggs v. Gass i. 302 ; ii. 754 

Scrugham v. Carter i. 234; iii. 218 

Scudder v. Andrews i. 495 

v. Balkam ii. 383 

v. Bradbury i. 568 

v. Bradford ii. 444, 449, 450 

v. Union Bank ii. 712 

Scull v. Briddle ii. 398 

Scully v. Kirkpatrick iii. 400 

v. Scully iii. 362 

Scurry v. Freeman iii. 134 

Seaborne v. Blackston ii. 746 

v. Maddy i. 340 

Seabury v. Hungerford i. 274 

Seacord v. Burling i. 280 

v. Miller i. 317 

Seago v. Martin « i. 51 

Seagood v. Meale ii. 77 ; iii. 14, 32 

Seagraves v. City of Alton i. 154 , , 

Sea Ins. Co. v. Fowler ii- 484 

Sea Lark, The "• 382 

Seaman, Ex parte }]}■ 467 

v. Aschermann iii- 323 

v. Fonereau i. 78 ; ii. 524 

v. Vawdrey ijj- 358 

Seamans v. Loring ii- 532 

Seamore v. Harlan iii- 240 

Sea Reuter, The }}■ 388 

Searle v. Adams iii- 1"> 

a. Keeves iii- 48, 444 

v. Laverick ii- 149 

v. Scovell »• 418 

Sears v. Bags of Linseed ii- 407 



clxxxii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Sears v. Brink iii. 17 

v. Giddey i. 393 

v. Lyons iii. 183 

v. The City of Boston ii. 709, 710, 711 ; 

iii. 301 

v. Vincent ii. 820 

v. "Wills ii. 407, 413 

v. Wingate ii. 410 

Searsburgh T. Co. v. Cutler ii. 942 

Seaton v. Benedict i. 387, 388, 390 ; ii. 772 

o. Booth i. 26, 525 

v. Henson i. 27 

v. Mapp iii. 338 

v. Scoville i. 279 

v. The Second Municipality iii. 198 

Seaver v. Coburn i. 68 

v Morse ii. 39, 41, 43 

v. Phelps i. 434 

Seawell v. Henry ii. 753 

Seccomb v. Provincial Ins. Co. ii 534 

Seckel v. Scott i. 564 

Secomb v. Nutt i. 640 

Secombe v. Edwards ii. 629 

Security Bank v. Bank of Republic i. 301 

v. Cushman i. 83 

u. McDonald i. 210 

Security Ins. Co. u. Gober ii. 615 

Seddon v. Senate ii. 026 

Sedgworth v. Overend ii. 748 

Seed v. Higgins ii. 310 

v. Lord i. 580 

Seeger v. Pettit i. 545 

Seeley v. Bishee i. 308 

o. Bishop ii. 665 

r. Engell i. 329 

v. Fisher ii. 337 

Seers v. Fowler ii. 660 

v. Turner ii. 863 

Segar v. Edwards i. 88 

Segars v. Segars iii. 38 

Segura v. Keed ii. 416 

Seidenbender v. Charles i. 489 

Seignior and Wolnier's case i. 63 

Seigworth v. Leffel iii. 219 

Seixas v. Woods i. 618, 622, 625 

Seizo v. Provezende ii. 355, 370, 371, 375 

Selby v. Eden i. 309 

v. Hutchinson ii. 654 

v. Selby iii. 6, 293 

Selden v. Cushman iii. 187 

v. Hendrickson ii. 403, 404 

Seldon v. Tutop ii. 836 

Selfridge v. Gill iii. 464 

Selkrig v. Davies i. 169 ; iii. 406 

Selleck v. French iii. 110, 111 

v. Tallman iii. 332 

Sellen v. Norman ii. 44, 53 

Seller v. Work ii. 108 

Sellers v. Dugan ii. 901 

Sellick v. Addams ii. 837 

Selser v. Brock ii. 9 

Selway v. Fogg ii. 161, 922 

v. Holloway ii. 193 

Selwood v. Mildmay ii. 681, 682 

Selwyn's case ii. 613 



Seminary v. McDonald i. 161 

Semmes v. City Ins. Co. ji. 601 

Semple v. Cornewall iii- 115 

Seneca County Bank v. Neass i. 319, 320 

v. Schermerhorn iii. 116 

Senior v. Armytage i. 537, 544 ; ii. 669, 

678 

Sentance <\ Poole i. 436 

Sergeson v. Sealey i. 438 

Servante v. James i. 13 

Sessions v. Moseley i. 266 

v. Richmond iii. 143, 170 

Seton v. Del. Ins. Co. ii. 509 

v. Low ii. 522 

v. Slade iii. 9, 312, 365 

Settle v. St. Louis Ins. Co. ii. 533 

Seventh Bank v. Cook i. 300 

Seventh Ward Bank y. Hanrick i. 318 

Severance v. Kimball i. 443 

Severn v. Clerks ii. 642 

Sewall v. Allen ii. 187 

v. Fitch iii. 62 

v. Henry ii. 035 

v. Hull, The, of a New Ship ii. 383 

v. Sewall ii. 93, 737 

v. Sparrow ii. 849 

u. V. S. Ins. Co. ii. 508, 512 

Seward v. L'Estrange i. 225 

v. Mitchell i. 478 ; iii. 39 

Sewer v. Bradfield i. 12 

Sexton v. Graham i. 565 ; ii. 146 

v. Montgomery Ins. Co. ii. 542, 554, 

555, 557, 560, 584, 586, 587 

o. Pike i. 129 ; ii. 60 

v. Wheaton i. 264, 410 

Seybel v. Currency Bank i. 289 

Seyds v. Hay iii. 284 

Scyfert v. Bean i. 552 

Seymour v. Brown ii. 142, 143, 145 

v. Darrow ii. 757 

v. Davis iii 49 

v. Delancey i. 522; iii. 306, 316 

v. Delaney i. 435 

v. Fellows ii. 78 

v. Gartside ii. 65 

v. Marvin iii. 143 

v. McCormick ii. 327 

v. Minturn ii. 749 

v. O'Keefe i. 568 

v. Osborne ii. 304, 315, 317 

i. Sexton ii. 765 

v. Strong iii. 116 

Shackel v. Rosier i. 485, 488 

Shackelford v. Handley ii. 927 

v. Morris iii. 153, 154 

Shackleton v. Sutcliffe iii. 356 

Shaddle v. Disborough iii. 372 

Shaeffer v. Lee iii. 201 

v. Sheppard i. 385 

v. Sleade ii. 920 

Shafer v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 543 

Shaffer v. McKanna i. 248 

v. Sawyer i. 579 

Shaffer's Appeal i. 147 

Shafher v. The State ii. 87 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxxiii 



Shakeshaft, Ex parte iii. 474 

Shaler v. Trowbridge i. 187 

Shamburg v. Ruggles i. 215 

Shank v. Northern R. R. Co. ii. 47 

Shannon v. Comstock ii. 423 ; iii. 208, 

248 
Shapley h. Bellows ii. 874, 875 
v. Tappan ii. 487 
Sharington v. Stratton i. 456 
Sharke v. Roahde iii. 429 
Sharkey v. Mansfield ii. 881 
Sharman v. Brandt i. 94, 107; iii. 11 
Sharp v. Brice iii. 187, 188 
v. Conkling i. 25 
v. Gibbs ii. 521 
v. Grey ii. 242, 243 
v. New York i. 79 
v. Nowell ii. 834 
v. Parks i. 556 
v. Rhiel iii. 40 
i'. Tavlor ii. 700; iii. 374 
v. Teese i. 489 
v. Thompson ii. 646 
v. "Wright iii. 311 
Sharpe v. Kelley ii. 940 
v. Roahde iii. 435 
Sharpley v, Hurrel ii. 402 ; iii. 147 
Sharrod v. Lond. & N. Western Rail- 
way Co. i. 114 
Shattuck v. Lawson i. 184 
Shaughnessy v. Fogg i. 127 
Shaw, Ex parte iii. 419, 420 
v. iEtna Ins. Co. ii. 561 
v. Allen iii. 75 
v . Arden i. 110, 128 
v. Badger ii. 792 
v. Batley iii. 458 
v. Berry i. 146; ii. 156 
v. Boyd i. 360 
v. Cooper ii. 305, 306 
a. Farnsworth i. 538 
v. Finney iii- 13 
v, Fisher i. 522 ; iii. 325 
v. Gookin ii. 877 
v. Hoffman i. 548 
v. Holland iii. 220 
v. Jakeman iii. 471 
v. Kay i. 537 
v. Knox i- 275 
v. Leavitt ii- 685, 686 
v. Loud i- 32 
v. M'Combs ii- 898 
v. McGregory i. 200, 215, 245 
v. Mitchell iii- 438, 456 
v. Nudd i. 46, 123 ; iii. 220 
< v. Picton ii- 763 
v.Pratt i. 27, 210; ii. 765 
v. Railroad Co. i- 331 
v. Reed >• 306 
a. Rep. Ins. Co. "• 614 
v. Robberds ii. 547, 548, 573 
v. Robbins iii- 393, 394 
v. Shaw iii- 63 
v. Sherwood i- 31 
v. Spencer i- 329 



Shaw v. Stone 




i. 104 


v. Thackray 




iii. 373 


v. Thompson 




i. 390 


v. Turnpike Co. 




ii. 813 


v. White 




iii. 239 


v. Wilkins 




iii. 242 


p. York & N. M. Ry. 


Co. 


ii. 268 


Shawe v. Felton 




ii. 488 


Shawhan v. Van Nest 


i. 664; 


iii. 224, 
225 


Sheahan v. Barry 


ii 


73, 810 


Sheahy v. Adarene 




iii. 43 


Shearer v. Handy 


ii. 


827, 828 


v. Shearer 


i. 


168, 227 


Shearman v. AkinB 




i. 441 


Shed v. Brett 


i. 


311, 322 


v. Pierce 




i. 28 


Shedd v. Wilson 




i. 237 


Shee v. Hale 


i. 538 


iii. 449 


Sheehan v. Davis 




i. 125 


Sheehy v. Mandeville 


i. 12 


; ii. 757 


Sheerman v. Thompson 




i. 485 


Sheffield v. Page 




ii. 464 


She f tall v. Clay 




iii. 69 


Shelby v. Guy 


ii. 723 


iii. 106 


Shelden v. Bennett 




ii. 762 


v. Robinson 




ii. 179 


Sheldon v. Benham 


i. 321 


; ii. 687 


v. Capron 




i. 525 


v. Conn. Ins. Co. 




ii. 616 


u. Cox 




i. 558 



v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co. ii. 542, 553 

v. Haxtun iii. 123, 128 

. Kendall i. 55 ; ii. 884 

v. Newton i. 356 

Sheldon Co. v. Eickmeyer Co. ii. 941 

Shellenbarger v. Blake ii. 71 

Shelley v. Wright ii. 931 

Shelling v. Farmer ii. 836 

Shelton v. Gill iii. 136 

v. Homer i. 95 

v. Livius i- 524 

v. Pendleton i. 388, 402, 403 

v. Sherfey i. 329 

v. Springett i. 341, 344, 351 

v. Tiffin ii. 709 

v. Tutt ii- 167 

v. Walker iii. 419 

Shepard, Ex parte iii. 467 

v. Hawley i. 211, 312, 321 

v. Milwaukie Gas. Co. iii- 199 

v. Ward ii. 746 

v. Watrous i- 444 

Shepherd, Ex parte iii. 468 

v. Bevin iii. 314, 316, 318 

v. Chamberlin i- 311 

v. Chewter ii- 536 

v. Conquest ii- 338 

v. Hampton iii- 220 

v. Harrison i- 579; ii. 412 

v. Johnson iii- 212, 220 

v. Kain i. 624, 635 ; ii. 394 

v. Kottgen ii- 444 

v. Mackoul i. 402, 403 

v. Percy i- 93 



olxxxiv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Shepherd v. Pybus 
v. Sawyer 


i. 630 


; ii. 393 
ii. 890 


o. Taylor 




ii. 412 


v. Temple 

v. Union Ins. Co. 




i. 623 
ii. 575 


Shepley v. Davis 
v. Waterhouse 




i. 566 
iii. 88 


Sheppard v. Boggs 
v. Doolan 


iii. 


i. 172 
323, 335 


v. Stites 




ii. 829 


Sheppards ;■. Turpin 
Sherburne v. Shaw 




iii. 382 
iii. 14 



Sheridan v. Brooklyn R. R. Co. ii. 240 

<.. Carpenter ii. 853 

v. The New Quay Co. ii. 218 

Sheriff;;. Potts ii. 534 

Sherman v. Ballou ii. 873 

v. Barnard i. 486 

v. Buffalo Bayou R. R. Co. iii. 107 

v. Champlain Trans. Co. i. 617 ; 

ii. 37, 38, 43 ; iii. 43 

v. Clark i. 320 

v. Dutch i. 553 

v. Fair ii. 577 

v. Hudson River R. Co. ii. 196, 210 

v. Rochester & Syracuse R. R. ii. 46 

v. Rugee i. 646 

v. Wakemari iii. 72 

v. Williams i. 531 

v. Withers iii. 95 

Sherratt v. Bentley ii. 645 

Sherrill v. Hopkins iii. 397, 404 

Sherrod v. Langdon i. 178 

Shersby v. Hibbert ii. 468 

Sherwood v. Agricultural Ins. Co. ii. 577 

v. Gen. Mut. Ius. Co. ii. 499 

v. Marwick i. 209 

v. Robins i. 582 

v. Sutton iii. 107 

Shields v. Fuller i. 227 

v. Ohio iii. 487 

u. Pettee i. 595, 597, 600, 636; 

iii. 222 

v. Wash. & N. O. Tel. Co. ii. 279, 301 

r. Yonge ii. 46 

Shiells v. Blackburne ii. 114, 115 

Shift v. La. State Ins. Co. ii. 637 

Shiffner v. Gordon ii. 880 

Shileock v. Passman i. 126 

Shillibeer ». Glyn i. 477 ; ii. 110 

Shilling v. Accidental Death Ins. Co. 

ii. 606 

Shimer v. Jones ii. 27 

Shindler v. Houston iii. 46, 49 

Shipherd v. Underwood i. 85 

Ship Lavinia v. Barclay i. 84 

Shipman v. Horton i. 334, 362 

Shippey v. Derrison iii. 4 

v. Eastwood ii. 900, 905 

v. Henderson i. 463 

Shipton v. Casson ii. 655, 792 

v. Thornton ii. 417, 418, 510 

Sliirland v. Monitor Iron Works Co. i. 94 

Shirley v. Shirley iii. 9, 295 

v. Stratton iii. 370 



Shirtz v. Shirtz 
Shisler v. Vandike 
Shitler v, Bremer 
Shitz v. Dieffenbach 
Shober v. Hauser 



iii. 239 

i. 301 

iii. 75 

iii. 432 

iii. 116, 127 



Shoe & Leather Bank v. Dix i. 58 

Shoecraf t v. Bailey it 162 

Shoemaker v. Benedict iii. 89 

i. Hinze ii. 99 

v. Keeley iii. 454, 465 

Shoemaker, &e. Co. v. Bernard i. 215 

Shoenfleld v. Fleisher i. 103 

Shook v. State ii. 27, 30 

Shore r. Bentall ii. 495 

o. Lucas i. 640 

v. Wilson ii. 632, 686, 691, 696 

Shorey v. Rennell '*. 465, 466 

Short v. Home Ins. Co. ii. 544 

v. McCarthy iii. 99 

v. New Orleans i. 247 

«. Skip with i. 93, 97 

a. Stone ii. 69, 71, 799, 800, 809 

v. Stotts ii. 64, 68 

Shorter v. Smith iii. 490, 494 

Shortrede v. Cheek iii. 17 

Shotwell v. Miller i. 211 

u. Murray iii. 355 

v. Wendover iii. 215 

Shreeves v. Allen i. 289 

Shreve v. Brereton iii. 169 

v. Joyce i. 146 

Shreves v. Leonard iii. 99 

Shrewsbury v. Blount ii. 917 

Shrewsbury & B. Ry. Co. v. Lon. & 

N. W. Ry. Co. iii. 374 

Shrimpton v. Laight ii. 375 

Shroyer v. Richmond ii. 934 

Shubrick ?\ Salmond i. 456 

Shucardt v. Aliens i. 563 

Shuck v. Wight iii. 126 

Shuey r. United States i. 513 

Shufeldt v. Pease i. 557 

Shuler v. Millsaps ii. 74 

Shultz v. Elliott i. 640 

v. Ohio Ins. Co. ii. 517 

Shumway v. Reed ii. 757 

v. Stillman ii. 740 

Shurlds v. Tilson i. 191 

Shurtleff v. Millard i. 355, 361 

Shute r. Dorr iii. 41 

v. Taylor iii. 168, 173 

Shutt'ord c. Borough iii. 97 

Shuttleworth v. Bruce i. 257 

Sibbald v. Bethlehem Iron Co. i. 109 

v. Hill ii. 523, 526 

Sibley v. Aldrich ii. 160 

v. Fisher ii. 860 

v. Hayward iii. 273 

v. Holden ii. 634 

v. Lumbert iii. 84 

v. McAllaster i. 32 

v. Tie i. 563 

Sibly v. Tutt i. 327 

Siboni v. Kirkman i. 145, 146; ii. 664 

Sibree v. Tripp i. 249 ; ii. 761 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxxv 



Sice v. Cunningham 


i. 306 


Simons ». G. W. Ry. Co. 




ii. 257 


Sicklemore v. Thistleton 


ii. 633 


u. Johnson 


ii. 


634, 851 


Sickles v. Borden 


ii. 311, 328 


Simpson, Ex yarte 




iii. 462 


o. Carson 


ii. 88, 98 


v. Bloss 




ii. 886 


u. Gloucester Man. Co. 


ii. 315, 325 


v. Charleston Ins. Co. 




ii. 501 


u. Mather 


iii. 79 


v. Clayton 




i. 25 


u. Mitchell 


ii. 325 


v. Crippin ii 


660 


; iii. 223 


v. Pattison ii 


. 39, 649, 653 


v. Fogo 




ii. 872 


v. The Falls Co. 


ii. 311 


v. Fullen wider 




iii. 129 


v. Youngs 


ii. 324 


v. Hand 




ii. 429 


Sidaways v. Todd 


ii. 153 


v. Hanley 




ii. 874 


Siddall v. Rawcliff 


ii. 752 


u. Hart 




ii. 874 


Sidwell v. Evans 


i. 471, 472 


u. Hawkins 




i. 526 


v. Mason 


iii. 75 


a. Henderson 


ii 


683, 691 


Siebert v. Spooner 


iii. 441 


v. Henning 




iii. 411 


Siebert's case 


ii. 338 


i'. Ingham 


ii 


764, 766 


Sievewright v. Archibald 


i. 585, 586, 


v. Leech 




i. 170 




591 


v. London, &c. R. Co. 




iii. 197 


Siewert v. Hamel 


iii. 123 


v. Nicholls 




ii. 906 


Siffken v. Wray 


i. 644 


v. Pacific Ins. Co. 




i. 296 


Siffkin r. Walker 


i. 194 


v. Potts 




i. 635 


Sigerson v. Matthews 


i. 325 


o. Robertson 




i. 339 


Sigourney i». Drury 


iii. 88, 90 


u. Sadd 




iii. 334 


v. Lloyd 


i. 286 


u. Simpson 




ii. 91 


v. Munn 


i. 168, 229 


u. Stackhouse 




ii. 860 


Sikes v. Johnson 


i. 356 


i/. Turney 




i. 323 


Sill v. Worsvvick 


iii. 406 


v. Vaughn 




i. 30 


Sillem v. Thornton ii. 


542, 545, 548 


v. Warren 




iii. 133 


Sillick v. Booth 


ii. 613 


v. Wilson 




ii. 321 


Silliman v. Fredericksburg, &c. R. Co. 


Simpson College v. Bryan 




i. 483 




i.01 


Sims v. Bond i. 66 


; a 


883, 938 


Silsbee v. Ingalls 


iii. 21 


v. Brittain 




ii. 389 


Silsbury v. McCoon ii. 


145 ; iii. 215 


v. Brutton 


i 


203, 215 


Silsby v. Foote 


ii. 308, 322 


v. Chance 




ii. 134 


Silva v. Low 


ii. 527, 533 


u. Clarke 


ii. 


753, 754 


Silver Lake Bank v. Harding ii. 744 


v. Everhardt 




ii. 945 


Silverman v. Chase 


i. 245 


v. Gondelock 




iii. 98 


Silvernail v. Cole 


i. 467, 471 


v. Gurney ii. 444, 


445, 


448, 449 


Silveus v. Porter 


i. 166 


v. Howard 




ii. 415 


Silvey v. Sumner 


i. 541 


v. Hutchins 




iii. 63 


Silvis v. Ely 


i. 470 


o. Rickets 




ii. 78 


Simerson v. Branch Bank 


i. 570 


v. Sims 




i. 263 


Slmmonds v. Swaine 


ii. 831, 835 


v. Willing i. 


195 


196, 198 


Simmons v. Almy i 


129; iii. 285 


Simson v. Cooke 


ii. 21, 766 


u. Cincinnati Sav. Soc. 


i. 263 


v. Jones 




i. 481 


„. Clark 


ii. 818 


Sinard v. Patterson 




ii. 822 


o. Law 


ii. 232 


Sinclair, In re 




ii. 455 


v. Simmons 


ii. 77 


v. Bank of S. Car. 




iii. 99 


v. South Eastern R. R. Co. 


v. Bowles 


ii. 


653, 655 


v. Swift 


i. 562 


v. Jackson 




ii. 929 


Simms v. Marryatt i 


615 ; iii. 331 


v. Pearson 


. 114; :. l ■ 


v. Norris 


i. 550 


v. Richardson 




ii. 12 


Simon v. Barber 


i. 347 


v. Tarbox 




iii. 183 


c. Lloyd 


ii. 820 


Singer v. Kelly 




i. 243 


u. Miller 


ii. 166 


v. McCormick 




ii. 39 


v. Motivos 


iii 12, 59 


v. Walmsley ' ii. 304, 


308, 


315, 317 


Simond v. Boydell 


ii. 480 


Singleton v. Bolton 


ii. 


362, 365 


v. Braddon 


i. 608 


v. Hilliard 




ii. 672 


Simonds v. Catlin 


iii. 12 


v. Kennedy 




iii. 186 


v. Clapp 


i. 62 


u. Lewis 




iii. 161 


v. Hodgson 


ii. 402, 403 


v. St. Louis Ins. Co. 


ii. 


606, 609 


v. Strong 


i. 192 


Sinnot v. Davenport 


ii. 


386, 399 


v. Union Ins. Co. 


ii. 510 


Siordet v. Hall 




ii. 173 


v. Walter 


iii. Ill 


Sipperly v. Stewart 




ii. 114 


v. White ii. 


444, 451, 452 


Sir Wollaston Dixie's case 




iii. 135 



clxxxvi 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Sissons v. Reynolds 




ii. 909 


Sloop Mary, The 




iii. 147 


Sistare v. Cushing 




i. 219 


Sloper v. Fish 




iii. 435 


Siter v. Morrs 




ii. 565 


Slossom v. DufE 




iii. 118 


Sivewright v. Archibald i 


508 ; iii. 13 


Slubey v. Heyward 


.564, 646; in !■'> 


v. Richardson 




i. 92 


Sluby v. Champlin 




iii. 69 


Skaggs v. Emerson 




i. 542 


Slutz v. Desenberg 




i. 558 


Skeate i\ Beale 


i. 


445, 4G5 


Slumway v. Cooper 




i. 150 


Skeels v. Chickering 




ii. 831 


Sly v. Edgley 




i. 114 


Skelton v. Brewster 




ii. 11 


Slyhoof v. Flitcraft 




ii. 863 


v. Dustin 




i. 303 


Small c. Atwood 




i. 621 


Skidmore v. Desdoity 


ii. 


495, 497 


v. Browder 




i. 258 


Skillen v. Waterworks 




i. 536 


v. Currie 




ii. 19 


Skillings v. Coolidge 




ii. 835 


v. Gibson 




ii. 528, 531 


Skingly, In re 




i. 536 


v. Moates 


i 


651; ii. 417 


Skinner v. Dayton 


i 


122, 220 


u. Oudley 




iii. 382, 383 


b. Gunn 




i. 62 


u. Owings 


iii. 


310, 346, 347 


c. Hall 




ii. 227 


v. Robinson 




iii. 258 


v. London, Brighton, & 


South- 


v. Quincy 




ii. 790 


coast Ry. Co. 


ii. 


135, 239 


v. Small 




ii. 91 


v. M'Douall 




iii. 345 


v. Stagg 




iii. 273 


v. Somes 


i. 


254, 255 


Smalley v. Greene 




ii. 893 


v. Stocks 




i. 65 


r. Smalley 




iii. 181 


v. Upshaw 




ii. 220 


Smallpiece v. Dawes 




i. 391 


v. Western Ins. Co. 




ii. 509 


Smart v. Batehelder 




i. 564 


Skinner's Appeal 




i. 3b2 


v. Harding 




iii. 37 


Skip, Ex parte 


iii 


136, 465 


v. Sandars 


i. 74 


77, 104, 108 


Skipp v. Eastern Counties R. 


Co 


ii. 46 


Smedburg v. More 




iii. 342 


Skrine v. Hope, The 




ii. 388 


Smedes v. Bank of Utica 




i. 91; ii. 112 


Slack v. Brown 




ii. 772 


Smedley v. Felt 




ii. 610 


Slackhouse v. O'Hara 




i. 131 


Smethurst v. Mitchell 




i. 60 


Slade r. Arnold 




ii. 900 


i'. Woolston 




iii. 211,220 


Slater, Ex parte 




i. 211 


Smilax, The 




ii. 403 


v. Irwin i. 83; 


iii. 


260, 293 


Smiley v. Bell 




i. 251 


v. Lawson 




iii 87 


Smillie r. Quinn 




ii. 609 


v. Magraw 


11 


; ii. U04 


Smith, Ex parte i. 126, 


224, 


551; iii. 421, 


u. Sherman 




iii. 188 






468, 471 


Slater Ins. Co. v. Barstow 




ii. 5:19 


In re i 


235 


iii. 434, 506 


Slatterie v. Pooley 




ii. 938 


Re 




iii. 416 


Slaughter v. Green 




ii. 142 


r. JEtna Ins. Co. 




ii. 592 


v. McRae 




iii. 227 


v. Algar 




i. 470, 472 


Slaymaker v. Irwin 




i 608 


v. Allen 


i. 411, ••'<■■: ii ;m 


Sleat v. Flagg 


ii. 


261, 273 


v. Appleton 




iii. 484 


Sleath v. Wilson 




ii. 247 


o. Arnold 




iii. 14 


Sleech v. Thorington 




i. 382 


v. Atlantic M. F. Ins. Co 


ii. 863, 864, 


Sleeper v. Paige 




iii. 106 






866 


Sleight v. Hartshorne 




ii. 666 


v. Ayer 




i. 83 


Slim v. Northern Railway Co 




ii. 256 


r. Babeock 




ii. 927 


Slingerland v. Morse ii. 103, 


786, 788 ; 


v. Barker 




i. 232 






iii. 27 


v. Barrow 




i. 184, 185 


Slingsby's case i. 13, 14, 15, ! 


v. Bartholomew 


i 


. 467 ; ii. 823 


Slipper v. Stidstone 




iii. 469 


v. Bates 




ii. 635 


Sloan v. Gibson 




i. 458 


c. Bean 




ii. 906 


v. R. F. & M. Co. 




ii. 941 


„. Bell 




ii. 515 


a. Sommers 




iii. 125 


i'. Berry 


i. 


254 ; iii. 220 


Sloane r. Cadogan 




iii. .315 


v. Bickmore 




ii. 759, 887 


v. Moore 




i. 221 


v. Birmingham Gas 


Co. 


i. 153, 154 


Slocomb v. Lizardi 




i. 222 


v. Bishop 




iii. 107 


Sloconibe v. Glubb 




i. 372 


v. Bond's Heirs 




iii. 105 


Slocum v. Despard 




ii. 663 


v. Boston, &c. R. R. 


Co. 


ii. 275 


v. Fsiirchild 




ii. 268 


r. Bouek 




iii. 56 


v. Hooker 




i. 370 


;>. Bourier 




ii. 896 


v. Seymour 




iii. 36 


o. Bowditch Ins. Co 




ii. 541, 555 


Sloeumb v. Holmes 




iii. 95 


o. Bowles 




i. 645 


Sloman v. Walter 




iii. 174 


c. Braine 




i. 273, 286 


Sloo v. Law 




i. 131 


c. Brotherline 




i. 127 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxxvii 



Smith 



th v. Brown ii. 


686, 751, 823, 824 ; 




iii. 391, 404 


v. Bruning 


ii. 80 


v. Brush 


iii. 119 


v. Bryan 


iii. 34 


v. Buchanan 


iii. 397, 406 


v. Burnham 


i. 174, 188 


v. Campbell 


iii. 382 


v. Cedar Falls, &c 


R. Co. i. 73 


v. Chester 


i. 300 


v. Clark 


i. 287 ; ii. 143 


v. Cleveland 


iii. 486 


v. Coe 


iii. 293 


t.-. Coffin 


iii. 426, 433, 435 


v. Columbia Ins. Co. ii. 505, 655, 564 


f. Collins 


i. 200, 209 


v. Condry i. 


93: ii. 434; iii. 196 


v. Cong. Meet. House in Lowell 




ii. 655 


v. Cook 


ii. 149 


v. Cragen 


i. 195 


v. Creole, The 


ii. 468, 469 


v. Crooker 


ii. 857, 861 


v. Dallas 


i. 563; iii. 15 


v. Dann 


ii. 16 


v. Davenport 


i. 84; ii. 415, 456 


v. Dawson 


iii. 79, 95 


v. Dearlove 


ii. 164, 168 


v. Demarest 


ii. 828 


v. De Silva 


ii. 390 


v. De Witt 


i. 292 


v. Dickenson 


iii. 168 


v. Dixon 


i. 131 


v. Downing 


ii. 311, 312, 317 


v. Dunlap 


iii. 220, 233 


v. Easton 


ii. 298 


v. Edwards 


i. 213, 231 


v. Ely 


ii. 311 


a. Empire Ins. Co 


ii. 660 


v. Estate of Steel 


ii. 27 


v. Evans 


i. 200, 360, 361 


v. Eield 


i. 653 


v. Finch 


i. 284 


v. Fisher 


i. 318 


v. Forty 


iii. 83 


v. Foster 


i. 578 


v. Fox 


iii. 99 


v. Frederick 


ii. 636 


v. Frost 


ii. 149 


v. Gibson 


i. 338 


v. Glens Falls Ins. 


Co. ii. 587 


v. Godfrey 


i. 486 ; ii. 698, 700 


v. Gordon iii 


. 423, 424, 427, 446 


v. Goss 


i. 653; iii. 260 


v. Gould 


ii. 403 


v. Green 


iii. 219, 227 


v. Greenlee 


i. 527 


v. Griffith 


iii. 208, 222 


v. Gugerty 


ii. 793 


v. Guild 


ii. 940 


v. Hathorn 


iii. 119 


v. Haverhill Ins. Co. 


a. Haynes 


ii. 789 


v. Hay ward 


ii. 37, 44 


u. Healy 


ii. 719 ; iii. 391 



Smith v. Henry 


i. 569 


v. Hibbard 


iii. 293 


v. Higgins 


ii. 314 


v. Hill 


iii. 102 


v. Hiscock 


i. 287, 289 


v. Hodson 


iii. 439, 478 


v. Home 


ii. 261 


v. Hubbs 


ii. 924 


v. Hughes 


i. 620 


v. Hunt 


i. 26 


v. Hyde 


ii. 60 


v. Ins. Co. 


ii. 563 


u. Jackson 


i. 169 


u. Jameson 


ii. 748 ; iii. 425 


v. JefEryes 


ii. 690 


v. Johnson 


i. 63 ; ii. 334, 828, 836 ; 




iii. 361 


v. Jones 


ii. 761 ; iii. 12 


v. Kelley 


i. 368 


v. Kingsford 


ii. 44 


v. Kittridge 


i. 266 


v. Knowlton 


ii. 612, 613 


v. Knox 


i. 293 ; iii. 451 


v. Lamberts 


i. 131 


r. Lascelles 


i. 91, 93, 574 


v, Lawrence 


iii. 340 


v. Lay 


ii. 389 


v. Lewis 


ii. 737, 814 


v. Little 


i. 318, 322 


v. Littlefield 


i. 548 


v. Lloyd 


ii. 765 


v. Lock 


ii. 934 


v. Loomis 


ii. 781, 787 ; iii. 29 


v. London, &c 


R. R. Co. ii. 249 


v. Love 


i. 627, 628 


v. Lowden 


ii. 874 



v. Lynes i. 557, 578, 579 
v. Manufacturers Ins. Co. ii. 504, 506 

v, Marrable i. 633 

v. Marsack i. 300 

v. Mawhood i. 489 ; ii. 894 

v. Mayer iii. 219 

u. Mayo i. 364, 370 

v. McClure i. 311 

v. McClusky ii. 872 

v. McGowan ii. 856, 862 

v. Mead ii. 700 

v. Mec. & Traders Bank i. 289 
v. Mercer i. 298, 300 ; ii. 308 

v. Miller i. 296, 306 

v. Milles iii. 426, 454 

v. Mitchell ii. 916 

v. Montgomery ii. 4 

v. Moore i- 612 

v. Morse i. 58, 506 

v. Mullett i. 320 

u. Myers i. 558, 597 



v. Nashua & Lowell R. R. Co. 

v. New York Cent. R. R. Co. 
v. N. Y. & Harlem B. R. Co. 
v. N. Y., &c. R. R. Co. 
v. Nichols 
v. Nicolls 
v. Niles 



.202, 

214 

ii. 256 

ii. 268 

ii. 232 

ii. 737 

ii. 737, 740, 743 

ii. 144, 145 



clxxxviii 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Smith v. Odlin ii. 470 

v. Overby iii. 178 

v. Oxford Iron Co. ii. 45, 47 

u. Pacldmrst ii. 035 

v. Parsons iii. 394, 507 

v. Pekin, The ii. 459 

v. Pettee i. 597 ; iii. 224 

v. Philadelphia Bank i. 280 

v. Philbrick i. 312 

a. Phillips iii. 313 

v. Pickering iii. 427, 452 

v. Pierce ii. 182 

v. Pittsburg Bank iii. 132 

v. Plomer i. 385 

l\ Plummer ii. 454 

v. Pocklington i. ]2 

v. Proprietors, &c. i. 154 

v. Raleigh i. 542, 551 

v. Ramsay iii. 476 

v. Readfield i. 446 

... Rice i. 627 

c. Richardson iii. 207 

v. Robertson ii. 512 

v. Robinson iii. 123 

v. Ryan iii. 80 

v. Sanborn ii. 790 
i'. Saratoga Co. Ins. Co. ii. 575, 577 

u. Schroeder ii. 936, 937 

v. Scott iii. 416 

v. Seward ii. 181 

v. Shaw i. 328 

v. Shelden ii. 28 

c. Sheldon i. 225 

v. Shepherd ii. 171 

o. Sherman ii. 74 

!•. Simms iii. 82 

v. Simonds i. 1 14 

v. Sleap i. 86 

v. Sloan i. 204 
v. Smith i. 170, 265, 397, 460, 469 ; 
ii. 51, 87, 736, 757, 784, 915, 937 ; 
iii. 174, 349, 394, 397, 409 
v. Sparrow 
v. Spinolla 
Spooner 



l. 588; ii. 899, 905 

ii. 719; iii. 391 

i. 436, 439, 440 

iii. 244 

ii. 76, 852 

ii. 578 

ii. 46 

i. 210 

iii. 240 

i 



Sprague 
. Stafford 
. State Ins. Co. 

Steele 

Stone 
. Strong 
. Sullivan 

Surman i. 571 ; iii. 6, 34, 35, 61, 60 



. Swift 
. Talcott 

Tarlton 
. Thompson 
. Thorn 
. Tracy 
. Turner 
. Underdunck 

Van Loan 
. Ware 

Watson 
, Weaver 



ii. 468 

i. 21 

i. 171, 174 

i. 128 

iii. 72 

i. 62, 78 ; ii. 60 

iii. 335, 511 

iii. 349 

i. 292 

i. 462 

i. 166, 176 

i. 512 



Smith v. Weed 

v. Westmoreland 

v. Whiting 

v. Wigley 

v. Wilcox 

v. Williams 

i-. Wilmington 

e. Wilson 

v. Winter 

v. Wolf 

v. Wood 

v. Woodflne 

v. Wooding 

v. Woodruff 

v. Wright i. 176; 

v. Wyckoff 
Smith's Heirs v. Dickson 
Smith Paper Co. v. Servin 
Smitherman v. Smith 
Smithson v. Garth 
Smithurst v. Edmunds' 
Smoot v. Rea 
Smout v. Ilhery 
Smuller v. Union Canal Co. 
Smyley v. Head 

r. Reese 
Smyrl v. Niolon 
Smyth, Ex parte 

u. Craig 

v. M'Mastera 

v. Tankersley 

v. Ward 
Snaitli v. Gale 
Snead v. Watkins 
Sneathen v. Grubbs 
Snedeker v. Warring 
Snee v. Prescot 
Sneed v. Ewing 

v. Weister 

v. Wiggins 
Sneider v. Geiss 
Snell !'. D wight 

c. Foussat 

v. Mitchell 

v. Moses 

v. Rich 

b. The Independence 
Snellgrove v. Bailey 

v. Hunt 
Snelling v. Lord Huntingfield 



i. 473 

iii. 82 

i. 146, 322 

ii. 766 

ii. 900 

i. 634 

i. 145 

ii. 424, 670, 678 

i. 219; ii. 27 

iii. 144 

i. 228 



i. 552 

ii. 363 

ii. 216, 447, 672 

i. 272 

i. 131 

i. 546 

ii. 821 

i. 28 

ii. 130 

iii. 307 

i. 70, 76 

ii. 762 

ii. 9 

i. 393 

ii. 172 

ii. 652 

i. 76 

ii. 897 

i. 183 

i. 565 

iii. 464 

ii. 167 

i. 565 

i. 546 

i. 642 

ii. 726 

ii. 766 

ii. 793 

ii. 159, 277 

i. 175 

ii. 742 

iii. 335 

i. 627 

ii. 468 

ii. 45 

i. 266 

iii. 426 

ii. 49; 

iii. 40 

ii. 529 

i. 463 

iii. 48 

iii. 104 

i. 231 

iii. 283 

ii. 649 



Snethen v. Memphis Ins. Co. 

Snevily v. Read 

Snider v. Thrall 

Snoddy v. Cage 

Snodgrass's Appeal 

Snook v. Davidson 
v. Fries 
v. Hellyer ii. 826, 827, 848; iii. 427 

Snow, In re iii. 466 

u. Conant ii. 877 

c. Eastern R. R. Co. ii. 277 

v. Franklin ii. 824 

v. Orleans i. 69 

v. Perkins i. 322 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



clxxxix 



Snow i>. Perry 






ii. 


753, 779 


v. Ware 






ii. 63, 655 


?>. Warner 








iii. 56 


v. Wope 






ii. 


465, 466 


Snowden v. Noah 






ii 


361, 378 


v. Phoenix Ins. 


Co. 






ii. 520 


t>. Warder 








ii. 671 


Snowdon v. Davis 








i. 86, 496 


Snowhill v. Snowliill 






iii. 437 


Snowman v. Harford 






iii. 339 


Snyder v. Farmers Ins. 


Co. 


ii. 


541, 554 


t>. Findley 






ii. 


917, 927 


u. Reno 








i. 272 


v. Riley 








i. 290 


v. Sponable 








i. 80 


v. Vaux 








iii. 215 


!>. Wise 








ii. 744 


Soames v. Spencer 








i. 592 


Soares v. Rahn 








ii. 404 


Soblomsten, The 








i. 129 


Society in Troy v. 


Goddard 




i. 484 


v. Perry 






i. 


482, 484 


Society, &c. v. New 


Haven 




iii. 485 



i). Wheeler i. 462 ; ii. 482, 511 

Sogers v. Hackett i. 308 

Sohier v. Easterbrook ii. 828 

v. Loring i. 325 

v. Norwich Ins. Co. ii. 569 

Solarte v. Palmer i. 322 

Soles v. Hickman iii. 309 

Sollers, Ex pdrte iii. 438 

Solly v. Forbes i. 27, 29, 210 ; ii. 851, 852 

v. Rathbone i. 89, 102, 109 

v. Whitmore ii. 535 

Solomon v. Fitzgerald i. 167 

o. Gregory ii. 27 

v. Kimmel i. 457 

Solomons v. Bank of England i. 272, 

287 ; iii. 290 

v. Jones iii. 127 

v. M'Kinstry ii. 826, 836 

v. Ross iii. 406 

Soltau v. De Held iii. 331 

Somerby v. Buntin iii. 56, 321, 343 

Somers v. Pumphrey i. 433 

Somerville v. Somerville ii. 701 

v. Williams i. 313 

Somes v. Brewer ii. 925 

v. British Empire Shipping Co. ii. 382 

v. Skinner ii- 925 

v. Sugiue ii. 396, 397 

Sommer v. Wilt iii- 183 

Soome v. Gleen iii- 147 

Sooy v. State i- 80 

Soper v. Fry i. 206, 335 

v. Soper "• 91 

Sophie, The ii- 385 

Sorbe v. Merchants Ins. Co. "• 484 

Sorrelle v. Sorrelle ii- 877 

Sorsbie v. Park i- 15, 16, 17, 23 

Sortwell v. Hughes }_■ 486 

Sottomayor v. De Barros ii- 726 

Souch v. Strawbridge iii. 38, 43, 44, 63 

Soulden v. Van Rensselaer iii- 92 

South, Ex parte i- 246 



Southampton v. Brown i. 498 

Southard v. Porter i. 290 

o. Rexford ii. 67, 71, 73 

v. Steele i. 216 

South Carolina Society v. Johnson ii. 18 

Southcomb v. Bishop of Exeter iii. 342 

Southcombe v. Merriman ii. 597 

Southeote c. Hoare i. 15, 22 

v. Stanley ii. 164 

Southcote's case ii. 98, 121 

South Eastern Railway Co. v. Knott 

iii. 365 

Souther, Re iii. 471 

Southern v. How i. 617 ; ii. 351, 375 

Southern Express Co. v. Moon ii. 270 

c/. Newby ii. 265 

u. Purcell ii. 260 

v. Shea ii. 227 

Southern Ins. Co. v. Booker ii. 616 

v. Gray i. 65 

v. Lewis ii. 559 

v. McCain ii. 643, 617 

Southern Life Ins. & Tr. Co. v. Cole iii. 57 

Southern R. R. Co. u. Kendrick ii. 250 

Southerne v. Howe i. 617 

Southey v. Sherwood ii. 337, 347 

Southorn v. Reynolds ii. 373 

South Sea Co. v. Bumbstead ii. 842 

v. Duncomb iii. 289 

South Wales, In re i. 175 

South Wales Railway Co. v. Wythes 

iii. 327, 330, 360 

Southwell v. Beezley i. 565 ; iii. 40 

v. Bowditch i. 107 

Southwestern Co. c. Stanard i. 564 

South Western Freight Co. v. Plant i. 568, 

578 

Southwick v. Atlantic Ins. Co. ii. 559 

v. Estes i. 114 

v. The Clyde ii. 392 

Southworth v. Smith ii. 777, 780 

Southworth Bank u. Gross ii. 858 

Soward v. Palmer ii. 770 

Spafford v. Dodge ii. 426, 447, 451 

Spain v. Arnott ii. 35, 38 

v. Hamilton i. 257 

Spalding v. Adams ii. 128 

v. Dixon iii. 461 

v. People iii. 478 

v. Rosa ii. 805 

v. Ruding i. 652 

v. Vandercook i. 495 ; ii. 773 

Spann v. Baltzell i. 319, 322 

v. Mercer i. 387 

Sparhawk v. Allen i. 150 

v. Buell i. 334 

v. Russell i- 239 

v. Wills ii- 769 

Sparkes v. Marshall ii. 476, 477 

Sparkling v. Smith iii- 68 

Sparkman v. Higgins ji- 305 

Sparks ». Garrigues ii- 769 

v. Kittredge ii- 446 

v. Purdy "i- 210 

Sparling v. Marks i. 617 ; iii. 223 



cxc 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Sparr v. Wellraan ii. 277 

Sparrow v. Caruthers ii. 488 

Sparry's case ii. 863, 864 

Spaulding v. Alford ii. 60 

e. Bank of Muskingum iii. 116 

v. Lord iii. 11:1 

v. Preston i. 480 

Spear v. Gardner i. 76 

v. Hart iii. 18 

v. Hartley iii. 256, 284 

v. Hooper ii. 835 

v. Newell ii. 670 

v. Orendorf iii. 348 

Spears r. Hartley iii. 108 

Specht v. Commonwealth ii. 905 

Speed v. Philips i. 406 

Speer i\ Bishop i. 193 

Speights v. Peters i. 221 

Spelman v. Aldrieh ii. 78 

r. Fisher Iron Co. ii. 48 

Spence v. Chadwick i. 536, 607; ii. 215, 

415 

c. White ii. 875 

Spencer v. Barnett iii. 293 

u. Billing i. 213 

v. Cone iii. 02 

v. Daggett ii. 181 

v. Durant i. 14, 2;i 

v. Eustis ii. 466, 467 

v. Field i. 56, 69 

v. Harding i. 527 

v. Harvev i. 308 

v. Milwaukee, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 817 

v. Tissue ii. 746 

v. Wilson i. 7o 

Spencer's case i- 261 

Spensley v. Lancashire Ins. Co. ii. 669 

Sperry, In re i. 238 

v. Fanning i. 152 

v. Horr i. 279 

Spicer v. Cooper ii. 667 

v. Earl i. 355 

v. Norton ii. 12 

Spiers v. Brown ii. 342, 343, 349 

Spies v. Gilmore i. 284 

i'. Joel iii. 382 

v. Newberry i. 322 

Spikes v. English iii. 184, 180 

Spildt v. Bowles iii. 435, 454 

v. Heath i. 600 

Spiller, Ex parte iii. 420 

j;. Scribner ii. 941 

Spindler v. Greillet i. 300 

Spinetti v. Atlas Steamship Co. ii. 183 

Spires v. Hamot ii. 709 

Spitzer v. St. Marks Ins. Co. ii. 471 

Spong v. Wright iii. 75 

Spooner v. Holmes i. 557 

Spoor v. Holland iii. 216 

Spotswood v. Barrow ii. 43 

Spottiswoode r. Clarke ii. 348, 361, 378 

Sprague v. Baker i. 260 

v. Craig ii. 69, 70, 71 

v. Hazenwinkle ii. 766 

v. Quinn i. 548 



Spreadbury v. Chapman i. 387 

Sprigwell v. Allen i. 615 

Spring v. Chase iii. 240 

v. Coffin i. 492 

v. Gray iii. 70, 94, 95, 96 

v. Haskell ii. 455 

v. So. Car. Ins. Co. ii. 475, 476 ; 

iii. 382 

Springer v. Foster iii. 394, 395 

v. Hutchinson ii. 3 

v. Springer i. 31 

Springfield Bank v. Merrick i. 489 ; 

ii. 886, 887 

Sproatt v. Donnell ii. 448 

Sprott v. Powell i. 140 

Sproul v. Hemmingway i. 117 

Sproule v. Ford iii. 211 

Spruill v. N. Car. Ins. Co. ii. 602 

Sprye v. Porter ii. 908 

Spurrier v. Hancock iii. 340 

Squier v. Hunt i. 572 

v. Mayer i. 547 

Squire v. Campbell iii. 331, 343, 345 

v. Grevell ii. 834, 837 

v. Tod i. 522 

v. West. Un. Tel. Co. ii. 285, 300 

v. Whipple ii. 49 ; iii. 41 

Squires v. Whiskan ii. 897 

Srodes v. Caren ii. 129 

StaatH i'. Bristow i. 231 

v. Howlett i. 206 ; ii. 21 ; iii. 17 

v. Ten Eyck iii. 175, 240, 241, 242, 

246 

Stables v. Eley i. 192; ii. 247 

Stacey v. Decy ii. 938 

v. Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 493, 582, 583 

Stache v. St. Paul Ins. Co. ii. 587 

Stackpole v. Arnold i. 7, 56 

v. Simon ii. 691 

v. Symonds ii. 905 

Stackwood v. Dunn ii. 938 

Stacy v. Kemp ii. 903 

v. Ross i. 506 

Stadt v. Lill iii. 16 

Stafford, In re i. 137 

v. Bartholomew iii. 362 

z>. Bryan iii. 75 

v. Clark ii. 772 

v. Newsom ii. 913 

a. Richardson iii. 98 

v. Roof i. 3t',J 

Stagg, Ej- parte iii. 42! I 

v. Eureka Co. i. 54' i 

Stainback ;>. Bank of Virginia i. 4- 

v. Rae ii. 42'.i 

v. Read i. 42 

Stainbank /■. Fenning i. 84; ii. 402, 403 

Staines v. Plank iii. 462 

v. Shore i. 526 

Stainland v. Hopkins ii. 644 

Stalker v. McDonald i. 292 

Stamford Bank v. Benedict ii. 765 

Stammers r. Macomb i. 38S 

Stanard v. Eldridge iii. 2-14 

Standen u. Chrinnas i. 530 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXC1 



Standish v. Ross 

». Wliitwell 
Standridge v. Standridge 
Stanifortli v. Fellowes 
Staniland v. Hopkins 
Stanley v. Charaberlin 

v. Gaylord 

v. Jones 

v, Kempton 

it, Robinson 

v. Stanley 

v. Towgood 
Stanley's Appeal 
Stanly v. Duhurst 

v. Hendricks 
Stannus v. Stannus 
Stansbury v. Fringer 
Stansell v. Roberts 
Stansfleld v. Johnson 
Stanton v. Allen 

v. Bell 

v. Blossom 



i. 496 

ii. 302 

ii. 734 

iii. 469 

ii. 644 

i. 81 

ii. 137 

ii. 908 

iii. 131 

iii. 372 

iii. 487 

iii. 249 

i. 150, 151 

iii. 454 

ii. 11 ; iii. 25 

i. 293 

iii. 333 

iii. 298 

iii. 12 

i. 487 

ii. 114 

i. 32:; 



v. Eager i. 328,653; ii. 411 

v. Hall iii. 438 

v. Henry ii. 837 

v. Small i. 560, 561 ; iii. 224. 226 

v. Wilson i. 336, 343, 347 

Stanwood v. Rich ii. 627 

Stapilton v. Stapilton i. 467; iii. 365 

Staples v. Anderson i. 532 

v. Emery i. 545, 547 

Stapleton v. Conway ii. 716 

v. Nowell ii. 772 

Star Glass Co. v. Morey iii. 219 

Starbuck v. New England Ins. Co. ii. 530 

Stark v. Parker ii. 36, 39, 792 

Stark Co. Ins Co. v. Hurd ii. 583 

Starkweather v. Cleveland Ins. Co. ii. 576 

u. Loring ii. 744 

Starr v. Bennett ii. 915 

v. Goodwin ii. 394 

v. Pease iii. 236 

v. Peck ii. 83, 85 

v. Robinson iii. 504 

v. Taylor i. 406, 407 

i'. Torrey i. 290 

v. Winegar ii. 146 ; iii. 213 

Startup v. Cortazzi iii. 220 

v. Macdonald i. 573, 580 ; ii. 783, 787 

State v. Atherton i. 61 

v. Baltimore, &c. R. R. Co. iii. 209 

v. Bell Telephone Co. ii. 278 

v. Campbell ii. 245 

v. Clarke i- 334 

v. Cook i. 343 

v. Davis ii. 88 

v. Dean _ ii. 106 

v. Dunnavant ii. 628 

v. Evans i. 569 

v. Gaillard i. 457, 62T 

v, Hallett ii- 709 

v. Hawthorne iii- 611 

v. Heyward iii- 486 

v. Kreider ii- 863 

v. Litchfield ii. 284 



State v. Mathews 


ii. 155 


v. Miller 


ii. 85 


v. Neal 


i. 209 


v. Patterson 


ii. 726 


v. Phalcn 


iii. 511 


v. Reynolds 


ii. 24, 26 


v. Richmond 


i. 336; iii. 415 


v. Rosenfeld 


i. 570 


v. Spartanburg 


i. 62 


v. Sterling 


iii. 611 


v. Suheer 


ii. 900 


i\ Torinus 


i. 99 



State Bank v. Bank of the Capitol i. 63 

v. Cowan iii. 139 

u. Fox i. 161 

u. Hastings i. 253 

u. Hunter iii. 143 

!>. Littlejohn ii. 822 

v. Seawell iii. 103, 104 

v. Slaughter i. 321 

e. Welles ii. 754 

u. Wilborn iii. 388 

u. Woody iii. 82, 83 

State Ins. Co. v Maackens ii. 577 

v. Roberts ii. 475, 577 

v. Todd ii. 587 

State of New York v. Mayor ii. 274 

State Treasurer v. Cross i. 482 

Staton o. Kew iii. 369 

Stavely v. Parsons iii. 449 

Stavers ;>. Curling ii. 663 

Stead i'. Davvber ii. 799 

v. Nelson iii. 369 

v. Salt i. 216 

Steadman v. Duhamel ii. 942 

Steamboat Co. v. Whillden ii. 434; iii. 184, 

196 

Steamboat New World v. King ii. 96, 238 

Steam Nav. Co. v. Dandridge ii. 182 

Stearnes v. Nevvson iii. 372 

Stearns v. Barrett ii. 890, 892 

v. Dean iii. 268 

v. Doe ii. 456 

,,. Felker ii. 908 

v. Frearman i. 369 

v. Haven i. 178, 212 

v. Marsh ii. 129 ; iii. 216 

v. Sampson ii 542 

v. Swift iii. 239 

Stebbins v. Globe Ins. Co. ii. 542, 553, 554 

u. Edmunds i. 161 

v. Leowolf ii. 783 

v. Palmer i. 145 ; ii. 74 

v. Sherman i. 463 

v. Smith i. 473 ; iii. 21 

Steckel i\ Bank ii. 113 

Stedman v. Eveleth i. 161 

v . Gooch i. 301 

v. Western Transportation Co. ii. 270 

Steel, Ex pane iii. 420, 422 

v. Frick i. 531 

v. Hoe iii- 17 

v. Jennings i. 205 

v. Lacy ii- 626 

v. Smelting Co. ii. 938 



cxcn 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Steel v. Steel ii. 52 

v. Whipple iii. 129 

Steele v. Harmer i. 163 

v. Ins. Co. ii. 169, 566 

v. Putney ii. 937, 943 

u. Thatcher ii. 466 

v, Townsend ii. 233 

Steen v. Niagara Fire Ins. Co. ii. 587 

Steene v. Aylesworth iii. 441 

Steers v. Lashley i. 293 

Stegall v. Stegall i. 377 

Steiglitz v. Egginton i. 52 

Stein v. La Dow i. 201 

Stein's case iii. 406 

Steinback v. Ehinelander ii. 474, 480 

Steiner v. Heald ii. 308 

Steinhauer v. Witman ii. 929 

Steinman v. Magnus ii. 751 ; iii. 477 

v. Wilkins ii. 153 

Steinweg v. Erie K. R. Co. ii. 186 

Steman i>. Harrison i. 282, 498 

Stemmer's Appeal i. 220 

Stenburg v. Callanan i. 215 

Stephens v. Australasian Ins. Co. ii. 484 

v. Badcock i. 96 

v. Baird ii. 938 

u. Bales of Cotton ii. 4C6 

v. Beal i. 380 

v. Be Medina iii. 414 

v. El wall iu. 434, 458 

v. Farrar i. 129 

v. Felt ii. 327 

v. Olive i. 401 

v. Peel ii. 372 

v. Sole iii. 427 

v. Squire iii. 25 

v. Wilkinson i. 642 

Stephenson ». Cady ii. 813 

v. Dickson i. 318 

v. Hall i. 351 

v. Hardy i. 392 

o. Hart ii. 224 

v. Little iii. 214 

v. Primrose i. 308, 317 

v. Weeks i. 138 

Steptoe's Adm'rs v. Harvey's Ex'rs. 

iii. 116 

Sterling v. Sinnickson ii. 79 

Sterry v. Arden i. 460 
Stetson v. Mass. Ins. Co. ii. 485, 489, 545, 

561, 562 

v. Patton i. 52, 72, 122 

Stevens, Ex parte iii. 416 

v. Adams i. 129 ; ii. 59 

v. Armstrong i. 117, 119 

v. Austin ii. 922 

v. Bell iii. 382 

o. Benton ii. 934 

n. Blanchard ii. 292 

v. Briggs ii. 749 

v. Cushing ii. 815 

v. Davis iii. 119, 145 

v. De Conte ii. 361 

v. Eno i. 566 
v. Fuller i. 623 ; ii. 918 



Stevens v. Gaylord 

v. Gladding 

v. Hartwell 

v. Hauser 

c. Hoy 

v. Head 

v. Jackson 

v. Judson 

v. Lincoln 

v. Lyford 

u. Park 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. 

;;. Reeves 

v. Robins 

v. Robinson 

t>. Stevens 

v. Stewart 

r. Strange 

u. Warren 

v. Webb 

... Wilson 
Stevenson v. Agry 

v. Blakelock 

v. Hart 

v. Heyland 

a. Kleppinger 

v. Lambard 

u. McLean 

v. Montreal Tel. Co. 

v. State 

v. Watson 
Steward v. Blakeway 

o. Harding 

u. Lee 

v. Lombe 

v. Winters 
Stewart, Ex parte 

v. Aberdeen 

v. Alliston 

v. Ball 
Bell 



ii. 852 
ii. 330 
iii. 194 
iii. 428 
i. 61 
ii. 318 
iii. 414 
ii. 925 
iii. 134 
iii. 188 
ii. 756 

i. 155 
ii. 672, 675 

i. 107 
ii. 915 

iii. 37 

iii. 49 

i. 283 

ii. 609 

ii. 791, 806 

i. 102 
iii. 382 
iii. 285 
ii. 224 

i. 292 
ii. 660 

i. 540 
i. 514, 515 
ii. 285, 301 

i. 557 
ii. 833 

i. 183 

i. 549 
ii. 748 

i. 569 

iii. 328 

iii. 416 

ii. 669, 670, 675 

i. 525 
iii. 416 
ii. 488, 524 



v. Brooklyn, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 244 

v. Brown ii. 774 

u. Caldwell i. 203 

v. Campbell ii. 11 ; iii. 26 

v. Cass ii. 825 

v. Donelly ii. 785 

v. Dougherty i. 622 

v. Drake iii. 242 

r. Dunlop ii. 525 

v. Edtlowes ii. 680 ; iii. 15 

v. Greenock Marine Co. ii. 507 

v. Harvard College ii- 47 

v. Lehigh Valley R. Co. i. 95 

v. Lehigh, &c. E. Co. ii. 187 

v. Loring i. 493 

v. Maddox iii. 184 

v. Mather i. 109 

i . McKean ii- 19 

u. Moody iii. 441 

i/. Morison ii- 622 

v. Noble iii. 245 

v. Parsons ii. 160 

n. Sloper iii. 416 

v. Smithson ii. 364 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXC111 



vart v. Spedden 


iii. 102 


v. Spenser 


iii. 382, 403 


v. Steele 


ii. 517 


v. Stewart 


iii. 315, 354 


v. Stimp8on 


ii. 57 


t>. Tenn. Ins. Co. 


ii. 532 


v. The State 


i. 522 



v. Trustees of Hamilton College i. 484 

v. U. S. Ins. Co. ii. 882 

v. Walker ii. 38 

v. West India, &c. Co. ii. 450 

v. Woodward ii. 882 

Stickles v. Arnold ii. 833 

Stickney v. Allen iii. 212 

v. Jordan ii. 714 

Stidham v. Matthews iii. 368 

Stief v. Hart ii. 129 

Stikeman v. Dawson i. 358 

Stiles i\ Cbwper i. 254 ; ii. 939 

v. Farrar i. 254 

v. Granville i. 349 

v. White ii. 916 

Stilk v. Myrick i. 467 

Still v. Hall ii. 879 

v. Hoste ii. 695 

Stilley v. Folger i. 408 

Stillwell v. Craig i. 281 

v. Staples ii. 474, 665 

Stimpson ». B. & S. R. R. Co. ii. 315 

v. The Railroads ii. 327, 328; iii. 176, 

_ 185 

Stinemets v. Ainslie iii. 464 

Stinson v. Clark i. 570 

v. Wyman ii. 454 

Stirling v. Peet iii. 242 

v. Vaughan ii. 489 

Stitt v. Wardell ii. 534 

Stoallings v. Baker i. 177 

Stobie v. Dills i. 643 

Stock v. Inglis ii. 489 

v. Mawson iii. 477 

Stockdale v. Dunlop i. 595, 601 ; ii. 561 

v. Onwhyn ii- 337 

v. Young iii. 237 

Stocken v. Collen i. 514 

Stocker v. Brockelbank i. 180 

v. Harris ii. 534 

Stocking v. Hunt iii- 507 

v. Sage iii. 30, 206 

Stockley v. Stockley i. 435; iii. 351, 373 

Stocks v. Dobson j- 258 

v. Van Leonard iii- 107 

Stockton v. Frey ii. 234, 239, 246, 823 

v. Turner ii- 645 

Stockton R. Co. v. Barrett ii. 487 

Stockwell v. Dillingham i- 197 

Stoddard v. Hart iii- 346 

v. Kimball i. 285, 286 

v. Long Island Railroad Co. ii. 254, 

255, 256, 259, 267 

v. Martin "'- 8 «I 

v. Mcllwain . ■■ "2 

v. Mix >■ 468 

v. Penniman i- 283 ; ii. 853 

v. TreadweU "• 63 



Stoddard's case i. 52 

Stoddard Woollen Manuf. Co. v. Hunt- 
ley iii. 264 
Stoddart ». Smith i. 525 
Stodden v. Harvey ii. 794 
Stoddert v. Bowie's Ex'r iii. 309 
v. Vestry of Port Tobacco Parish 

i. 157 

Stoever v. Whitman ii. 671, 909 

Stokely v. Thompson iii. 159 

Stokes v. Cox ii. 624 

v. Landgraff ii. 352, 360, 371, 375 

v. Mason iii. 467 

u. Moore iii. 7 

b. Saltonstall ii. 234, 235, 236, 239, 244 

Stollenwerck v. Thacher i. 103, 568, 570, 

651 

Stonard v. Dunkin ii. 152 

Stone, Ex parte i. 205 

v. Blanchard ii. 311 

v. Boston & Maine Railroad iii. 453, 

455 
v. Browning iii- 51 

o. Carlan ii. 360 

v. Carr i. 348 

v. Charlestown iii. 483 

v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. ii. 273 

v. Codman i. 117, 120 

v. Compton ii. 9 

v. Dennis ii. 844 

v. Dennison i. 353 ; iii. 44, 64 

v. Denny ii. 917 

v. Fouse i. 184 • 

v. Fowle ii. 790 

v. Gilliam i. 676 

v. King i. 572 

v. Lidderdale i. 253 

v. Marsh i. 209; ii. 747 

i'. McNair i. 392 

v. Matthews i. 553 

r. Miller ii. 822 

v. Mississippi iii. 510 

v. National Ins. Co. ii. 409 

«. Peacock i- 566 

v. Pointer i. 015 

!>. Rockefeller ii. 3 

v. Seymour ii. 763, 765 

v. Swift i. 328 

t;. Vance ii. 686 

v. Waitt ii. 199, 224, 465 

t>. Ware iii- 136 

v. Whiting i. 543 

v. Wilson ii- 861 

v. Withipool i- 356 

v. Wood _ i- 68, 69 

Stonehewer v. Farrar ii. 830, 833 

Stonehouse v. Gent i- 84 

Stoneman !>. Pyle i- 279 

Stoney b. Araer. Life Ins. Co. iii. 132 

v. Beaubien _i- 283 

Stoolfoos v. Jenkins i- 357 

Stoonevart Maatschappy Nederland, 

The, b. Peninsular, &c. Co. ii. 429 

Storer v. Gordon ii- 603 

v. Great Western Railway Co. iii. 327 



cxciv 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Storer v. Hunter 




i. 569 


!•. Logan 




i. 303 


Storke v. De Smeth 




ii. 835 


Storm v. Green 




iii. 181 


v. Smith 




i. 616 


v. Stirling 




i. 280 


Storr v. Crowley ii. 


196, 


197, 214 


Storrs v. Barker ii 


939 


; iii. 355 


v. City Bank of Utiea 




i. 117 


Story v. Elliot 




ii. 898 


v. Finnis 




ii. 773 


v. Flournoy 




iii. 262 


v. Holcomoe ii. 336, 


341, 


342, 344, 
345, 349 


v. Johnson 




i. 366 


v. Livingston 




ii. 769 


r. Lord Windsor 




i. 80 


u. Patten 




ii. 874 


v. Richardson 




i. 20, 26 


Stotts v. Byers 




i. 292 


Stouffer v. Coleman 




iii. 324 


v. Latshaw 




i. 443 


Stoughton v. Lynch 


. 187 


; iii. 161 


v. Rappalo 




ii. 415 


Stoughton's Appeal 




i. 150 


Stourbridge Can. Co. v. Wheeley 


ii. 638 


Stout v. Folger 




iii. 200 


v. Jackson 




iii. 242 


Stoveld, Ex parte 




iii. 418 


u. Brewin 




ii. 772 


v. Hughes 


i. 


647, 653 


Stover v. Herrington 


iii. 


381, 382 


Stow v. Russell 




iii. 340 


v. Stevens 




ii. 790 


Stowe v. Meserve 




i. 612 


v. Thomas ii. 


330, 


341, 342 


v. Wyse 




ii. 931 


Stowell v. Robinson 




iii. 341 


v. Roch 




i. 374 


Stowell's Adm'r v. Drake 




i. 31 


Stracey v. Deey 




ii. 882 


Stracy v. Bank of England 




i. 469 


Strader v. Lambeth 




ii. 687 


Strafford Bank v. Crosby 




ii. 29 


Straker v. Kidd 




ii. 424 


Strang v. Hirst 




ii. 756 


Strangborough v. Warner 




i. 478 


Strange v. Brennan 




iii. 374 


v. Price 




i. 322 


Stratbmore v. Bowes 




i. 411 


Strathnaver, The 




ii. 436 


Straton v. Enstall 




ii. 686 


Stratton v. Allen 




i. 157 


v. Hale 




iii. 472 


v. Pettit ii. 


627, 


637, 643 


v. Stratton i 


.460 


; iii. 370 


Straus v. Minzesheimer 




i. 564 


v. Wessel 




i. 579 


Strauss v. Kois 




i. 564 


Stray v. Russell 




ii. 806 


Streaper v. Williams 




iii. 169 


Streatfleld v. Ilalliday 




i. 12 


Street v. Blay 




i. 637 


v. Rigby ii 


.845 


; iii. 172 


Streeter v. Horlock 




ii. 68 



Stretch v. Parker 

v. Sehenk 
Stretton v. Busnach 
Stribblehill v. Brett 



ii. 65 

iii. 311 

i. 407 

ii. 80 



Stribling v. Bank of the Valley iii. 118, 

143 

Strickland v. Coker i. 372 

v. Hudson i. 54 

u. Maxwell i. 544; ii. 634 

v. Turner i. 558 

Striekler v. Burkholder ii. 27 

Strithrost v. Graeme iii. 104 

Strode v. Russel ii. 695 

Stroh v. Uhrich ii. 881 

Strohn v. Detroit R. R. Co. ii. 265 

v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 540 

Strong v. Barnes ii. 634 

t;. Blake ii. 777 

v. Campbell ii. 155 

v. Clawson iii. 424 

v. Foote i. 336 

v. Foster i. 294; ii. 627 

v. Hart iii. 261 

u. Harvey ii. 775 

„. Manuf. Ins. Co. ii. 659, 562, 575 

v. Martin ii. 500 

v. Natally ii. 212, 488 

v. N. Y. Ins. Co. ii. 537 

v. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 494 

v Place i. 177 

u. Smith i. 382 

v. Stewart 'i. 109 

v. Strong ii. 749; iii. 216 

v. Wilkin i. 410 

v. Willey ii. 825 

Stronghill v. Buck ii. 931 

Strother v. Lovejoy ii. 392 

u. Lucas ii. 713 

Stroud v. Marshall i. 433 

Strowd v. Willis ii. 931 

Stuart v. Commonwealth ii. 877 

v. L. & X. W. Railway Co. iii. 306 

v. Stimpson ii. 57 

v. Wilkins i. 618 

Stubbs v. Lund i. 649, 650 

v. Page iii. 240 

Stucky v. Clyburn i. 618 

Studabaker v. Marquardt iii. 132 

Stukeley v. Butler ii. 645 

Stull v. Hanse ii. 5 

Stults v. Silva i. 281 

Stultz v. Dickey i. 544 

Stump v. Henry iii. 80 

Stupetski v. Transatlantic Ins. Co. ii. 546 

Sturdevant v. Pike i. 94 

Sturge v. Sturge i. 523 

Sturges v. Crowninshield i. 5; iii. 385, 

390, 391, 392, 397, 400, 449, 502, 

503, 507, 509, 511 

a. Keith iii. 211, 220 

v. Murphy ii. 430 

Sturgess v. Cary ii. 444, 445 

Sturgis v. Clough ii. 430 

v. Galindo iii. 322 

v. Slocum iii. 277 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



cxcv 



Sturm v. Atlantic Ins. Co. ii. 661, 683 
Sturt v. Mellish iii. 95 

Sturtevant v. Ballard i. 570 

0. Randall ii. 870 

Stuyvesant v. Mayor of New York 

iii. 327 
v. Woodruff ii. 664 

Styan, In re ii. 610 

Styles v. Wardle ii. 798 

Success, The ii. 519 

Succession of Dulhonde i. 292 

Suckley v. Delafield ii. 526 

i\ Furse ii. 545 

Sucklinge v. Coney ii. 776 

Suffell v. Bank of England ii. 853 

Suffield Society v. Loomis iii. 113 

Suffolk Bank «. The Worcester 

Bank ii. 771, 773 

Suffolk Ins. Co. v. Boyden ii. 564 

Sugden v. Lolley ii. 735 

Sugg !•. Tillman iii. 403 

Suit v. Woodhall i. 81 

Sullivan v. Jacob iii. 373 

c'. Ferguson iii. 294 

v. Mitchell i. 311 

v. Sullivan i. 397; ii. 88 

v. Tuck iii. 320 

Summerhays v Kansas, &c. It. Co. ii. 47 

Sum merit 0. Elder i. 645 

Summers v. Ball i. 399 

Summersett v. Jarvis iii. 416 

Sumner u. Bowen i. 320 

u. Ferryman i. 445 

v. Ford i. 309 

v. Hamlet ii. 380 

v. Jones ii. 907 

v. Powell i. 228 

v. Williams i. 143 ; ii. 32, 631 ; iii. 175 

Sumter v. Lehie iii. 237 

Sunbolt v. Alford ii. 167 ; iii. 265 

Sunderland Ins. Co. v. Kearney di. 482 

Sun Ins. Co. e. Wright ii. 490 

Supervisors v. Otis ii. 28 

Supervisors of Albany Co. v. Dorr ii. 154 

Supple v. Iowa State Ins. Co. ii. 543 

Surcome v. Pinniger iii. 32, 353 

Surplice v. Farnsworth i. 533, 537 

Surtees, Ex parte iii. 419, 420 

v. Hubbard i. 248 

Surtell v. Brailsford i. 407 

Susan, The ii. 439, 440 

Suse f. Pompe i. 327 

Susquehanna Ins. Co. v. Perrine ii. 541 

Susquehanna, &c. Co. v. Finney i. 571 

Sussex Bank v. Baldwin i. 308, 311, 316, 

318 

Sutcliffe v Dohrman i- 231 

Suter v. Sheeler iii- 75 

Sutherland, In re iii- 435 

I?. Briggs iii- 337 

i<. Pratt ii- 486 

Sutphen v. Fowler iii- 333 

Sutphin v. Crozer ii- 760 

Sutton i'. Ballou i- 568 

0. Buck ii- 103 



Sutton u. Chetwynd 

v. Crain 

v. Hawkins 

v. Horn 

v. Irwine 

v. Kettell 

v. Kowley 

v . Tatham 

v. Temple 

v. Tyrell 

v. Warren 
Suttons v. Tyrrell 
Suydam v. Bartle 

v. Broadnax 



iii 316 

i. 142 

ii. 779 

ii. 841 

i. 210 

ii. 410 

iii. 360 

i. 87; ii. 670 

i. 533, 633 ; ii. 135 

ii. 39 

ii. 88, 724, 726, 727 

ii. 847, 848 

iii. 143 

iii. 396, 397 



v. Clark i. 508, 583, 586 ; iii. 444 

v. Columbus Ins. Co. ii. 540 

v. Day ii. 318 

v. Jenkins iii. 115, 210, 211, 212, 215, 

217, 218, 220, 221 

v. Vance ii. 27 

v. Westfall iii. 143 

Swain v. Howland ii. 467 

v. Seamans ii. 939 

v. Senet iii. 286 

v. Tyler i. 342 

Swallow v. Emery i. 578 

Swampscot Machine Co. v. Partridge 

ii. 539, 57!) 

Swan, The ii. 441 

0. Broome ii. 898 

v. Nesmith i. 101 

f. Snow ii. 608 

v. Stedman i. 212 

v. Tappan iii. 189 

Swanson v. Swanson i. 376 

.'. White iii. 117 

Swanton w. Reed ii. 420 

Swanzey e. Moore ii. 40, 657 

Swartwout v. Payne iii. 121, 125 

Swasey v. Antram i. 166 

v. Vanderheyden i. 353 

Sweany v Hunter i. 467 

Sweat ;;. Hall i. 399 

Sweatland v. 111. & Miss. Tel. Co. ii. 280, 

283, 286, 287, 288, 289 

Sweeney v. Franklin Ins. Co. ii. 561 

t,-. Owsley i. 563 

Sweeny v. Easter iii. 276 

Sweet v. Bartlett iii. 286 

v. Benning ii. 337, 344, 340 

v. Cater ii. 348 

v. Franklin iii. 74 

v. Harding ii. 783 

0. Jenkins ii. 677 

v. Lee iii. 9, 16, 41 

v. Maugham ii. 337, 348 

v. Pym i. 644; iii. 271 

Sweeting v. Darthez ii. 424 

v. Turner i. 562 

Sweetland u. Illinois, &c. Telegraph 

Co. i. 79; ii. 287 

Sweetzer v. French i. 209, 210 

Swcezey v. Thayer i. 150 

Sweigart v. Berk i. 23 

Swete v. Fairlie ii. 592, 599 



CXCV1 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Swetland v. Creigh i. 280 

Swett v. Colgate i. 616, 622, 625 

v. Patrick i. 25; iii. 175, 242 

v. Southworth i. 90 ; ii. 745 

Swick ». Home Ins. Co. ii. 597, 609 

v. Sears ii. 939 

Swift v. Barnes iii. 218, 220 

v. Barnett i. 338 

v. Clark i. 442 ; ii. 458 

u. Dey ii. 374, 375 

v. Hawkins i. 457 

v. Kelly ii. 726 

v. Pierce iii. 23 

v. Railway, &c. Ass. ii. 610 

v. Stevens i. 332 

v. Tyson i. 291, 292 

v. Vt. Ins. Co. ii. 561 

i>. Williams ii. 39 

v. Whesen ii. 304 

Swigert v. Graham ii. 132 

Swindall v. Swindall i. 137 

Swindler v. Hilliard ii. 256, 268 

Swiney v. Barry ii. 856 

Swinfen v. Chelmsford i. 126, 130 

v. Swinfen i. 131 

Swinford v. Burn ii. 59 

Swire v. Redman ii. 3, 28, 756 

Swires v. Parsons ii. 52 

Swisher v. Williams ii. 901 

Switzer ». Gardner iii. 323 

v. Skiles i. 527 

v. Smith i. 256 

Sword v. Keith iii. 41 

Swoyer's Appeal i. 382 

Sydebotham, Ex parte i. 354; iii. 415 

Sydney Cove, The ii. 404 

Sydnor v. Hurd i. 55, 68 

Syers v. Bridge ii. 674 

v. Jonas ii. 668, 678 

v. Syers i. 176 

Sykes v. Dixon i. 478 ; ii. 48, 52 

v. Giles i. 41, 87, 528, 520 ; ii. 740, 747 

v. Halsted i. 391 ; ii. 91 

i>. Sykes ii. 364, 372, 373, 375 

Sylvester v. Crapo i. 296 

v. Downer i. 274, 283, 284 

Symes, Ex parte iii. 473 

v. Hughes ii. 886 

Symington v. McLin i. 60 

Symonds v. Coekerill iii. 116, 149 

i/. Northwestern Ins. Co. ii. 618 

Symons i>. James i. 524 

Sypher v. McHenry i. 137 

Syracuse, &c. R. Co. v. Collins ii. 755 



Taber v. Cannon ii. 390, 391 

v. Penett ii. 112 

Tabor v. Michigan Life Ins. Co. ii. 616 

Taffe v. Warnick i. 647 

Taft v. Buffum i. 222 

v. Larkin ii. 878 

v. Montague ii. 655 



Taft v. Sergeant i- 364 

Taft & Co. v. Pike i. 361 

Tagart v. The State of Indiana iii. 104 

Tagg v. Tennessee Bank i. 81 

Taggard v. Loring ii. 386, 420, 500 

Taggart v. Buckmore ii. 383 

Taintor v. Prendergast i. 68, 106 

Tait v. Levi ii. 480, 527 

ii. N. Y. Ins. Co. ii. 601 

Taitt, Ex parte i. 238 

Talbot v. Commonwealth Bank i. 309 

v. Gray ii. 81, 795 

v. M'Gee i. 131 ; ii. 825 

v. Seamen, The ii. 441 

v. Wilkins i. 209 

Talcot v. Marine Ins. Co. ii. 534 

Talcott !■. Goodwin iii. 426 

v. Henderson ii. 914 

Tallcott v. Dudley iii. 424 

Talley v. Great Western R. Co. ii. 212 

Talliaferro's Ex'rs v. King's Adm'rs 

iii. 161 
Talmadge v. The Rensselaer & Sara- 
toga R. R. Co. iii. 44 
Talver v. West iii. 49 
Tameret u. Edwards i. 569 
Tamplin v. Diggins iii. 439, 469 
Tarns r. Way i. 290 
Tamvaco v. Simpson i. 446 
Tandy ». Tandy ii. 834 
Tanner, Ex parte iii. 422 
v. Christian i. 68 
v. Livingston iii. 240 
v. Moore ii. 24 
v. Scovell i. 645, 646 
v. Smart iii. 71, 72, 74, 76, 78, 79 
Tansley v. Turner i. 566 
Tapley v. Butterfield i. 200, 201, 207 
v. Martens ii. 755 
Tappan v. Blaisdell i. 231, 232 
v. Kimball iii. 90 
v. Nat. Bank-note Co. ii. 324 
Tappenden v. Burgess iii. 441 
Tapscott ». Williams i. 23 
Tarbox v. Eastern Steamboat Co. ii. 410 
Tardy v. Boyd i. 307 
Tarleton v. Backhouse iii. 159 
v. Baker ii. 897 
v. M'Gawley iii- 195 
v. Tarleton ii. 740 
Tarling v. Baxter i. 563, 566 
o. O'Riordan i. 505 
Tarpley v. Hamer iii. 506 
Tarquair v. Redinger ii. 833 
Tarr i>. Williams i. 409 
Tarrant v. Webb ii. 46 
Tartar, The ii. 404 
Tasker v. Kenton Ins. Co. ii. 588 
Tassell v. Lewis i. 321 
Tatara v. Williams iii 96 
Tate v. Citizens Ins. Co. ii. 476, 574, 578 
v. Clements i. 199, 225 
v. Greenlee iii- 12 
v. Wellings iii. 116, 119, 125 
v. Wymond ii. 29 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXCVU 



Tatham v. Le Roy 

v. Lowber 

v. Piatt 
Tatlock v. Harris 
Tattersall v. Groote 
Tatton v. Wade 
Tatum t'. Bonner 
Taunton v. Costar 



U. 317, 321 

ii. 325 

iii. 309 

i. 245 

i. 229; ii. 846 

ii. 915 

ii. 6 

i. 650 



Taunton Bank v. Richardson i. 315 

Taunton Copper Co. v. Merch. Ins. 

Co. ii. 485 

Taussig v. Hart i. 94 

Tawney w. Crowther iii. 4, 18 

Tayler v. Marling ii. 848 

Tayloe v. Merchants Fire Ins. Co. i. 515 ; 
ii. 540, 587; iii. 329 
v. Sandiford ii. 763; iii. 168 

Taylor v. ./Etna Ins. Co. ii. 601, 613 

v. Agricultural, &c. Assoc. iii. 353 
v. Ashton i. 71; ii. 917 

v. Atwood i. 435 

v. Backhouse ii. 844 

v. Baldwin ii. 687 

v. Bank of Illinois i. 326 

v. Blacklow i. 126 

v. Blanchard ii. 893 

v. Bowers ii. 886 

v. Brewer ii. 59 

u. Briggs ii. 666, 672 

v. Bryden i. 318 

v. Bullen i. 635; ii. 394 

v. Carpenter i. 449 ; ii. 356, 357, 358, 
372, 375, 376, 377 ; iii. 185 
v. Cato, The ii. 438, 461 

v. Chapman i. 543 

v. Chicago, &e. R. Co. i. 48 

v. Clay ii. 425 

v. Coryell i. 216 

v. Croker i. 370 

v. Curry i. 281 

v. Diplock ii. 613 

v. Dobbins i. 279 

v. Field i. 234, 236 ; iii. 298 

v. Fleet i. 626; ii. 911 

v. French i. 315, 317 

v. Gallup ii. 784 

v. Geary iii. 409 

v. Germania Ins. Co. ii. 471, 616 

v. Gilman ii. 908 

v. Green i. 78 

v. Henderson i. 197 

v. Henry i. 263 

v. Horde ii. 634 

v. Hutchinson i. 226 

v. Jones i. 308, 475, 515 

v. Kymer i. 330; ii. 766, 938 

v. Laird ii. 37 

v. Liverpool & Great Western 

Steam Co. .ii. 183 

v. Longworth iii- 338 

v. Lowell ii. 472, 480, 529 

v. Maguire iii- 196 

v. Merrill iii- H 

„. Mills iii- 200, 464 

u. Mortindale i- 523 



Taylor v. Moseley 




ii. 860 


o. Neville 




iii. 329 


v. Nicolson 




ii. 827 


v. Phoenix Ins. Co. 




ii. 544 


v. Patrick 


i 


435, 468 


v. Plumer 


iii 


300, 439 


v. Popham 




ii. 875 


v. Pratt 




ii. 13 


v. Pugh 




ii. 71 


v. Robinson 




iii. 277 


v. Ross 




iii. 17 


v. Salmon 




i. 93, 94 


v. Savage 




i. 37 


v. Shelton 




i. 68 


v. Shum 


iii. 


424, 448 


v. Snyder 




i. 312 


v. Spear 




iii. 98 


v. Stibbert 




iii. 313 


v. Taylor 




ii. 371 


v. Terme 




i. 180 


v. Thomas 




i. 271 


v. Trueman 




i. 330 


v. Wakefield 




iii. 46 


v. Waters 




ii. 874 


v. Weld 




ii. 924 


v. Wells 




ii. 225 


v. Wetmore 




ii. 14 


v. Wheeler 


iii. 427, 


431, 432 


v. Whitehead 




ii. 136 


v. Whitthorn 




iii. 442 


v. Wilson 


ii. 


483, 525 


v. Young i 


192 ; iii. 


463, 466 


v. Zepp 




ii. 940 


Taymon v. Mitchell 




i. 626 


Teaff v. Hewitt 




i. 547 


Teague v. Hubbard 




i. 186 


Teal v. Auty 




iii. 35 


«-•. Felton 




ii. 155 


v. Sears 




ii. 191 



Teasdale i'. Charleston Ins. Co. ii. 612 

Tebbets, In re iii. 478 

ii. Haskins ii. 62 

Tebbetts v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 542 

Tebbitts v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 557 

Tebbs v. Carpenter i. 137 

Tebbutt v. Bristol R. Co. i. 153 

Teed v. Ellworthy i. 23 

Teesdale v. Anderson i. 624 

Teese v. Huntington ii. 328 

Tegetmeyer v. Lumley ii. 876 
Tempest v. Fitzgerald i. 671 ; iii. 46 

v. Kilner iii. 220, 221 

Templar v. McLachlan i. 128 

Temple, Ex parte iii. 427 

v. Haw ley i. 372 

v. Seaver i. 218 

v. Turner ii. 459 

Templeman v. Biddle i- 544 

v. Case ii. 104 

Tenant v. Elliott ii- 887 

Ten Broeck v. De Witt iii. 287 

v. Livingston iii. 334 

Tench v. Cheese ii. 642 

Ten Eyck v. Brown ii- 4 

v. Wing iii. 72 



CXCV1U 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Tennant, Ex parte i. 174, 183 

v. Strachan iii. 426, 451 

Tennessee v. Sneed iii- 506 

Tennessee Bank v. Ebbert i. 613 

Tenn. Ins. Co. v. Scott ii. 478 

Tenney v. Foote i. 208 

Tenny i: Prince i. 274, 283 ; ii. 7 

Terhune v. Mayor, &c. of New York 

ii. 745 

Terrell v. Goddard i. 221 

Terrett v. Taylor iii. 481, 483, 485 

Terrill v. Richards i. 175, 198, 213 

Tcrritt v. Bartlett i. 486, 480 

Terry v. Belcher i. 569 

v. Bissell ii. 936 

v. Carter i. 187 

v. Duntze ii. 660 

v. Fargo i. 42 

v . Parker i. 307, 310 

v. Wacher i. 96 

Tetley v. Easton ii. 308 

r. Taylor iii. 402 

Tewksbury v. Bennett i. 617, 621 

l: O'Connell ii. 809 

b. Spruance i. 94 

Thacher v. Dinsmore i. 7, 154 ; ii. 756 

Thackaray v. The Farmer ii. 459 

Thacker v. Hardy ii. 896 

v. Shepherd i. 24 

Thaekoorseydass v. Dhondmull ii. 896 

Thallhimer r. Brinckerlioff ii. 908 

Thames v. Barbour ii. 6 

Thames Iron Co. u. Patent Derrick 

Co. ii. 148; iii. 253 

Tharsis Sulphur Co. v. Loft us ii. 833 

Thatcher v. Bank of New York i. 48 

v. Gammon iii. 130 

Thaxton v. Edwards ii. 783 

Thayer v. Brackett i. 290 ; ii. 778 

v. Clemence i. 260 

v. Daniels i. 258; iii. 98 

t7. King i. 332 

v. Luce iii. 15 

v. Middlesex Ins. Co. ii. 541 

v. Mowry ii. 866 

v. Rock iii. 19, 36 

v. St. Louis, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 233,236 

v. Torrey i. 406 

v . Turner ii. 922 

o. Viles iii. 38 

v. Wadsworth ii. 36, 39 

v. Wendell i. 143 

v. White i. 342 

Thelusson v. Fergusson ii. 520, 533 

v. Fletcher ii. 513 

Theobald u. Colby ii. 885 

Thetford v. Hubbard ii. 775, 780 

Thetis, The ii. 440 

Thibault v. Gibson iii. 115 

Thibodeau v. Levasseur ii. 721 

Thicknesse v. Bromilow i. 204 

Thickstun v. Howard ii. 156, 164 

Thiis i'. Byers ii. 424 

Thimbleby v. Barron ii. 850 

Thimblethorp v. Hardesty i. 23 



Thing v. Libbey i. 365 

Thinue v. Rigby ii. 829 

Thorn v. Bigland ii. 916 

Thomas v. Afflick ii. 797 

v. Allen iii. 200 

v. Atherton i. 206 

v. Atkinson i. 66 

c. Bishop i. 135 

u. Boston & Providence R. R. 

Co. ii. 151, 184, 201, 212 

v. Cadwallader ii. 663 

v. Catheral iii. 119 

v. Clarke ii. 422, 423 

v. Cleaves iii. 132 
v. Cook i. 37, 643, 544 ; ii. 941 ; 
iii. 24 

v. Courtnay iii. 477 

v. Crosswell iii. 179 

v. Davis ii. 31, 795 

v. Day ii. 152 

v. Dering iii. 358 

u. Desanges iii. 460 

v. Dickinson iii. 38 

v. Dike i. 355 ; ii. 40 

v. Dingley i. 631 

i>. Dow ii. 28 

v. Edwards i. 66, 69 

v. Evans ii. 776 

v. Freelon ii. 863 

u. Graves ii. 676 

v. Hammond iii. 40 

v. Hayden i. 535 

i'. Heathorn ii. 749, 751 

v. Hewes i. 69 

v. Hopper ii. 877 

o. Jones iii. 328 

v. Kelsoe iii. 437 

v. Lane ii. 465 

v. Lewis ii. 389 

v. Lincoln i. 110 

v. Mason iii. 136 

v. McCann ii. 917, 927 

u. Miles ii. 892 

v. Molier ii. 829 

i7. Newton i. 287, 289 

v. O'ilara ii. 076 

v. Osborn ii. 404, 421 

v. Pemberton iii. 447 

v. Pennrich i. 208 

o. R. R. Co. i. 167 

u. Rawlings i. 126 

u. Rideing iii. 426 

v. Roossa I. 279; ii. 785 

v. Rhymney Railway Co. ii. 236 

v. Roberts i. 335 

v. Shillibeer i. 247 

v. Sorrell ii. 642 

v. Stetson ii. 20 
v. Thomas i. 457, 497 ; ii. 93, 680, 694 

v. Todd ii. 753 
•>. Vonkapff ii. 565 ; iii. 361 

i: Weeks ii. 305 
u. Williams i. 486 ; ii. 43; iii. 19, 20, 31 

v. i. 20 

Thomas Martin, The ii. 433 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CXC1X 



Thomason v. Frere 


. 224, 272 ; iii. 426, 




458 


Thomasson v. Boyd 


i. 368 


Thombleson v. Black 


iii. 331 


Thomond v. Earl of Suffolk i. 383 


Thompson, Ex parte 


iii. 462, 465 


In re 


ii. 710 


v. Alger 


iii. 224, 225, 388 


v. Andrews 


i. 226 


v. Bell 


i. 47 


v. Berry 


iii. 130 


v. Blanchard 


i. 458, 569 ; ii. 938 


v. Botts 


i. 618, 636 


v. Brown 


ii. 765 


v. Charnock 


ii. 844 


v. Cohen 


iii. 324 


v. Davenport 


i. 66, 68 ; ii. 391 


v. Dawson 


iii. 294 


v. Dominey 


i. 328, 651 ; ii. 410 


v. Emery 


i. 254, 257 


v. Fargo 


i. 96 


v. Finden 


ii. 390 


v. Gardiner 


i. 583,585; iii. 13 


v. Gillespy 


ii. 521 


v. Glover 


ii. 14 


o. Guthrie 


iii. 245 


v. Hale 


i. 293, 296 


v. Harding 


i. 147 


v. Havelock 


i. 93, 111 


v. Hervey 


i.-402 


v. Hewitt 


iii. 471, 478 


v. Hopper 


ii. 495, 631 


v. Inglis 


ii. 423 


v. Ins. Co. 


ii. 617 


v. James 


i. 515 


o. Jones 


iii. 126 


v. Ketcham 


ii. 683, 713 


v. Lacy 


ii. 155, 167 


v. Lay 


i. 364 


v. Lindsay 


i. 627 


v. Lovrein 


i. 405 


v. Lyon 


i. 356 


v. Marrow 


iii. 239 


v. MoCullough 


i. 298 


v. McFarland 


ii. 939 


v. N. Y. & Harlem R. E. Co. iii. 490 


v. Page 


i. 483 


v. Patrick 


ii. 120 


■v. Percival 


i. 192, 245 


v. Perkins 


i. 100, 101 


v. Powles 


iii. 122 


v. Reynolds 


ii. 499, 909 


v. Ross 


ii. 76 


v. Royal Exch. Ass 


Co. ii. 505 


v. Shattuck 


iii. 199, 249 


v. Shepherd i. 


273, 293 ; iii. 452 


v. Sickles 


iii. 101 


v. Small 


ii. 407 


v. Stanhope 


ii. 336 


v. Thompson 


i. 640 ; ii. 92 


v. Tiles 


i. 571 


v. Tod 


iii. 347 


v. Towle 


i. 616 


v. Trail 


j. 649 ; ii. 407 


v. Williams 


ii. 906 



Thompson v. Williamson 


i. 177 


v. Woodbridge 


iii. 135 


Thorns v. Dingley 


iii. 193 


Thomson v. Bank of S. C. 


ii. 112 


v. Brit. No. Am. Bank 


ii. 755 


v. Buchanan 


ii. 524 


v. Davenport i. 105 


106, 107, 590 


t>. Dougherty 


i. 264, 410 


u. Harrison 


ii. 78 


v . Hopper 


iii. 95 


v. Picket 


iii. 113 


v. Redman 


ii. 879 


v. Royal Ex. Ass. Co. 


ii. 403 


v. Winchester 


ii. 362 


Thomyris, The 


ii. 519 


Thoreau v. Pallies 


ii. 828 


Thorley, Ex parte 


iii. 420 


v. Lord Kerry 


iii. 185 


Thorn v. Wilson 


iii. 295 


Thornborow v. Whiteacre 


i. 466 


Thornbury v. Bevill iii. 


344, 360, 374 


Thorndike v. Bath 


i. 564, 568 


u. Boardman 


ii. 534 


v. Burrage 


i. 536 


v. City of Boston ii. 


708, 710, 711 


v. De Wolf i. 176, 184 ; ii, 38, 


v. Norris 


ii. 933 


v. Stone ii 


404 ; iii. 147 


Thorne v. Deas 


ii. 112 


v. Kathan 


i. 396 


v. Watkins 


ii. 701 


v. White 


ii. 464, 465 


Thornett v. Haines i 


526 ; iii. 370 


Thornton v. Appleton 


ii. 858 


v. Bank of Washington 


iii. 143 


v. Carson ii. 


826, 831, 835 


v. Charles 


i. 686 ; iii. 13 


v. Davenport 


i. 569 


v. Dixon 


i. 168 


v. Exchange Bank 


i. 405 


<•. Fairlie 


i. 469 


v. Illingworth i. 365, 


369 ; iii. 415 


v. Kelly 


iii. 15 


v. Kempster i 


. 587 ; iii. 13 


v. Meux i 


. 586; iii. 13 


v. Place i 


494 ; ii. 655 


u. Thompson 


iii. 227 


v. V. S. Ins. Co. 


ii. 447, 537 


v. Wynn 


i. 325, 637 


Thorogood v. Bryan 


ii. 250 


v. Marsh 


ii. 172 


Thorold v. Smith 


i. 51 ; ii. 747 


Thorp v. Thorp ii. 660, 661, 728 


Thorpe v. Booth 


i. 302 


v. Cooper 


ii. 836 


v. Fowler 


i. 579 


v. N. Y. Cent. R. Co. 


ii. 237 


v. Sliapleigh 


i. 387, 393 


u. Thorpe i. 473 ; ii 


91 ; iii. 452 


v. White 


ii. 39 


Thouvenin v. Lea 


iii. 39, 43 


Thrall v. Hill 


i. 545, 560 


v. Newell 


ii. 637 


v. Wright 


i. 338 


Thrasher v. Everhart 


ii. 719 



cc 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Thrasher v. Haynes ii. 827 

v. Tuttle ii. 746 

Threfall v. Borwick ii. 167 

Threlkeld v. Fitzhugh iii. 242 

Throckmorton v. Tracey ii. 638, 640 

Thropp v. Field i. 531 

Thropp's Appeal i. 545 

Thrupp v. Fielder i. 363, 364 

Thrustout r. Crafter ii. 875 

Thurber v. Anderson i- 41 

v. Blackburne ii. 740 

Thurlow i\ Massachusetts iii. 511 

Tliurman v. Wells i. 253 

Thnrn v. Alta Cal. Tel. Co. ii. 285 

Thursby ». Plant iii. 449 

Thurston v. Blanchard ii. 756 

v. Col. Ins. Co. ii. 500 

v. Cornell iii. 144 

v. Fisher iii. 106 

ii, Koch ii. 582 

v. Maddocks iii. 96 

v. Martin iii. 170 

n. McKown i. 273, 295 



v. Percival 
v. Thornton 
v. Wolfborough 

Thurstout v. Grey 

Thweatt v. Jones 

Thwing !;. Wash. Ins. Co. 



i. 128 ; ii 

i. 509 
iii. 98 
iii. 237 
i. 36, 37 
ii. 418, 510, 
511,512 
Tibbetts v. Towle i. 578 

v. Moore iii. 293 

Tibbits v. George i. 245, 254, 257 ; ii. 610 
Tice v. Gallop i. 59 

Tichburne v. White ii. 217, 274 

Tickel v. Short i. 01 

Ticonic Bank v. Johnson iii. 143 

Tidd v. Lister iii. 438 

v. Iiines i. 55 

Tidewater Canal Co. v. Archer i. 9.3 

Tidmarsh v. Washington Ins. Co. ii. 525, 

528, 529 
Tidswell v. Angerstein ii. 605 

Tier u. Lampson i. 75 

Tierman t>. Beam iii. 294 

Tiernan v. Napier ii. 783, 787 

v. Poor iii. 310 

Tifft i>. Culver iii. 183 

v. Tifft i. 351 

Tilden v. Barnard i. 58 

Tileston v. Nettleton ii. 11 

f. Newell ii. 663 

Tiley i\ Courtier ii. 753 

Tilford r. Ramsey iii. 189 

Tilghman p. Proctor ii. 310 

Tilley v. County of Cook ii. 680 

v. Hudson R. R. Co. iii. 209 

v. Tilley ii. 613 

Tillier v. Whitehead i. 211 

Tillinghast v. Nourse iii. 88 

v. Wlieaton i. 266 

Tillock ii. Webb ii. 902, 904 

Tillotson v. Boyd i. 260 

v. Cheetham iii. 183 

v. Gesner iii. 335 



Tillotson v. McCrillis i. 349 

ii. Tillotson i. 260 ; ii. 716 
Tillou v. Britton ii. 776; iii. 381, 382 
ii. Clinton Mut. Fire Ins. Co. ii. 860 

v. Kingston Ins. Co. ii. 552, 562 

Tilton v. Hamilton Ins. Co. ii. 571 

v. Russell i. 348 

v. Tilton iii. 309 

Tilton Safe Co. v. Tisdale i. 631 

Tilton, The Sch. ii. 398 

Timberman v. Craddock i. 109 

Timbers v. Katz i. 381 
Timmins v. Gibbins i. 302; ii. 754 

Timmis o. Piatt i. 145 

Timrod v. Shoolbred i. 627 

Tindal, Ex parte iii. 462 

</. Bright i. 186 

</. Brown i. 322 
v. Taylor i. 328 ; ii. 407, 410, 417 

Tindall v. Touchberry ii. 11 

Tingle v. Tucker ii. 466 
Tingley v. Cutler i. 458 ; iii. 174 

Tingrey v. Brown i. 146 

Tinker v. McCauley ii. 4 

Tinkler v. Prentice i. 488 

Tinney v. Ashley ii. 790 

Tinsley r. Beall i. 290 

v. Lacy ii. 346 

Tipper v. Bicknell i. 475 

Tippet v. Hawkey i. 26 

Tippets v. Heane iii. 81 

y. Walker i. 68 ; iii. 37 

Tipping v. Smith ii. 829 

Tirrell v. Gage ii. 413 

Tisdale v. Conn. Ins. Co. ii. 612 

v. Harris iii. 56 

v. Mitchell iii. 97 

v. Mut. Ben. Ins. Co. ii. 586 

Tisloe v. Graeter ii. 686 

Titcomb ». Wood i. 557 

Titman u. Titman ii. 51 

Tittemore v. Vt. Ins. Co. ii. 576 

Titus y. Carkins iii. 181 

</. Glens Falls Ins. Co. ii. 687 
v. Hobart ii. 719; iii. 391 

v. Perkins ii. 829 

Tobago, The ii. 401 

Tobey v. County of Bristol ii. 845 

v. Ellis i. 323 

v. Lennig i. 322 

v. Robinson i. 487 

v. Wood i. 354 

Tobias v. Francis i. 547 

Tobin v. Crawford i. 42 

o. Post iii. 220 

Tod v. Baylor iii. 239 

v. Benedict i. 61 

Todd v. Clapp i. 166, 354 

v. Emly i. 41 
v. Gee i. 522 ; iii. 359 

v. Lorah i. 208 

e. Old Colony R. R. Co. ii. 817 

v. Parker ii. 774 

v. Stokes i. 401 

v. Summers ii. 663 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CC1 



Todd v. Todd iii. 79 

Toland v. Sprague iii. 95 

Tolbert v. Harrison ii. 874 
Toledo Bank v. Bond iii. 482, 483, 486, 

498 

Toledo Works v. Bernheimer iii. 293 

Toledo, &c. R. Co. v. Hamilton ii. 174 

w. Hammond ii. 275 

Tolen v. Tolen ii. 732, 736 

Tollcy v. Greene iii. 43 

Tome v. Doelger ii. 807 

v. Dubois i. 559, 562 

Tomlin v. Mayor, &c. of Fordwich ii. 834 

Tomlinson v. Gill iii. 21 

n. Hammond ii, 835 

v. Savage i. 526 

Tompkins v. Bernet iii. 137 

v. Brown iii. 76, 89 

v. Corwin ii. 644 

v. Elliot ii. 660, 663 

v. Haile ii. 426 

v. Weeks i. 147 

o. Wheeler iii. 381, 382 

Tonnawanda R. K. Co. a. Munger ii. 248 

Tonson v. Walker ii. 341, 346 

Toof v. Martin iii. 415 

Took v. Tuck iii. 477 

Tooke v. Hollingworth i. 575; iii. 434, 438 

Tooker v. Bennett i. 211 

v. Sloan i. 49 

Tooley v, Windham i. 471 

Toomer v. Dawson i. 583 ; iii. 4, 18 

Tope v. Hoekin iii. 434, 458 

Topham v. Braddick i. 96 ; iii. 98 

v. Chapman iii. 409 

Toppan v. Atkinson ii. 479 

Torrey v. Baxter i. 218 

v. Fisk i. 272 

v. Grant iii. 129 

Torriano v. Young i. 535 

Toulmin v. Copland ii. 766 

Toulson v. Grout iii. 429 

Touro v, Cassin ii. 700 

Tourville v. Naish i. 80 

Touson v. Walker ii. 330 

Toussaint v. Hartop ii. 848 

v. Martinnant i. 31 ; iii. 463 

Touteng v. Hubbard ii. 425 

Tovey v. Lindsey ii. 734 

i\ Pitcher iii. 448 

Tow Boat Co. v. The Delphos ii. 441 

Towell v. Gatewood i. 621, 623, 624 

Tower v. Richardson i. 270 

v. The Utioa, &c. Railroad Co. ii. 189 

Towers v. Barrett ii. 812 

v. Moore i. 30 

v. Osborne iii. 59, 61 

Towle v. Dresser i. 361 

v. Kettell ii- 424 

u. Larrabee ii- 900 

,.. Leavitt i. 60, 526 

v. Marrett "• 00 

v. Raymond iii. 266 

Town v. Stetson ii. 353 

Town of Pawlett i;. Clark iii. 483 



Towne v. Fiske 


i. 546 


v. Rice 


i. 58, 281 


a. Smith 


iii. 397, 409 


v. Wason 


i. 298 


v. Wiley 


i. 356 


Townend v. Drakeford 


i. 586; iii. 13 


Townes v. Mead 


iii. 106 



Townly v. Crump i. 648, 652 ; iii. 274, 

444 

Townsend v. Bush iii. 127 

v. Carpenter i. 252 

v. Crowdy i. 496 

v. Devaynes i. 169 

v. Hargraves i. 563; iii. 63 

v. Houston iii. 350 

v. Inglis i. 48; ii. 747 

v. Jennison ii. 722 

v. Long ii. 9 

v. Loraiue Bank i. 322 

v. Neale i. 22 

v. Newell iii. 260, 270 

v. Nickerson i. 542 

v. Riddle i. 211 ; ii. 24, 28 

v. Riley ii. 769 

v. Townsend iii. 393 

i). Wells ii. 784, 785 

Townshend, Ex parte iii. 419, 420 

v. Stangroom iii. 344 

Townsley v. Sumrall i. 325, 459 

v. Tickell iii. 430 

Towsley v. Moore iii. 38 

Towson v. Havre-de-Grace Bank ii. 162, 

165, 779 

Tracey v. Albany Exchange Co. i. 532 

v. Jenks ii. 905 

v. McArlton i. 404 

.-. Strong ii. 772, 775, 776 

e. Suydam i. 228 

Tracy v. Reed ii. 863 

v. Torry ii. 325 

v. Wood ii. 101 

Traders Ins. Co. v. Robert ii. 562 

Tradesmen's Bank v. Third Bank i. 300 

Trafton, Ex parte iii. 411 

Train v. Holland Ins. Co. ii. 616 

Trainer v. The Superior ii. 459 

Trail v. Trail ii. 91 

Trammell v. Harrell ii. 878 

Transportation Co. v. Downer ii. 817 

Traphagen v. Traphagen iii. 348 

Trapnall v. Burton ii. 939; iii. 102 

v. Merrick i. 530 

Trask v. Patterson ii. 604 

Traver v. i. 474 

Travis v. Bishop i. 612 

Treadway v. Smith iii. 41 

Tread well v. Aydlett i- 645 

v . Bladen ii. 307 

v. Brown iii. 440 

v. Marden iii. 464 

v. Moore ii. 768 

<-. Union Ins. Co. ii. 418, 527 

ii, Williams i. 174 

Treasurer, The ii- 416 

v. Commercial, &c. Co. iii. 31SJ 



ecu 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



i. 12 


i 


803 
492 




ii. 


771 




. 59, 03 




ii. 89 




iii. 
i. 


137 

538 




ii. 


700 




ii. 


398 




iii. 
i. 


427 
228 



Treasurers ». Bates 

Treat v. Orono 

Trebilcock v. Wilson 

Tredwen v. Bourne 

Tree r. Quin 

Tregoning v. Attenborough 

Treloar v. Bigge 

Tremain v. Liming 

Tremont, The 

Tremont Bank, Ex parte 

Tremper v. Conklin 

Trench v. Chenango Ins. Co. ii. 542, 500 

Trenehard v. Hoskins ii. 633 

Trent Navigation Co. v. Harley ii. 25 

Trenton Bank v. Gay i. 01, 279 

e. Wallace ii. 804, 860 
Trenton Banking Co. v. Duncan ii. 944 

Trenton Ins. Co. v. Johnson ii. 599, 605, 

607 

Trescott v. Davis ii. 936 

Treuttell v. Barandon i. 103 

Trevor v. Wood ii. 296 ; iii. 14 

i: Woods ii. 299 

Tribune, The Sch. ii. 421 

Trickett v. Tomlinson i. 41 

Trident, The ii. 403 

Trieber v. Commercial Bank ii. 907 

Trigg v. Faris i. 616 

Triggs v. Newnham iii. 69 

Trimbey v. Vignier ii. 700, 719 

Trimble v. Hill ii. 760 

v. Rateliffe i. 264 

v. Strother i. 248 

Trinity House v. Clark ii. 422 

Tripp v. Armitage iii. 458 

v. Curtenius i. 279 

Trippee v. Frazier ii. 088 

Trist v. Child ii. 895 

Triton v. Foote iii. 323 

Triumph, The ii. 438 

Troewert v. Decker ii. 904 

Tronson v. Dent ii. 418 

Trott v. Wood ii. 669, 672 

Trotter v. Curtis iii. 143 

v. Evans iii. 296 

Troubadour, The ii. 400 

Troup v. Smith iii. 99, 107 

Trousdale v. Darnell i. 548 

Troutman v. Gowing iii. 338 
Trow v. Vermont C. R. R. Co. ii. 248, 250 

Trowbridge v. Cushman i. 232 

v. Welherbee iii. 39 

Trowel v. Castle ii. 859 

Troy Academy v. Nelson i. 482, 483 
Troy Iron & Nail Factory v. Corning 

ii. 079 

Troy, &o. R. Co. v. Boston, &c. R. 

Co. i. 158 

True v. Fuller ii. 3 

u. International Tel. Co. ii. 286 

.... Plumley ii. 898 

v. Ranney ii. 87, 88, 727 

True Blue, The ii. 442 

Trueman v. Fenton iii. (if) 

v. Hurst i. 352 



Truesdale v. Hazard ii. 392 

Truett v. Chaplin i.468, 471 

v. Wainwright ii. 858 

Truitt v. Baird i. 185 

Trullinger v. Kofoed ii. 762 

Trull v. Roxbury Ins. Co. ii. 579, 588 

Truman v. Loder i. 56, 591, 670 ; iii. 11 
Trumbull v. Portage Co. Ins. Co. ii. 575 
v. Tilton i. 463 

Trundy v. Farrar i. 154 

Truscott v. Davis ii 941 

Trusler v. Murray ii. 336, 344 

Trustees of Howard College r. Pace i. 248 
Trustees of Iowa College i>. Hill i. 292 
Trustees of Schools v. Tatman iii. 482 
Trustees, &c. v. Kendrick ii. 757 

Trustees, &c. of Vincennes Univer- 
sity v. Indiana iii. 485 
Tryon v. Whitmarsh ii. 917 
Tubb i: Harrison i. 348 
Tuck v. Fyson iii. 449 
Tuckahoe Canal Co. 
R. R. Co. 



Tucker v. Andrews 

i. Buffington 

a. Clarke 

v. Humphrey 

v. Justices 

!>. Magee 

v. Moreland 

c Oxley 

u. Ruston 

u. Taylor 

v. Tucker 

?•. Wilamouicz 

v. Wilson 

i*. Woods 
Tuckerman v. French 

v. Hinkley 

v. Home Ins. Co. 

v. Newhall 

v. Stevens, &c. 
Co. 

Tuckwell v. Lambert 
Tudor v. New Eng. Ins. Co 

v. Terrel 
Tudway o. Bourn 
Tuel v. Weston 
Tuffnell v. Constable 
Tufts v. Adams 

v. McClure 

v. Tufts 
Tuggle v. Gilbert 
Tulk v. Moxhay 
Tuller v. Talbot 
Tullett v. Armstrong 
Tullidge v. Wade 
Tunison v. Chamblin 

v. Cramer 
Tunnell v. Pettijohn 
Tunno r. Bird 

o. Lague 

r. Trezevant 
Tupper v. Cadvvell 

i\ Hay thorn 



Tuckahoe 

iii. 

i. 

ii. 395, 



617, 652 



i. 331 



490 

411 

400 

iii. 337 

iii. 444 

i. 138 

ii 55 

i. 366, 368 

iii. 439 

iii. 48, 444 

iii. 254 

ii. 884 

ii. 127 

ii. 129 

i. 506 

ii. 14 

ii. 903 

ii. 502 



i. 26 ; ii. 
Transportation 



ii. 503, 
ii. 



850 

227 

913 

509 

681 

iii. 429 

i. 113 

i. 490 

iii. 244 

i. 572 

iii. 17 

i. 147 

iii. 307 

ii. 245 

iii. 455 

ii. 75; iii. 183 

i. 363 

ii. 16 

ii. 187 

ii. 844 

i. 309 

i. 238 

336, 337, 338 

iii. 296 



i. 309; 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CC111 



Tupper v. Powell 
Turberville v. Whitehouse 
Turley v. Bates 

v. North Amer. Ins. Co. 

v. Thomas 
Turnbull v. Gadsden 

v. Strohecker 

v. Turnbull 
Turner, Ex parte 

v. Bissel 

v. Browne 

v. Burrows 

v. Calvert 

v. Cameron 

v. Clirisman 

v. Coffin 

v. Coolidge 

a. Davies 

v. Diaper 

u. Hawkeye Tel. Co. 

v. Hubbell 

v. Hulme 

v. Jay cox 

v. Langdon 

v. Leech 

v. Lewis 

v. Maddox 

v. Mason 

u. Meyers 

a. Meymott 

v. Protection Ins. Co. 

v. Richardson 

v. Robinson 



iii. 136 

i. 353 

i. 506 

ii. 586 

ii. 250 

ii. 916 

ii. 881 

ii. 93 

iii. 428 

i. 181 

ii. 824 

ii. 389, 478, 482 

iii. 127 

i. 545 

i. 464 

ii. 944 

ii. 395 

i. 37 

ii. 880 

ii. 282 

iii. 31 

iii. 131 

i. 240 

i. 563 



ii. 392 
ii. 849 
ii. 38 
iii. 414 
i. 550 
ii. 532 
iii. 424, 446 
i. 110; ii. 36,43, 330, 
332 
v. Rookes i. 402 

v. Rusk i. 434 

v. Samson i. 294 

v. Satterlee ii. 874 

v. Stetts ii. 565 

v. Swainson ii. 826, 832 

v . Thomas ii. 882, 938 

o. Trisby i. 337 

(i. Trustees of Liverpool Docks i. 649, 

650 

v. Turner ii. 833 

v. Vaughan iii. 434 

Turner's case ii. 450, 465 

Turney v. Dodwell iii- 80 

a. Williams i- 136 

o. Wilson ii. 177, 181, 183 

Turnpike Co. v. Commonwealth ii. 815 

o. Phillips iii- 486 

v. State iii- 484 

Turpin, Ex parte 

v. Povall ii 

Turquand v. Vanderplank 
Turrell v. Morgan 
Turrill v. Boynton 
v. Crawley 
v. Mich., &c. R. R. 
Turtle v. Muncy 

v. Worsley 
Turton v. Benson 

v. Turton 
Tuscumbia R. R. Co. v. Rhodes 



123, 136 

iii. 458 

iii. 6 

ii. 28 

ii. 167 

ii. 315 

i. 385 

i.407 

ii. 78 

i. 381 

i. 290 



Tutela, The 
Tuthill v. Davis 
Tutor v. Patton 
Tutt v. Land 
Tuttle v. Bartholomew 

v. Brown 

o. Chirk 

i'. Cooper 

v. Love 

i. Swett 

v. Tuttle 
Twiggs v. Chambers 
Twiss v. George 

v. Massey 
Two Catherines, The 
Two Friends, The 
Twopenny v. Young i 
Twycross v. Dreyfus 
Tye v. G Wynne 
Tyler v. iEtna Ins. Co. 

v. Binney 

v. Bland 

v. Carlton 

v. Currier 

c/. Pickett 

u. Gould 

v. Home 

v. Jones 

v. McCardle 

v. West. Un. Tel. Co. 

Tyly v. Morrice 
Tynes v. Grimstead 
Tyre v. Causey 
Tyrell v Hope 
Tyrer v. King 
Tyrie v. Fletcher 
Tyrrell v. Washburn 
Tyson v. Cox 

u. Gurney 

v. Prior 

v. Rickard 

v. Robinson 

v. Watts 



ii. 425 

iii. 12U 

i. 289 

i. 187 

ii. 84 

i. 623 

iii. 163 

i. 198 

i. 505, 506 

ii. 49; iii. 41 

ii. 823 

i. 129 

iii. 352 

i. 463 

ii. 461 

ii. 438 

29 ; ii. 852, 853 

i. 99 

i. 405 

ii. 559, 561 

ii. 3 

ii. 780 

i. 458 

ii. 383 

ii. 680 

i. 303 

ii. 481 

ii. 848 

ii. 793 

ii. 287, 289, 292, 

300 

ii. 274 

i. 93 

i. 623 

iii. 456 

iii. 246 

ii. 472, 486 

i. 36 

ii. 27 

ii. 519 

ii. 437, 440 

iii. 116, 119 

ii. 847 

iii. 367 



u.- 

Udell v. Atherton 
Uhde i'. Walters 
Uhl v. Harvey 

v. Robinson 
Ulary v. Washington, The 

Ullman v. Kent 
Ullock v. Reddelein 
Ulmer v. Cunningham 
Ulrich v. Berger 

v. McCormick 
Underhill v. Asrawam Ins. Co. ii. 524, 586 

i. 474 
ii 660 
ii. 840 
i. 531 
ii. 613 



i. 79 

ii. 668 

i. 191 

i. 568 

ii. 466, 467, 

902 

i. 574 

i. 573 

i. 26 

ii. 881 

i. 75; ii. 745 



v. Gibson 

v. Saratoga & W. R. R. Co. 



. Van Cortlandt 
Underwood v. Birchard 
v. Wing 



CC1V 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Unger v. Boas ii. 897 

Union, The ii. 464 

v. Jansen ii. 466, 467 

Union Bank v. Commerce Bank Hi 440 

v. Costar's Ex'rs ii. 16 

v. Eaton i. 206 

v. Edwards iii. 312 

v. Geary i. 469 

v . Hyde i. 315, 320 

v. Kindrick ii. 769 

v. Oceana County Bank i. 303 

v. Ridgely ii- 17 

o. Willis i. 274, 283, 312, 321 

Union Bank of Georgetown v. Geary 

i. 131 

Union Bank of La. v. Bowman ii. 15 

Union Bank of Md. v. Ridgely i. 154 

Union Bank of Tenn. v. Gowen i. 320 

Union College Trustees p. AVheeler i. 255 

Union Ex. Co. c. Graliam ii. 270 

Union Ins. Co. v. Chipp ii. 543 

v. Comm. Ins. Co. ii. 470, 494 

v. Grant ii. 616 

v. Lenox ii. 413, 419, 510 

v. Mowry ii. 617 

o. Pottker ii. 617 

v. Eeif ii. 597 

v. T.vsen ii. 488 

v. Wilkinson ii. 543 

Un. Man. Co. <>. Lounsbury ii. 304, 324 

Union Sav. Inst. v. Boston iii. 113 

Union Steamship Co. v. N. Y. S. Co. ii. 432 

Union Sugar Refinery v. Mathieson ii. 314 

Union Towboat Co. r. Delphos, The ii. 441 

Union Trust Co. v. Bigdon ii. 128 

Union Turnpike Co. o. Jenkins i. 7 

United States v. Alden ii. 465, 466 

v. Ames i. 60; ii. 825 

v. Arredondo iii. 488 

t*. Bainbridge i. 335, 355, 375 

v. Bank of U. S. iii. 381 

v. Barker i. 318 i 

v. Bartlett iii. 355 

v. Blakeney i 355 I 

v. Borden ii. 465 i 

v. Bostwick , i. 535 

v. Boyd ii. 16 

u. Bradbury ii. 766 

u. Buchanan ii. 672 

v. Buford i. 251 

v. Coffin ii. 465 

v. Collins ii. 465 

v. Crosby ii. 701 

v. Curry i. 131 

v. Cutler ii. 465 

v. Freeman ii. 465 

v. Great Falls iii. 484 

u. Grush ii. 465 

v. Hatcli ii. 463 

v. Herron iii. 478 

v. Hillegas ii. 19 

v. Hudson i. 60 

v. Hunt ii. 465 

v. Ins. Cos. i. 153 

v. Jarvis i. 74 



United States v. King 


iii. 382 


v. Kirkpatrick 


ii. 766 


u. Le Baron 


ii. 479 


u. Lunt 


ii. 465 


r. Matthews 


ii. 466 


v. McLemore 


ii. 769 


v. Netcher 


ii. 465 


v. Parmelee 


i. 50 


v. Paul Shearman, The 


ii. 534 


i'. Robeson 


iii. 391 


y. Ruggles 


ii. 405 


v. Small 


ii. 465 


v. Steffens 


ii. 350 


u. Tillotson 


ii. 19 


u. Wardwell 


ii. 766 


v. Wilder 


ii. 451, 459 


v. Winn 


ii. 465 


v. Wyngall 


i. 59 


? . Yates 


i. 131 


U. S. Bank v. Bank of Ga. i 


301 ; ii. 753 


v. Binney 


i. 188 


c. Carneal 


i. 322 


v. Chapin 


iii. 113 


r. Smith 


i. 309 


U. S. Ex. Co. v. Backman 


ii. 175, 270 


v. Bedbury 


i. 187 



U. S. F. & M. Ins. Co. v. Kimberley ii. 649 
U. S. Ins. Co. o. Scott ii. 456 

U. S. Life Ins. Co. v. Advance Co. ii. 543 
U. S. Tel. Co. v. Gildersleeve ii. 287 

v. Wenger ii. 290, 292 

». Western Union Tel. Co. ii. 291 
Unity Assurance Ass. v. Dugan iii. 455 
University v. People iii. 499 

University of Cambridge v. Bryer ii. 334 
University of Oxford !-. Richardson ii. 349 
University of Vt. o. Buell i. 482, 483 



Unwin ?•. Heath 


ii. 314, 317 


r. Woolsley i 


138; ii. 631 


Updegraff v. Bennett 


ii. 76 


Updyke v. Doyle 


i. 215 


r. Ten Broeck 


iii. 43 


Upham v. Lefavour 


i. 108 


v. Prince 


i. 299; ii. 3 


Upnor, The 


ii. 437 


Upshaw v. McBride 


ii. 940 


Upson v. Austin 


iii. 132 


Upton i'. Gray 


i. 66 


o. Salem Ins. Co. 


ii. 487 


u. Sturbridge Mills 


i. 577, 580 


Ure v. C oilman 


ii. 431 


Urquhart u. Barnard 


ii. 534 


v. Melver 


i. 102 


Urruston v. Newcomen 


i. 339 


Usher v. De Wolfe 


i. 254, 250 


Uthwatt v. Elkins 


i. 140 


Utica Ins. Co. v. Bloodgood 


ii. 887 ; 




iii. 143 


v. Cad well 


ii. 887 


v. Kip 


ii. 887 


v. Scott 


ii. 887 


v. Tillman 


iii. 139 


Utley v. Donaldson 


i. 505 


r. Union Tool Co. 


i. 161 


Utterson v. Vernon 


iii. 462, 466 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CCV 



Vaccaro v. Toof 


i. 191 


Vail v. Durant 


i. 107 


v. Heastis 


iii. 118 


v. Rice 


ii. 667, 674 


v. Strong 


i. 558 


Valo v. Bayle 


i. 573 


Valejo v. Wheeler 


ii. 195 


Valentine v. Foster 


i. 463 


v. Valentine 


ii. 825 


v. Vaughan 


iii. 416 


Valk a. Gaillard 


i, 323 


v. State Bank 


i. 323 


Vallance v. Dewar 


ii. 524, 532, 669 


Vallee v. Dumergue 


ii. 737 


Vallette v. Mason 


i. 292 



Valley Bank v. Stribling iii. 117 

Valliant v. Dodemede iii. 424, 448, 449 

Vallier v. Ditson ii. 756 

Valpy v. Gibson i. 650 

v. Oakeley iii. 429, 435 

v. Sandars iii. 435 

Valton v. National Ins. Co. ii. 591, 605 

Van Aernam v. Van Aernam i. 377 

Van Alen v. Rogers iii. 236 

v. Vanderpool i. 60 

Van Allen v. Humphrey i. 410 

Van Alstyne i>. Van Slyck i. 11 

Van Amringe v. Peabody i. 102 

Van Antwerp v. Stewart ii. 848 

Van Arsdale v. Howard ii. 917, 918 

Van Atta v. McKinney i. 129 ; ii. 60 

Van Baggen v. Baines ii. 521 

Van Benschooter v. Lawson ii. 769 

Van Bracklin v. Fonda i. 632 

Van Buskirk v. Hart. Fire Ins. Co. i. 215 

v. Purinton ii. 223 

v. Roberts ii. 41 

Van Casteel v. Booker i. 61, 649, 650 

Van Derveer v. Wright ii. 32 

Van Deusen v. Charter Oak Ins. Co. ii. 575 

Van Doren v. Everitt i. 544 

u. Robinson iii. 372 

v. Tjader i. 274 

Van Duyne v. Van Duyne ii. 941 

Van Duzor v. Allen i. 580 

Van Dyck v. Howitt ii. 481 

v. Van Beuren i- 487 

Van Dyke o. Davis i. 468 

Van Epps v. Dillaye • ii- 757 

v. Schenectady i. 525 

o. Van Deusen iii. 437 

Van Hagen v. Van Rensselaer ii. 635 

Van Hook v. Pendleton ii. 325 

Van Horn v. Hann i. 436 

Van Horn & Clark, Adm'rs, v. Bell ii. 856 

Van Home v. Crain i- 260 

Van Hoven v. Irish ii- 905 

Van Keuren v. Central Railroad i. 546 

e. Parmelee iii. 88, 89, 90, 91 

Van Master v. Babcock ii- 893 

Van Natta v. Mutual Ins. Co. ii- 566 

Van Ness v. Forrest i- 185 

v. Packard ii- 668 



Van Orden v. Van Orden i. 142 

Van Ostrand v. Reed i. 589, 633 ; ii. 757 

Van Patton v. Beats i. 435 

Van Raugh v. Van Arsdale iii. 397, 409 

Van Reimsdyke v. Kane i. 198 ; ii. 700, 

719, 721 ; iii. 507 

Van Rensselaer v. Gallup i. 260, 551 

v. Jewett i. 535; iii. Ill 

v. Jones iii. Ill 

v. Read iii. 507 

Van Rhyn v. Vincent iii. 96 

Van Sandau v. Crosbie iii. 463 

Van Santvoord v. St. John ii. 230, 231 

Van Shaick v. Hudson River R. R. 

Co. ii. 817 

Van Storch v. Griffin ii. 69, 73 

Van Syckell v. Ewing, The ii. 184 

Van Vacther v. Flack i. 280 

Van Valen v. Russell i. 233 

Van Valkenburg v. Bradley i. 227 

v. Roun ii. 685 

Van Valkinburg v. Watson i. 343, 345 

Van Vetchen v. Pruyn i. 319 

Van Vleet v. Adair iii. 233 

Van Voorhis v. Brintnall ii. 728 

Van Wart v. Smith i. 91 

v. Wooley i. 91 ; ii. 112 ; iii. 206 

Van Winkle v. Keteham i. 358 

Van Woertu. Albany, &c. R. Co. iii. 40, 49 

Van Wyck v. Allen iii. 219 

v. Brasher i. 435 

Van Zandt v. New York iii. 311 

u . Mut. Ben. Ins. Co. ii. 603 

Vanada v. Hopkins i. 88 

Vance v. Blair i. 184 

v. Bloomer ii. 783 

v. Campbell ii. 309, 315 

v. Lowther ii. 853 

v. McLaughlin i. 382 

v. Monroe ii. 765 

v. Tourne iii. 220 

v. Vance ii. 92 

v. Ward i. 303 

v. Wells i. 465 

Vancouver v. Bliss iii. 335 

Vandenanker v. Desbrough iii. 454, 456 

Vandenheuvel v. United Ins. Co. ii. 509, 

518 

Vanderbilt, The ii. 433 

v. Adams iii. 510 

v. Richmond Turnpike Co. i- 114 

Vanderburgh v. Hull i. 181 

v. Truax iii. 195 

Vanderheyden v. Mallory i. 409 

Vanderpoel v. Van Allen i. 547 

Vanderslice v. Newton iii. 188 

v. Steam Towboat Superior ii. 182 

Vandervoort v. Smith ii. 679 

Vandeuzer v. McMillan i. 230 

Vane v. Cobbold ii. 912 

Vanhooser v. Logan ii. 785 

Vanlandingham v. Huston iii. 106 

Vanmeter v. McFadden iii. 432 

Vann v. Hussey i- 236 

Vanquelin v. Boward ii. 872 



CCT1 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Vansandau v. Browne 


iii. 101 


Vanvivee v. Vanvivee 


ii. 836 


Vardy, Ex parte 


iii. 446 


Varick r. Crane 


iii. 125, 126 


Varley v. Coppard 


i. 539 


Varner v. Nobleborough 


ii. 756 


Varney v. Brewster 


ii. 828 


u. Grows 


iii. 106 


v. Hickman 


ii. 760 


v. Young 


i. 344, 349 


Varnum v. Bellamy 


i. 292 


v. Martin 


i. 126 


Vassar v. Camp 


i. 508, 514 


Vasse v. Ball 


ii. 521 


o. Smith 


i. 356, 300 


Vaughan v. Aldridge 


ii. 76 


v. Davies 


ii. 875 


v. Fuller 


i. 308 


r. Hancock 


iii. 19, 36 


l: Taff Vale Ry. Co. 


ii. 218 


Vaughn v. Hankinson 


iii. 81 


Vaupell v. AVoodward 


iii. 56 


Vaux i\ Draper 


i. 21 


v. Sheffer 


ii. 429 


Vawter v. Griffin 


iii. 56, 57 


Veacock r. McCall 


i. 458 


Veazie v. Parker 


i. 109 


c. Somerby 


ii. 386 ; iii. 217 


r. Williams i. 51, 


78, 526 ; ii. 924 


Veazy r. Harmony 


ii. 780 


Vedder v. Vedder 


ii. 821 


Venable v. Curd 


i. 58 


Venables v. Smith 


i. 113 


v. Thompson 


ii. 687 


Vennum v. Gregory 


iii. 165 


Vent v. Osgood i 


335,355; ii. 40 


Ventris v. Shaw 


iii. 72 


v. Smith 


i. 556 


Venus, The 


iii. 175 


Vere v. Smith 


i. 102 



Vermilye e. Adams Ex. Co. i. 330 
Vermont Central R. R. Co. v. Estate 

of Hills ii. 079 

Vernard v. Hudson ii. 412 

Vernede v. Weber i. 609 

Vernon, The ii. 434 

o. Alsop ii. 015 

v. Hankey iii. 458, 469 



v. Hanson 






iii. 426 


v. Keys 






ii. 913 


v. Manhattan Company 




i. 191 


v. Morton 






iii. 382 


v. Smith 






ii. 565 


v. Vernon 




iii. 


308, 314 


Vertue v. Jewell 




i. 


640, 645 


Very v. McHenry 






ii. 718 


Vibbard v. Johnson 






i. 616 


Vicars r. Wilcocks 






iii. 194 


Vice v. Fleming 






i. 202 


Vickers v. Viekers 


i. 


561 


; iii. 319 


Vickery v. Welch 






ii. 890 


Victoria, The 




ii. 


429, 431 


Victors v. Davies 






i. 603 


Vidal v. Thompson 






ii. 700 


Viele r. Germania Ins 


Co. 




ii. 645 



Viele i'. Hoag 
Vielie (-. Osgood 
Vigers v. Pike 
Viliers v. Beaumont 
Vinal v. Richardson 
Vincennes, The 
Vincent v. Chicago 

v. Germond 

v. Horlock 
Viner v. Cadell 
Vining v. Gilbreth 
Vinton v. Middlesex R. R. Co 

v. Peck 
Violett v. Paton i. 6, 

v. Powell 
Virany v. Warne 
Virgil, The 
Virgin, The 

v. Gaithcr 
Vischer v. Yates 
Vivian v. Campion 
Vivior v. Wilde 
Vlierboom v. Chapman 
Vogel c. People's Ins. Co. 

v. Ripper 
Voguel, Ex parte 
Volant, The 
Voltz v. Blackmar 

v. Harris 
Volunteer, The 
Von Hemert v. Porter 
Von Hoffman 

Von Lindenau v. Desborough 
Voorhees v. Dorr 

v. Earl i. 636, 637 ; 

v. Wait 
Voorhies v. Atlee 
Voorhis v. Olmstead 
Vore v. Hurst 
Vos v. Robinson 

v. United Ins. Co. 
Vose v. Allen 

i: Eagle Ins. Co. 

v. Handy 

o. L. & Y. Ry. Co. 

r. Morton 

v. Philbrook 
Voyle v. Hughes 
Vreede r. Scholyts, The 
Vreeland v. Hyde 

i'. Ryno 
Vroom v. Van Home 
Vrow Elizabeth, The 
Vulliamy v. Noble 
Vynior's case 
Vyse v. Wakefield 



W. 

Wabash & R. Co. v. Rector 
Wabash, &c. Co. v. Beers 

v. Toledo National Bank 
Wack v. Sorber 
Waddell, In re 



ii. 29 

iii. 8 

iii. 370 

ii. 686 

i. 473 

ii. 388 

ii. 203 

iii. 46 

i. 270 

iii. 439 

i. 570 

ii. 247 

ii. 903 

272; iii. 17 

i. 57, 66 

ii. 59 

ii. 429, 431 

ii. 403, 404 

i. 266 

ii. 897 

i. 260 

ii. 848 

ii. 419, 456 

ii. 556 

ii. 858 

i. 237 

ii. 454 

iii. 181 

ii. 32 

ii. 413, 421 

iii. 161 

iii. 481 

ii. 605 

ii. 908 

iii. 194, 227 

i. 370 

i. 315 

i. 639 

i. 284 

ii. 587 

ii. 495 

ii. 415 

ii. 594 

i. 257 

ii. 46 

ii. 453 

ii. 878 

iii. 315 

ii. 519 

i. 317 

i. 3b5 

i. 147 

ii. 619 

i. 22_ 

ii. 847 

ii. 802 



iii. 186 
iii. 502 

i. 580 
iii. 348 

ii. 284 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CCV11 



Waddell v. Col. Ins. Co. ii. 509 

v. Cook i. 235 

Waddington v. Bristow iii. 35 

v. Oliver ii. 39, 792 

v. United Ins. Co. ii. 479 

Wade v. Dowling ii. 837, 844 

e. Grimes i. 380 

v. Hamilton iii. 277 

v. Haycock ii. 653 

t. Kalbfleish ii. 74 

i . Lindsay ii. 933 

v. Newbera iii. 6 

v. Powell i. 131 

v. Simeon i. 470, 471 

v. Taylor i. 113 

v. Thayer iii. 181 

v. Wilson iii. 134, 135 

Wade's case ii. 775, 779 

Wadham v. Marlowe iii. 406, 449 

Wadleigh v. Elines ii. 033 

v. Jordan iii. 101 

v. Pillsbury ii. 866 

v. Veasie ii. 863, 865 

Wadley v. Jones i. 185 

Wadling v. Oliphant iii. 435 

Wadlington v. Gary ii. 29 

Wadsworth v. Alcot ii. 143 

v. Manning Hi. 306 

v. Pacific Ins. Co. ii. 488 

v. Sherman i. 437 

Wagenseller v. Simmers ii. 66, 68 

Wagman v. Hoag ii. 28, 29 

Wagner v. Holbrunner iii. 180 

v. Simmons i- 200 

v. White .i- 537 

Wagonseller v. Snyder ii. 897 

Wailing v. Toll i. 350 

Wain v. Bailey i. 331 

v. Warlters i. 6 ; ii. 7; iii. 15, 16, 17 

Wainewright v. Bland _ ii. 606 

Wainman v. Kyman iii. 82, 83 

Wainwright v. Crawford ii. 403 

v. Webster i. 302 ; ii. 754 

Waistell v. Atkinson ii- 773 

Wait, In re i- 234 

v. Baker , i. 650; ii. 411 

v. Brewster ''• 755 

v. Green j- 580 

v. Morris ,j- 464 

v. Pomeroy ji- 853 

Waite v. Barry ii- 829 

v. Delesdernier «• 746 

v. Foster i- 2 " 

v. The Hundred of Stoke ii. 898 

Waithman v. Miles i- 549 

Waitman, Ex parte i- 211 

v. Wakefield i- 387 

Wake v. Tinkler ii- -884 

Wakefield v. Governor, The }]■ 435 

v. Lithgow ii- 752 

v. Martin "• *;& 

v. Orient Ins. Co. "• 649 

v. Smart m- 1( ® 

v. So. Boston, &c. R. Co. i- 48 

Wakefield & Bingley v. Brown i- 20 



Wakeman v. Gowdy 


ii. 128 


v. Grover 


iii. 381 


v. Hoyt 


iii. 416, 441 


Waland v. Elkins 


ii. 226, 246 


Walbridge v. Harroon 


i. 463, 464 


Walburn r. Ingilby 


i. 216 



Walcot v. Walker" i. 569; ii. 347, 348 

Walcott v. Keith i. 569 
Waldeck v. Springfield F. & M. Ins. 

Co. ii. 586 

Walden v. Bolton i. 130 

v. Chamberlain ii. 404 

r. Le Roy ii. 447 

v. Louisiana Ins. Co. ii. 524, 558, 919 

. v. Murdock i. 570 

v. N. Y. Ins. Co. ii. 527 

r. Phoenix Ins. Co. ii. 513 

v. Sherburne i. 207; iii. Ill 

Waldo, The ii. 224, 454, 456 

v. Belcher i. 566 

v. Long iii. 175, 245 

Waldo Bank v. Lumbert i. 205 

Waldron v. Chase i. 566 

v. Harring ii. 3 

v. Romain i. 566 

Wales v. Webb iii. 129 

Walkenshaw v, Perzell i. 243 

Walker v. Bank of Augusta i. 320 

v. Bank of Mont. Co. i. 323 

v. Bank of the State of New 

York i. 72, 304 

v. Bank of Washington iii. 129 
v. Birch ii. 129 ; iii. 259, 275 

v. Boiling ii. 47 

v. Boston Ins. Co. ii. 455 

v. Burnell iii. 435 

v. Butterick i. 558 

v. Campbell iii. 75 

v. Carrington i. 94, 387 

v. Collier i. 569 

v. Constable iii. 12 

v. Davis i. 288, 356, 360 

v. Derby i. 94 

v. Ellis iii. 190 

v. Eyth i. 239 

v. Fitts i. 183 

v. Forbes ii. 14 

v. Geiss i. 292 

v. Graham i. 316 

v. Hatton i. 537 

v. Hill iii. 22, 29, 409 

v. Hitchcock iii. 236 

v. Hoisington i. 635 

v. House i- 229 
v. Jeffreys iii. 339, 340, 341, 342 

v. Johnson iii- 40 

v. Leighton ii. 877, 878 

v. Lide i- 304 

v. Maitland ii- 495 

v. May i- 147 

v. McCulloch i. 27, 210 

v. McDonald i- 269 

v. Merrill ii- 827 

v. Metropolitan Ins. Co. ii- 472 

v. Moore iii. 245, 246 



CCV111 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Walker v. Newton ii- 745 


Wallis v. Day 


v. Nussey iii- 58 


v. Mease 


v. Perkins i- 465 


v. Truesdell 


v. Protection Ins. Co. ii- 503 


v. Wallis i 


o. Reeves iii- 448 


v. Wheelock 


r. Sargeant i. 129; ii. 60; iii. 285 


Walls v. Atcheson 


v. Schuyler iii- 239 


Wallwyn v. Coutts 


v. Scott i- 131 


Walmesley v. Cooper 


v. Sherman 546, 547 


Walpole v. Bridges 


v. Shoemaker i. 532 


v. Cholmondeley 


v. Simpson i. 338, 392, 394 


v. Ewer 


v. Smith i. 60; iii. 185, 187 


Walrond v. Hawkins 


v. Stetson i. 303, 319 


Walsh v. Adams 


v. Supple iii- 56 


v. Bailie 


v. V. S. Ins. Co. ii. 444, 445 


v. Bishop 


v. Wait i. 222 


v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. 


v. Walker i. 51, 411, 457 ; ii. 838 


v. Durkin 


v. Wilson iii. 183 


v. Etna Ins. Co. 


v. Witter ii. 739 


v. Farrand 


v. Woollen i. 281 


v. Gilmor 


v. York & North Midland Rail- 


v. Homer 


way Co. ii. 231, 256 


v. Medley 


Wall v. Bry i. 315 


v. Nourse 


a. Charlick i. 409 


v. Peet Valve Co. 


v. East River Ins. Co. ii. 553, 560 


v. Philadelphia Fire Ass 


v. Howard Ins. Co. ii. 542, 560 


v. Sexton 


v. Lakin iii. 381 


v. Washington Ins. Co. 


v. London Real Property Co. iii. 247 


v. W'nitcomb 


v. Williamson ii. 724, 728 


Walter v. Brewer 


Wallace v. Agry ii. 757 


v. Dewey 


v. Breeds i. 566 


v. Harvey 


v. Clark iii. 218 


v. Haynes 


v. De Pau ii. 528 


v. Kirk i. 


v. Fielden ii. 404 


v. Ross i. 


v. Fouche ii. 676 


v. Smith 


v. Hardacre iii. 427, 450 


Walters v. Munroe 


v. Ins. Co. ii. 578, 648 


v. Short 


v. Jewell i. 11 ; ii. 853 


Walton v. Bethune 


v. Kensall i. 26 


v. Crowley ii. 


v. Lewis i. 367 


v. Dickerson 


v. McConnell i. 309 


v. Dodson 


v. McLaren i. 22 


v. Hanbury 


v. Miner ii. 932 


v. Mandeville 


v. Morss i. 357 


v. Neptune, The 


v. Patterson i. 234 ; iii. 409 


v. Potter 


o. Rappleye i. 465; iii. 374 


Walworth v. Pool 


v. Rippon i. 407 


Walwyn r. St. Quintin 


v. Talbot iii. 242 


Walz v. Alback 


v. Vigus ii. l'-i6 


Wangler v. Swift 


v. Woodgate iii. 254 


Wankford v. Fotherley 


v. Wren iii. 227 


v. Wankford 


Waller v. Cralle i. 444 


Wanless v. McCandless 


o. Drakeford ii. 941, 943 ; iii. 426, 


Wann v. West. Un. Tel. Co. 


452 


Wansbrough v. Maton 


v. Hendon iii. 14 


Wape v. Hemenway 


v. King ii. 832 


Waples v. Eames 


v. Lacy ii. 765, 768 ; iii. 75 


v. Hastings 


v. Parker i. 571 


Warbasse v. Sussex Ins. Co. 


v. Smith iii. 253 


Warburton v. Aken 


Walley v. Montgomery ii. 411 


v. Lytton 


Wallingsford v. Wallingsford iii. 374 


v. Storr 


Wallis v. Bardwell i. 162, 337 


Ward, Ex parte 


v. Bastard ii. 873 


v. Allen 


v. Carpenter iii. 167 


v. Ames 


v. Cook ii. 413 


v. Blunt 



ii. 36, 890 

iii. 188 

ii. 936, 937 

. 458 ; ii. 635 

i. 175 

i. 544 

iii. 316 

ii. 852 

ii. 170 

ii. 623 

ii. 637 

i. 639 

i.235 

ii. 16 

i. 28 

ii. 904 

ii. 864, 865 

ii. 601 

iii. 394, 507 

ii. 829 

ii. 533 

i. 569 

iii. 404 

ii. 45 

. ii. 559, 561 

i. 266 

ii. 629 

i. 74, 77 

ii. 194 

i. 634 

i. 301 

ii. 753 

. 322 ; iii. 444 

. 328, 594, 652 

iii. 289, 291 

i. 317 

ii. 860 

ii. 518 

. 358, 367, 371 

i. 129; ii. 60 

ii. 4 

i. 36 

iii. 28 

ii. 463 

ii. 305 

iii. 208 

i. 316, 323 

i. 275 

ii. 802 

ii. 77; iii. 32 

ii. 852 

i. 61 

ii. 286, 288 

i. 547 

ii. 457 

ii. 488 

i. 335 

ii. 475 

ii. 924 

i. 372 

ii. 847 

iii. 465 

i. 304 

ii. 466 

ii. 618 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CC1X 



Ward v. Bodeman 


i. 183 


v. Buckingham 


iii. 328 


v. Byrne 


ii. 890 


u. Dalton 


iii. 434 


v. Evans 


ii. 747 


v. Fryer 


i. 474 


v. Fuller 


iii. 430 


u. Green 


ii. 421 


v. Hobbs 


i. 632 


v. Hunter 


i. 441 


v. Jenkins 


iii. 426, 429 



v . Johnson i. 12, 13, 28, 211 ; ii. 850 

i: Kilpatrick i. 546 

v. Lambert ii. 925 

v. Morris iii. 409 
v. New York Central B. Co. ii. 196 

v. Peck ii. 506 

v. Perrin i. 312 

u. Ruckman ii. 388 

u. Shaw i. 564, 566 

v. Stahl ii. 5 

v. Stout ii. 27 
v. Tingley ii. 402 ; iii. 402 

v. Turner i. 265 

v. Tyler i. 225 

v. Uncorn ii. 836 

v. Ward ii. 605 

v. Wardsworth iii. 286 

v. Warren i. 81 

f. Weeks iii. 194 

u. Whitney ii. 410 

v. Wilson ii. 392 

v. Wood ii. 474, 500 

Ward's case i. 547 

Wardell v. Mourillyan ii. 196, 206 

v. Railroad Co. i. 157 

Warden v. Eichbaum i. 51 

v. Greer ii. 173, 410 
Wardens, &c. of St. James Church 

v. Moore i. 278 

Wardens, &c. of St. L. o. Kerwan ii. 813 

Wardens, &c. of St. Saviour v. Bostock ii. 16 

Warder v. Baker ii. 943 

v. Horton ii. 493 

v. Tucker i. 467 

Wardwell v. Haight i. 75, 191 

Ware v. Adams ii. 8 

v. Gay ii. 135, 239 

v. Hylton i. 449 

v. Miller iii. 503 

Wareham Bank v. Burt ii. 171 

Warfield v. Campbell i. 129 

Warfield's Adm'rs v. Boswell iii. 118 

Waring v. Ayres iii- 311 

v. Clarke ii. 430 

v. Cunliffe iii. 159, 161 

v. Favenck i. 67 ; ii. 883 

v. Knight iii. 407, 409 

o. Mason i. 589, 628, 636 

v. Smith ii. 856, 862 

b. Waring i. 434 

Wark v. Willard ii- 933 

Warlow b. Harrison i- 526 

Warmstrey v. Tanfield i- 251 

Warn v. Bickford ii- 879 



Warner v. Beckett i. 253 

v. Booge i. 474 

v. Cunningham i. 226 

v. Daniels i. 621 ; ii. 921, 926, 027 
b. Heiden i. 388, 402 

v. Hitchins i. '537 

b. Martin i. 103 

v. McKay i. 66 

u. People iii. 483 

v. Vallily iii. 210 

v. Van Alstine iii. 296 

v. Warner ii. 93 

Warnick v. Grosshobz iii. 29 

Warnock v. Davis i. 253; ii. 609 

Warren, In re i. 175, 238 ; iii. 416 

v. AUnutt i. 310 

b. Batchelder i. 247 

v. Buckminster i. 566 

v. Crabtree iii. 122, 129 

b. Flagg ii. 744 

b. Green ii. 827 

b. Hodge i. 470 

b. Leland iii. 35 

b. Lyons City ii. 496 

v. Mains ii. 753, 779, 793 

b. Manuf. Ins. Co. ii. 527 

b. Merrifield ii. 633 

b. Middlesex Ass. Co. ii. 555 

o. Milliken ii. 146 

b. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 474 

b. Philadelphia Coal Co. i. 617, 619 
v. Richardson iii. 334 

b. Saxby ii. 660 

b. Skinner ii. 823 

v. Stearns i. 483 

b. Tenth Nat. Bank iii. 421 

b. Thunder iii. 345, 372 

». Wells ii. 877, 878 

v. Wheeler i. 254; ii. 683; iii. 247 
v. Whitney i. 463, 464 

Warren Bank v. Sufiolk Bank ii. 113 

Warrender v. Warrender i. 397 ; ii. 701, 

712, 727 
Warrick b. Bruce i. 353, 370, 481 ; iii. 35 
b. Scott ii. 473 

i\ Warrick i. 81 

Warring v. Layton ii. 860 

Warters i\ Herring ii. 810 

Warwicke v. Noakes ii. 752 

Washburn v. Bank of Bellows Falls i. 231, 

232, 234 
b. Fletcher i. 515 

b. Goodman i. 219, 223, 227 

v. Gould ii. 304, 324, 633 

„. Hale i- 385 

v. Jones ii. 162 

v. Ramsdell i. 290 

Washburn, &c. Co. u. Providence, &c. 

R. Co. ii- 227 

Washington Bank v. Brown iii. 237 

v. Lewis iii- 282 

v. Shurtleff iii- HI 

Washington Bridge Co. b. State iii. 487 
Washington Co. Ins. Co. v. Colton ii. 931 
Washington Co. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Miller i. 281 



ccx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Washington Ins. Co. v. Kelley ii. 559 

v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 545 

Washington & Baltimore Turnpike Co. 

v. Baltimore & Ohio R. E. Co. iii. 490 
Washington & N. 0. Tel. Co. v. Hob- 
son ii. 290, 301 
Wason v. Rowe i. 624 ; ii. 624 
Watchman, The iii. 409 
Water's Appeal ii. 944 
Waterbury v. Graham iii. 17 
v. Sinclair i. 284 
Waterer v. Freeman iii. 233 
Waterhouse v. Skinner i. 577 
r. Waite iii. 459 
Waterman v. Barratt i. 291, 473 
v. Clark ii. 880 
v. Gilson ii. 50 
v. Hunt i. 240 
c. Johnson ii. 680, 689 
«•- Meigs iii. 14, 62 
c. Robinson ii. 103 
Waters v. Allen ii. 480 
v. Bean i. 465 
v. Bridges ii. 827 
v. Brogden i. 41 
v. Comly iii. 382 
( . Earl of Thanet iii. 98, 99 
v. Grace i. 129 
v. Howard ii. 76 ; iii. 305, 306 
v. Merchants Ins. Co. ii. 489, 495, 

560 

v. Monarch Ins. Co. ii. 474, 482 

r. Riley i. 30, 32 

v. Simpson ii. 29 

v. Taylor i. 76, 223 

v. Tomkins iii. 82, 84 

r. Towers iii. 197 

v. Travis i. 525 ; iii. 358 

Waterston v. Getchell iii. 265 

Watertown v. White i. 255 

Watertown Ins. Co. v. Grover ii. 580 

Water Witch, The ii. 410 

Wathen v. Sandys i. 12 

Watkins v. Atkinson ii. 392 

v. Baird i. 443 

t-. Birch i. 569 

v. Bowers i- 271 

a. Crouch i. 309 

v. Purand ii. 567 

v. Eames i. 483 

v. Halstead i. 464, 465 

v. Hill ii. 756 

v. Holman ii. 940 ; iii. 333 

v. Maule i. 271 ; iii. 329, 427, 452 

r. Peck ii. 936, 939 

v. Perkins iii. 23 

v. Stevens iii. 75, 92 

v. Vince i. 47, 125 

Watkinson v. Bank of Penn. i. 191 

r. Inglesby ii. 749, 751, 818 

r. Laughton iii. 206, 207 

Watriss v. Cambridge Bank i. 545 

Watrous v. Chalker i. 406 

Watson, Ex parte i. 180; iii. 415, 474 

v. Alcock ii. 6 



Watson v. Ambergate ii- 231 
v. A. N. & B. Railway Co. ii. 229 ; 
iii. 195 

v. Bennett i. 153 

v. Bladen ii. 305, 313 
v. Bourne iii. 394, 397, 409, 507 

v. Brightwell iii. 13 

v. Clark ii. 529 

v. Cross ii. 167 

v. Denton i. 635 

v. Hensel ii. 878 

o. Hetherington ii. 774 

v. Hurt i. 284 

v. Ins. Co. of N. A. ii. 511 

v. King i. 76, 77 

v. Lyle iii. 95, 96 

v. Mainwaring ii. 593 

a. Marine Ins. Co. ii- 502 

v. Marston iii. 305, 373 

v. McLaren ii. 3 ; iii. 18 

v. Mercer iii. 506 

v. Moore iii. 180 

v. Murray i. 175 

v. Murrell i. 129 
u. Pittsburg & Cleveland R. R. 

Co. iii. 240 

v. Poulson ii. 916 

v. Randall i. 470 

v. Reid iii. 372 

v. Sherman i- 122 

v. Spratlev iii. 37 

v, Thelkeld i. 394, 395, 404 

v. Watson ii. 829 ; iii. 238 

Watt, The ii. 437, 439 

v. Hoch ii. 763 ; iii. 110 

v. Morris ii. 527 

v. Potter ii. 456 ; iii. 211 

Watters v. Smith i. 468 

Watts r. Everett iii. 506 

v. Fraser iii. 191 

v. Friend iii. 62 

r. Hendry i. 564 

v. Kavanagh i. 74 

v. Rees ii. 876 

u. Van Ness ii. 900 

v. Waddle iii. 333 

Wattson v. Marks ii. 455 

Waugh v. Carver i. 188 

v. Cope iii. 82 

v. Riley i. 448 

Waul v. Kirkman iii. 14 

Wave, The, r. Hyer ii. 439 

Waverley, The, v. Clements ii. 392 

Way v. Howe iii. 411, 476 

v. Peck ii. 78 

v. Sperry i. 463, 464 

Wayde v. Carr ii. 250 

Waydell v. Luer ii. 757 

Wayland v. Mosely ii. 410, 686 

Waymire v. Jetmore ii. 87 

Wayne v. Holmes ii. 315, 327 

». The Gen. Pike ii. 392 

Weatherall v. Geering iii. 435 

Weatherbee r. Weatherbee ii. 737 

Weathered v. Mays ii. 875 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CCX1 



Weatherford v. Fishback ii. 916, 921 

Weatherhead v. Boyers iii. 118 

Weatherhead's Lessee v. Baskerville 

ii. 689 

Weatherstone v. Hawkins ii. 48; iii. 177 

Weave v. Gove i. 98 

Weaver v. Baehert ii. 67, 74 

v. Childress ii. 661 

v. Jones i. 552 

v. Lynch ii. 941 

v. Sessions ii. 813 

v. S. G. Owens, The ii. 386 

v. Ward iii. 414 

Webb, In re ii. 151, 610 

v. Daggett iii. 381, 402 

v. Direct Lond. & Port. Railway 

Co. iii. 306, 309, 332, 374 

v. Duckingfield i. 442 ; ii. 458 

v. Fairnianer ii. 797 

v. Fox ii. 103 ; iii. 424, 446 

v. Ingram ii. 836 

v. Odell i. 662 

v. Pierce ii. 421 

v. Plummer i. 544 ; ii. 669, 677 

v. Portland Manuf. Co. iii. 233, 234 
u . Powers ii. 336, 341, 342, 344, 346, 

349 

v. Protection Ins. Co. ii. 571 

v. Rose ii. 330 

v. Steele i. 255 

Webb's case ii. 688 

Webber v. Davis i- 562 

v. Ives ii. 842 

v. Tivill iii- 94 

Webster v. Bray i. 229 

„. Cobb i. 274, 284 

v. Coffin i. 580 

v. De Tastet i. 93 ; ii. 460 

v. Ela iii- 14 

v. Enfield ii- 654 

v. French }■ 526 

v. Granger i- 574 

v. McGinnis }■ 386 

v. Seekamp ii- 453 

v. Spencer i- 146 

v. Withey "i- 403 

v. Woodford }■ 434 

v. Wvser "• 824 

v. Zellly "i- 1°' 39 

Wedderburn r. Bell ii- 527 

v. Wedderburn ."• 94 ° 

Wedge r. Newlyn }}}■ Wl 

Wedgwood v. Adams ul - 30 g 

Wedlake v. Hurley i;.2f° 

Weed v. Clark .."■ \ 2 n 

v Ellis "• °" 

v. Panama R. R. Co. ii. 236, 454 

v. Schenect. & Sar. R. R. Co. h. 227, 

230, 231, 275 

v. Van Houten \- 309 

Weed, &c. Co. a. Emerson .i- 405 

Weeks v. Burton »• ^ 

ii. 797 



Weeks v. Tybald 

v. Wead 
Weger v. Penn. R. R. Co, 
Wehrum v. Kuln 
Weiberg v. The St. Oloff 
Weigel, Succession of 
Weiger v. Gould 
Weiler v. I-Ioch 
Weimer p. Clement 
Weir v. Aberdeen 

v. Weir 
Weisser v. Denison 

v. Maitland 
Weiting v. Nissley 
Weitzel, In re 
Welborn ;'. Sechrist 
Welch v. Goodwin 

v. Hicks 

v. Knott 

v. Mandeville 

v. Marvin 

v. Myers 

v. Ware 

v. Whittemore 

v. Wordsworth 
Welchman v. Sturgis 
Weld v. Cutler 

v. Hadley 

v. Lancaster 

v. Walker 
Weldon v. Buck 
Welford v. Beazley 

v. Liddel 



v. Hull 

v. Leighton 

v. Propert 



i. 355, 360 ; ii. 39 
i. 69 



i. 506 
i. 669 
ii. 47 
i. 468 

ii. 458 
i. 131 
i. 627 
ii. 27 
i. 621 

ii. 527 
ii. 51 
i. 301 

ii. 047 

iii. 240 

iii. 416 

iii. 362 

i. 300 

ii. 215, 418 

ii. 375 
i. 254 
iii. 22 

iii. 447 

iii. 183 
i. 613 

iii. 506 
i. 146 
i. 564 

ii. 787 
ii. 895 
i. 393 
i. 327 

iii. 4, 8 
iii. 96 



Welland Canal Co. u. Hathaway ii. 936, 

942, 944 

Weiler v. Baker iii- 235 

v. London, &c. R. Co. ii. 251 

Welles v. Boston Ins. Co. ii- 572 

u. Cowles hi- 37 

v. Gray ii- 447 

v. March i. 197, 201 

Wellesley v. Wellesley iii- 324 

Wellington v. Downer iii- 219 

v. Jackson i- 279, 301 

v. Mackintosh ii- 844, 845 

Wellman v. Southard iii- 77 

Wells, Ex parte }}}■ 417 

v. Abernethy iii- 220 

v. Archer ii- 610 

v. Banister i- 500 

v. Cooke ii- 844 

v. Girling i»- 477 

i). Hatch i- 129 

v. Horton ii. 49 ; m 43 

v. Jackson i- 284 

v. Jewett «• 917 

v. Kingston-upon-Hull i- 154 

v. Mace "'• 463 

v. Meldrum "• 464 

v. New York Cent. R. R. Co. ii. 238 

v. Padgett ii- 65, 75 

v. Phila. Ins. Co. ii- 485 

v. Pierce »■ 943 

v. Porter i. 560; in. 127 

v. Ragland iii- 102 



CCX11 



INDES TO CASES CITED. 



Wells v. Robinson 
v. Smith 

v. Steam Nav. Co. 
v. Tregusan 
v. Watiing 
v. Williams 
Wright 



iii. 137 

iii. 338 

ii. 182 

ii. 645 

iii. 235 

i. 450; ii. 482 

ii. 645 

Welsh r. German American Bank i. 300 

v. Hole iii. 286 

!>. Lawrence ii. 247 

v. Speakman i. 198 

r. Usher iii. 297, 432 

v. Welsh iii. 464 

Welts v. Conn. Ins. Co. ii. 601 

Wence !•. Wykoff ii. 51 

Wendell v. Van Rensselaer ii. 939 

Wennall v. Adney i. 460, 462 

Wennan v. The Mohawk Ins. Co. iii. 98 

Wentworth v. Bullen i. 478 ; ii. 819 

v. Clark i. 406 

v. Cock i. 145 

v. Day ii. 105 ; iii. 255 

v. Dows iii. 219 

v. Outhwaite i. 642, 646 

v. Realm ii. 412 

Werner v. Humphreys i. 145 

Wernse v. Hall ii. 721 

Wertheimer r. Penn. R. Co. ii. 253 

West v. Ashdown ii. 27 

c. Cairns i. 460 

v. Citizens Ins. Co. ii. 576 

v. Cunningham i. 618, 627 

v. Cutting i. 637 

i -. Emmons i. 578 

«. Foreman i. 280 

v. Francis ii. 342 

v. Lady Franklin, The ii. 392 

v. Moore i. 356 

v. Newton i. 572 

v. O'Hara iii. 22 

v. Pritchard iii. 220 

v. Pryce iii. 469 

v. Raymond i. 132 

c. Skip i. 168, 234 

r. Tilghman ii. 939 

v. Wentworth iii. 211, 212, 220 

v. Wheeler i. 392 

West Bank v. Shawnee Bank ii. 113 

West Boston Bank v. Thompson i. 83, 

297 
West Branch Bank v. Morehead ii. 763 
West Feliciana R. R. Co. v. Stockett 

iii. 511 
West Hickory Ass. v. Reed i. 107 

West India, &c. Co. v. Home, &c. Ins. 

Co. ii. 497 

West Mass. Ins. Co. v. Duffey ii. 471 

West of England Bank, In re i. 210 

West River Bank v. Taylor i. 320 

West River Bridge Co. v. Dix iii. 483, 
490, 491, 492, 493, 494, 496 
West St. Louis Co. Bank v. Shawnee 

Co. Bank i. 297 

West T. & Coal Co. v. Kilderhouse 

ii. 714, 762 



Westbrook Manuf. Co. v. Grant iii. 460 
Westbury v. Aberdein ii. 912 

Westchester Ins. Co. v. Earle ii. 471 

v. Foster ii. 585 

Westerlo v. Evertson i. 185 

Westerman v. Means ii. 793 

Western v. Genessee Mut. Fire Ins. 

Co. ii. 713 

v. Russell iii. 18, 316, 337, 365 

Western R. R. v. Babcock iii. 367, 371 
Western Stage Co. v. Walker i. 109, 217 
Western Trans. Co. o. Barber iii. 268 

West. Un. Tel. Co. v. Am. U. Tel. Co. 

ii. 278 
v. Buchanan ii. 286, 288 

v. Carew ii. 280, 282, 283, 285, 286, 

288 

v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. iii. 15 

a. Fenton ii. 286 

u. Fontaine ii. 279, 286 

v. Meyer ii. 291 

Western, &c. Co. r. Lansing i. 532 

Western, &c. R. Co. v. McElwee i. 51 

Westfall v. Parsons i. 35; iii. 24 

Westlake v. St. Lawrence Ins. Co. ii. 582, 

587 

Westley r. Clarke i. 29 

Westmeath v. Salisbury i. 399 

v. Westmeath i. 397 

Westminster College v. Gamble i. 484 

Weston v. Alley i. 61 

». Barton ii. 20, 21 

v. Chamberlain i. 35 

v. Davis i. 500 

v. Ernes ii. 473 

a. Penniman ii. 386, 396 

v. Wright i. 84 

Westwick v. Theodor ii. 55 

Westwood v. Bell ii. 883 ; iii. 283 

Westzinthus, In re i. 652, 653 

Wetherbee v. Green iii. 1'14 

Wetherell v. Jones ii. 886 

v. Langston i. 23 

Wetherill v. Neilson i. 627, 629 

Wethey v. Andrews i. 296 

Wetmore v. Baker ii. 246 

v. Brien iii. 153 

u. Neuberger iii. 37 

v. Pattison ii. 639; iii. 199 

v. Scovill ii. 336 

v. Wells ii. 05 

Wetzel v. Sponsler's Ex'rs ii. 26 

Weyland v. Elkins ii. 226 

Weybosset Bank v. Borden City 

Mills iii. 414 

Weymouth v. Boyer iii. 302 

Wiser v. Lockwood ii. 88 

Whallon v. Kauffman ii. 034 

Wharton v. King ii. 831, 833, 835 

v. McKenzie i. 337 

v. O'Hara i. 492 

v. Walker i. 247, 248 

o. Williamson i. 324 

Wheat, The Convoy's ii. 298 

Wheatcroft v. Hickman i. 174 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CCX111 



Wheatley v. Low 


i. 477 ; ii. 109 


Whitaker, The 


v. Purr 


iii. 315 


v. Bond 


v. Strobe 


i. 281 


v. Brown 


v. Williams 


iii. 97 


v. Cone 


Wheaton v. East 


i. 335, 366, 367 


v. Eastwick 


v. Hibbard 


ii. 887 ; iii. 137 


v. Rice 


v. Peters 


ii. 330, 331, 337 


v. Sumner 


v. Wilmarth 


i. 322 


v. Whitaker 


Wheeler n. Borman 


iii. 424 


v. Williams 


v. Bowen 


i. 382; iii. 437 


Whitbeck v. Whitbeck 


v. Bramah 


iii. 446, 447 


Whitbread v. Brockhurst 


f. Collier 


i. 526 ; iii. 14 


Whitcher v. Morey 


v. Constantine 


ii. 731 


Whitchurch v. Bevis iii 


v. Eastern State, The ii. 432 


Whitcomb v. Converse 


v. Field 


i. 308, 311 


v. Jacob 


v. Guild 


i. 273 


v. Preston 


v. Knaggs 


ii. 753, 777, 779 


v. Williams 


v. Moore 


i. 382 


v. Whitcomb 


v. Nevins 


i. 52 


v. Whiting 


v. Newbold 


iii. 253 


v. Whitney 


v. Raymond 


ii. 739, 884 


White, Ex parte 


v. Rice 


i. 215 


v. Allen 


v. Russel 


i. 489, 886, 887 


v. Bailey , 


v. Spencer 


ii. 761, 897 


v. Banks 


v. San Francisco, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 226 


v. Baxter 


v. Stone 


i. 276 


v. Bluett 


v. Sumner 


ii. 380, 395 


v. Boulton 


v. Thompson 


ii. 459 


v. Bradshaw 


v. Train 


i. 569 


v. Branch 


v. Van Wart 


i. 219 


v. Brockway 


v. Warner 


i. 295; iii. 98 


v. Brown 


i7. Washburn 


ii. 28 


v. Canfield 


u. Webster 


iii. 106 


v. Chapman i 


v. Wheeler i. 263 ; ii. 91, 92, 749 


v. Commonwealth 


Wheeler, &c. Co. v. Teetzlaff ii. 802 


v. Crew 


Wheeling Ins. Co. v. Morrison ii. 562 


v. Cuddon 


Wheelock v. Doolittle 


iii. 88 


u. Cushing 


v. Freeman 


ii. 858 


v. Daedalus, The 


v. Lee 


iii. 426 


v. Damon 


v. Tanner 


i. 571 ; ii. 779 


v. Demilt 


v. Wheelwright 


ii. 137 


v. Dingley 


Wheelwright v. Beers 


iii. 207 


v. Dougherty 


u. Depeyster 


i. 556 ; ii. 399 


v. East Saginaw 


v. Moore 


ii. 7 


o. Fox 


Whelan v. Lynch 


i. 96 


v. Franklin Bank 


v. Reilly 


i. 47 


v. Gainer 


v. Whelan 


i. 460 


v. Geroch 


Wheldale i>. Partridge 


i. 150 


v. Gifford 


Whelpdale v. Cookson 


iii. 422 


v. G. W. Ry. Co. 


Whetstone v. Davis 


i. 548 


v. Griffing 


Whichcote v. Lawrence 


i. 94 ; iii. 422 


v. Hale 


Wellington v. Polk 


iii. 484 


v. Hancock 


Whincup v. Hughes 


ii. 814 


v. Holford 


Whipple v. Blackington 


iii. 80 


v. Humphrey 


v. Chamberlain Man 


Co. iii. 234 


v. Jordan 


v. Cumberland Man. 


Co. iii. 176 


v. Lady Lincoln 


v. Dow 


i. 343 


v. Lowe 


v. Giles 


i. 388 


v. Mann 


v. Parker 


iii. 41 


v. Maynard 


v. Stevens 


iii. 79, 90 


u.Miller i. 630 ; ii. 932 ; 


v. Walpole 


iii. 183, 186 


a, Mitchell 


v. Whitman 


i. 130 


v. Moseley 


Whisler v. Hicks 


iii. 244 


v. Murphy 


Whiston v. Stodder 


ii. 700, 713, 717 


v. Mutual Ins. Co. 


Whitacre v. Culver 


ii. 941 


v. Nelis 



ii. 442 
iii. 370 
i. 204, 205 
ii. 909 
i. 616, 618 
iii. 85 
i. 611 
i. 380 
ii. 938 
i. 473 
iii. 350 
iii. 40 
. 346, 347, 350 
i. 176 
iii. 301 
ii. 829 
ii. 756 
i. 564 ; ii. 737 
iii. 87, 88, 90 
i. 566, 571 
i. 558 
ii. 304 
iii. 103 
iii. 382 
i. 459 
i. 462, 469 
ii. 234 
ii. 681 
i. 361 
iii. 219 
ii. 564, 651 
iii. 391 
.110; iii. 206 
i. 146 
iii. 12 
iii. 356, 361 
i. 464 
ii. 402 
iii. 305 
i. 478, 481 
ii. 849, 850 
i. 645 
ii. 16 
ii. 859 
ii. 886, 887 
iii. 261 
ii. 333, 334 
i. 76 
ii. 266 
iii. 446 
iii. 88 
ii. 645 
ii. 837 
ii. 151 
ii. 823 
i. 96, 110 
ii. 84 
ii. 806 
iii. 37 
iii. 110, 196 
i. 645 
iii. 199, 239 
i. 191 
ii. 546, 560 
ii. 76 



CCX1V 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



White v. Oliver 
v. Palmer 
v. Parker 
v. Patten 
v. Perley 
u. Proctor 
u. Reed 



ii. 63, 655 

i. 437 

i. 150, 151 

ii. 933 

ii. 784, 785 

i. 125; iii. 12 

ii. 24 



v. Republic, &c. Ins. Co. ii. 571 

v. Skinner i. 68, 72 

v. Smith i. 281 ; iii. 271 

v. Solomonsky iii. 25 

f. Springfield Bank i. 292 

v. Stoddard i. 307 

v. Trotter i. 95 

v. "Walker ii. 850, 941 

v. Webb iii. 216 

a. "Westport Cotton Man. Co. i. 42 
v. White ii. 730; iii. 333, 501, 

500 

v. Whitman ii. 865, 866 

v. Whitney iii. 242, 244 

v. Williams iii. 295 

v. Winnisimmet Co. ii. 181, 190, 248 

v. Wright iii. 120, 121, 149 

White's Bank v. Smith ii. 380 

White's case ii. 161 

White River Turnpike v. Vermont 

Central R. R. Co. iii. 490, 494 

Whitebread, Ex parte iii. 297 

Whuecross, &c. Co. v. Savill ii. 450 

Whited r. Germania Ins. Co. ii. 543 

Whitefield v. Longfellow i. 444 

v, McLeod i. 522, 027 

Whitehead v. Anderson i. 641 

v. Cade ii. 876 

v. Greetham i. 476; ii. 110 

v. Lord iii. 101 

v. Price ii. 548 

v. Reddick i. 55 

■,-. Tuckett i. 39, 42, 59 

v. Vaughan iii. 282 

v. Walker i. 200, 327 ; iii. 100 

Whitehouse v. Bickford ii. 939 

v. Frost i. 653 

v. Hanson ii. 10 

Whitehurst v. Boyd ii. 635 

v. Fayetteville Ins. Co. ii. 551, 571 

Whiteley v. Swayne ii. 304 

Whitesell v. Crane ii. 277 

v. Heiney iii. 23 

Whiteside v. Jennings iii. 247 

Whitesides ;>. Dorris i. 382 

v. Lafferty i. 229 

v. Thurlkill ii. 171, 183 

Whitestown v. Stone i. 484 

Whitfield v. Collingwood ii. 860 

o, Le Despencer ii. 154, 1 55 

v. Levy iii. 108 

Whitford v. Panama R. R. Co. ii. 247 

Whiting, Ex parte iii. 469 

u. Barrett i. 263 

v. Brastow i. 547 

v. Earle i. 349, 350 

v. Independent Ins. Co. ii 492 

v. Mass. Ins. Co. ii. 614, 618 



Whiting v. Stacey ii. 25 

Whitley i'. Lof tus i. 354 ; ii. 54 

v. Piedmont Ins. Co. ii. 614 

Whitlock v. Duffield i. 532 ; iii. 323 

Whitlocke v. Walton iii. 107 

Whitman, Ex parte iii. 423 

u. Bryant iii. 22 

v. Freese i. 624 

v. Leonard i. 223 

Whitmarsh v. Charter Oak Ins. Co. ii. 545 

v. Hall ii. 40 

v. Walker i. 355; iii. 33,37 

Whitmore v. Adams i. 208 

v. Coats ii. 666 ; iii. 224 

a. Gilmour i. 65 

v. Shiverick i. 167 

v. Steamboat Caroline ii. 194 

Whitney v. Allaire ii. 923 

v. Bigelow iii. 92 

v. Black River Ins. Co. ii. 546 

v. Boardman i. 634 ; iii. 224 

c. Brattleboro Bank ii. 99 

v. Cochran iii. 03 

v. Dutch i. 304 

v. Eaton i. 580 

v. Emmett ii. 306, 307, 309, 312 

u. Ferris i. 198 

u. Groot ii. 24 

v. Haven ii. 523, 533 

v. Hitchcock iii. 185 

v. Lee ii. 114 

v. Meyers i. 543 

v. N. Y. Fire Ins. Co. ii. 418 

u. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 527 

u. Potsdam Bank i. 272 

v. Robinson ii. 941 

v. Spencer ii. 810 

f. Stearns i. 458 

v, Sutton i. 023 

v. Whiting iii. 398 

Whitney Arms Co. v. Barlow i. 158 

Whitney & Munson, Re iii. 422 

Whiton r. Mears ii. 31 

v. Spring ii. 745 

Whitridge v. Dill ii. 431, 432 

Whittaker v. Manchester, &c. R. R. 

Co. ii. 251 

v. Mason ii. 668 

Whitteniore v. Adams ii. 719 

u. Cutter ii. 307, 311, 313, 323, 328 ; 

iii. 189 

v. Gibb9 iii. 57 

Whitten v. Fuller iii. 220 

v. Peacock i. 261 

Whittier v. Dana iii. 57 

o. Groffam i. 306 

Whittingham v. Hill i. 353 

u. Thornburgh ii. 523 

v. Wooler ii. 341, 349 

Whittingham's case i. 370 

Whittington, Ex parte iii. 448 

v. Farmer's Bank ii. 879 

Whittle v. Skinner i. 257, 466, 474 

Whittlesey v. Dean i. 318 

Whitton v. Commerce, The ii. 464 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CCXV 



Whitton v. Smith 


i. 201, 


207, 220 


v. Wass 




iii. 104 


Whitwell v. Harrison 




ii. 488 


v. Johnson 


i 


318, 319 


Whitworth v. Adams 




iii. 154 


a. Davis 




iii. 435 


v. Erie R. Co. 




ii. 228 


u. Ferguson 




iii. 102 


v. Harris 




i. 220 



Whoregood v. Whoregood i. 400 

Whywall i: Champion i. 303 
Wibert v. N. Y. & Erie E. R. Co. ii. 198; 

iii. 198 

Wick v. Samuel Strong, The ii. 392 

Wickens v. Evans ii. 890 

Wicker v. Norris ii. 797 

Wickes v. Caulk ii. 862 

Wicknam v. Hawker ii. 642 

Wicks v. Gogerley iii. 128 

v. Lippman i. 185 

Widgery v. Haskell iii. 381, 382 

Widoe v. Webb i. 486 

Wieland v. White i. 130 

Wieler v. Schilizzi i. 620 

Wigg b. Shuttleworth i. 488 

v. Wigg i. 80 

Wiggin, Ex parte iii. 413 

b. Coffin iii. 177, 188 

v. Peters ii. 797 

v. Suffolk Ins. Co. ii. 492 

u. Tudor i. 26, 210 

o. Wiggin i. 541 

Wiggins v. Hammond i. 20(3 

v. Hathaway ii. 154, 155 

Wiggle b. Thompson i. 322 

Wigglesworth v. Dallison i. 537, 544 ; 

ii. 608, 678 

v. Steers i. 435 ; iii. 373 

Wight ». Geer ii. 900 

b. Shuck iii. 126 

Wightman v. Chartman i. 12 

v. Coates ii. 64, 66 

b. Wightman ii. 88, 726 

Wigmore v. Jay ii. 46 

Wigmore and Wells' case i. 12 

Wilbert o. New York & Erie Railroad 

Co. iii- 197 

Wilborn v. Whitfield i- 540 

Wilbour v. Turner i. 272, 298 

Wilbur v. Beecher ii. 309, 327 

v. Crane i- 469 

v. Jernegan ii. 756, 757 

v. Tobey i-_448 

Wilburn v. Larkin i- 55 

Wilby r. Phinney i- 186 

v. W. C. R. Co. ii. 226, 232 

Wilcocks v. Union Ins. Co. ii- 499 

Wilcox v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. i. 47 

b. Draper •'• 14 

v. Hall i- 627 

b. Howland i. 444 ; iii. 159, 160 

v. Hunt ii. 700, 719 

Wilcus v. Kling !»• 172 

"• ^e "■ 8 S„ 

u. Parmelee ii- 2t, 



Wilcus v. Plummer 


iii. 99 


v. Roath 


i. 304 


v. Singletary 


i. 210 


o. Wilcox 


ii. 833 


v. Wood 


ii. 009 


Wild b. Harris 


ii. 71 


v. Williams 


ii. 749 


Wilde v. Armsby 


ii. 860 


v. Gibson 


iii. 371 


v. Vinor 


ii. 848 


v. Waters 


i. 547 


Wilder b. Keeler 


i. 238 


b. Winne 


iii. 382 


Wildes b. Savage 


i. 303 ; ii. 14 


Wildman, Ex parte 


iii. 408 



Wilds b. Hudson River R. R. Co. ii. 248 

Wilelmina Eleanora, The ii. 426 

Wiley b. Bradley iii. 39 

v. Brattleboro Bank ii. 99 

b. Griswold i. 208 

b. Knight iii. 403 

v. Moor ii. 861 

v. Shoemak ii. 785 

Wilhelm v. Schmidt ii. 764 

Wilkes b. Ferris iii. 48, 382 

v. Jacks i. 307 

v. Lion iii. 237 

v. Wilkes i. 397 

Wilkie b. Geddes ii. 527 

b. Roosevelt iii. 127 

Wilkins v. Aiken ii. 335, 341, 342, 343, 

348 

v. Bromhead iii. 435 

b. Carmichael ii. 454 ; iii. 286 

v. Casey iii. 301, 451 

v. Davis i. 224 ; iii. 440 

v. Fry iii. 424, 448 

v. Germania Fire Ins. Co. ii. 552 

v. Pearce i. 202, 217 

v. Reed i. 69 

v. Taliaferro i. 552 

v. Tobacco Ins. Co. ii. 552 

Wilkins School District v. Milligan iii. 66 

Wilkinson, Ex parte iii. 421, 425 

v. Adain ii. 633 

v. Byers i. 469 ; ii. 823 

v. Candlish i. 203 

v. Conn. Ins. Co. ii. 598 

b. Coverdale ii. 108 

u. Gaston ii. 797 

v. Godefroy ii. 761 

v. Hall i. 25 

v. Holiday i. 564, 567 

v. Henderson i- 228 

u. Hunter i- 143 

v. Leland iii. 481 

v. Lindo i- 26 

b. Lloyd ii- 806 

v. Scott i. 458 ; ii. 932 

v. Torkington iii- 323 

v. Verity iii- 99 

v. Wilkinson i. 377 ; iii. 449 

v. Wilson ii- 404 

v. Wright i- 409 

Wilks v. Black i. 55, 124 



CCXV1 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Wilks v. Davis ii. 845 ; iii. 332 

v. Smith ii. 660 

Will's case i. 515 

Willamette Co. v. Eemick iii. 293 

Willan t ■. Willan i. 532 

Willard «>. Bridge ii. 152 

v. Dorr ii. 454 

v. Fox ii. 875 

v. Hewlett i. 304 

v. Perkins i. 573 

v. Reeder iii. 121 

v. Rice iii. 213 

v. Sperry ii. 751 

r. Stevens i. 622 

o. Stone i. 370, 481 ; ii. 66 

u. Tayloe iii. 305 

v. Twitchell iii. 240 

Willats v. Kennedy i. 459, 470 

Willcocks, Ex parte i. 160 

Willes, Ex parte iii. 416 

v. Glover i. 80 ; ii. 524 

Willet v. Atterton iii. 70 

v. Blanford i. 228 

p. Chambers i. 208 

Willets v. Green ii. 43 

Willetts v. Buffalo & Rochester R, R. 

Co. ii. 248 

Willey v. Beach i. 388 

v. Connor i. 544 

William, The ii. 102, 469 

William Beckford, The ii. 440 

William F. Burden, The ii. 435 

William Hannington, The ii. 440 

William Lushington, The ii. 442 

William & Emmeline ii. 403, 404 

Williams, Ex parte i. 224, 226, 228 ; 

iii. 446 

In re ii. 827; iii. 414 

v. Alexander i. 473 

v. Archer iii. 221 

v. Avery ii. 77 

v. Bacon iii. 11 

v. Bank of Michigan i. 240 

v. Bank of U. S. i. 311 

v. Bartholomew iii. 355 

v. Barton i. 102 ; iii. 192 

v. Branson ii. 172 

v. Brown iii. 382 

v. Bruffy iii. 480 

v. Butler i. 126 

v. Carpenter ii. 753 
v. Chester & Holyhead Railway 

i. 154 

v. Commercial Exch. Co. i. 407 

</. Crary . ii. 882 

v. Currie iii. 187 

v. Dakin iii. 170, 173 

v. Delafield ii. 525 

v. Donaldson i. 409 

v. Dormer ii. 732 

v. Durst iii. 101 

v. Dyde . i. 463 

v. Everett i. 248 

v. Field iii. 248 

v. Eowler i. 403 



Williams v. Gilchrist 


ii. 881 


v. Gillies 


i. 107, 212 


u. Gilman 


ii. 668, 676 


o. Given 


i. 557 


v. Grant 


ii. 172, 183 


v. Gridley 


iii. 84 


v. Griffith ii. 763; 


iii. 72, 75, 79 


v. Hance 


iii. 145 


v. Harrison 


i. 355 


v. Hart 


iii. 312 


o. Healey 


ii. 663 


v. Henshaw 


i. ]84, 185 


v. Hide 


ii. 805 


v. Hill 


iii. 189 


v. Holcombe 


ii. 138 


v. Hollingsworth 


ii. 73, 75 


v. Houghtaling 


ii. 769 


v. Hutchinson 


i. 348 


v. Ingersoll ii 


838 ; iii. 300 


v. Jenny Lind, The 


ii. 442 


v. Johnson 


ii. 355, 371 



v. Jones i. 165 ; ii. 721 ; iii. 108, 381 
v. Kennebec Ins. Co. ii. 505, 509 

u. Landman iii. 349 

v. Leper ia. 27, 30, 31 

v. Little i. 292 

v. Littlefield i. 107 

v. Lloyd ii. 805 

v. London Ass. Co. ii. 452 

v. London Com. Ex. Co. ii. 821 

u. Marshall i. 95 

v. May bee i. 366 

v. Mayor of Annapolis iii. 310 

v. Millington i. 528 

o. Moor i. 353 

u. Moore i. 336 

u. Morris ii. 665; iii. 15 

v. Mostym iii. 233 

v. N. E. Ins. Co. ii. 473, 522, 524, 

542, 547, 554, 555, 557 
v. Nichols ii. 224, 456 

v. North China Ins. Co. i. 49 

v. Oates ii. 724, 728 

<.'. Ocean Ins. Co. ii. 8b5 

v. Paul ii. 900 

u. Pendleton i. 4b0 

v. Planter's Bank iii. 4SS7 

v. Prince i. 396 

v. Rawlinson ii. 766, 768 

v. Robbins i. 58 

v. Roberts iii. 294 

o. Roger Williams Ins, Co. ii. 559, 

563 
v. Roser i. 611 

u. Shee ii. 532, 535 

v. Sherman iii. Ill 

v. Sims i. 2b0 

v. Smith ii. 419, 605, 507 ; iii. 102 
v. Spafford i. 628 

u. Spence ii. 370 

a. Storrs iii. 112 

v. Stratton iii. 432 

v. Suffolk Ins. Co. ii. 449, 495, 501 
<.-. Taylor ii. 235, 238 

v. Thorp ii. 610 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CCXV11 



Williams v. Vanderbilt 
v. Vermeule 
v. Vreeland 
v. Walsby 
v. Waring 



ii. 228; iii. 209 
iii. 424 
iii. 353 

ii. 748 ; iii. 425 
i. 310 



v. Wash. Life Ins. Co. ii. 606 

v. Whiting ii. 709 

v. Williams i. 537 ; ii. 85, 92, 421, 

834 ; iii. 116, 373 

v. Wilson i. 173; ii. 369, 830 

v. Winans i. 303 

v. Woods i. 89 

v. Young i. 563 

Williams Bros. v. Davis i. 558 

Williams College v. Danforth i. 485 

Williamsburg Ins Co. v. Cary ii. 549, 587 

Williamson v. Alphonso, The ii. 441 

v. Barrett ' ii. 434 ; iii. 196 

v. Dickens iii. 465 

v. Henley ii. 907 

v. Missouri, The ii. 392 

v. N. J. S. E. Co. i. 546; ii. 914 

v. Taylor ii. 49 

v. Wilson i. 224 

v. Woodman ii. 941 

Willing v. Peters i. 463 

Willingham v. Joyce iii. 429, 454 

Willings v. Blight ii. 388 

v. Consequa i. 629 ; ii. 700 

Willion v. Berkley i. 448 ; ii. 638 

Willis, In re iii. 463 

o. Bank of England i. 82 

v. De Castro ii. 851 

v. Dyson i. 202 

v. Evans iii. 309 

v. Freeman iii. 450, 451 

v. Gammell i. 470 

v. Green i. 321 

v. Hall i. 204 

v. Long Island E. E. Co. ii. 234, 246, 

250 

v. Newham iii. 84, 85 

v. Peckham i. 467 

v. Poole ii. 593, 594 

v. Twambly i. 258, 361 

v. Willis i. 564, 577 

Willison v. Watkins i. 540 

Williston v. Williston iii. 338, 348 

Willoughby v. Backhouse ii- 215 

v. Comstock iii- 118 

v. Horridge ii. 181, 248 

v. Moulton i. 279 

Wills v. Brown iii. 26, 27 

v. Cowper ii. 701 

v. Boss ii- 14 

v. Stradling iii- 349 

Will's case i- 515 

Wilmer v. Smilax, The ii- 401 

Wilmhurst ». Bowker i. 642, 650 

Wilmot v. Charter Oak Ins. Co. ii. 618 

v. Hurd i- 621 ; ii. 879 

v. Smith ii. 61, 747, 774 

Wilson, Ex parte iii. 416, 427 

In re "?• 406 

v. Alexander u- '«d 



Wilson v. Anderton ii. 218 

v. Appleton iii. 104 

v. Backhouse i. 024 
v. Balfour iii. 259, 290 
v. Baptist Educational Society i. 482 

v. Barker i. 53 

v. Beddard iii. 10 

v. Borstel ii. 463 

v. Bowden i. 200 

ti. Breeding i. 380 
v. Brett i. 92; ii. 102, 116 

v. Broom iii. 225 
v. Burr i. 129, 403; ii. 59 

„ v. Butler ii. 913 

* v. Calvert iii. 79 

v. City Bank iii. 421 

v. Clements i. 303 

v. Codman ii. 883 

v. Coffin i. 126 

v. Conine i- 235 

v. Curzon i. 164 

v. Day iii- 441 

v. Dickson ii. 454 

v. Ducket ii. 523 

v. Edmonds _ i- 77 

v. Ferguson i. 618 

. v. Finch Hatton i. 532 
v. Foote i. 274 ; ii. 30 

v. Forbes iii- 242 

v. Gen. Ins. Co. ii. 500 

v. Genessee Ins. Co. ii- 584 

v. George iii- 232 

v. Greenwood i. 219, 224 
v. Guyton ii. 105; iii. 255 

a. Hamilton ii. 181 

v. Hardesty iii. 136, 506 

v. Hart _ i- 66 

v. Hatton i- 633 

v. Henderson ii- 860 

v. Hentges i- 492 
v. Herkimer Co. Ins. Co. ii. 553, 560 

v. Hicks ii- 423 
v. Hill ii. 476, 563, 574 

v. Hirst ii- 766 

v. Hodson i. 147 

v. Holmes i- 286 

v. Hooper i- 569 

v. Hudson i- 147 

o. King iii- 224 

v. Knott "■ 140 

v. Lazier •• 329 
v. Little ii. 123, 126; iii. 220, 221 

v. Lutwidge }■ 300 

v. Marsh •• 63 J 
v. Martin ii. 489 ; iii. 41 

v. Mary, The . «• 465 

v. Merry "• 46, 47 

v. Milner „„'■„„£ 

v. Mushett i- S98, 399 

v. Northern Pac. E. Co. }}■ 240 

v. Oatman »;■ 239 

v. Ohio, The «■ \% 

v. Paulsen 1-.568 

v. Poulter .}• 51 

v. Powers u - ^ 



CCXVlil INDEX TO C 


Wilson v. Ray 




iii. 477 


o. Robertson 




ii. 080 


v. Rousseau 




ii. 319 


v. Russell 




iii. 37b 


v. Simpson 




ii. 320 


u. Smyth 




i. 401 


v. Soper 




i. 201 


v. Spencer 




iii. 240 


v. Stolley 




ii. 320 


v. Sugg 




i. 131 


v. Swabey 




i. 323 


v. Trumbull Ins. Co. 




ii. b'A'J 


v. Tumman 




i. 40, 53 


v. United Ins. Co. 




ii. 501 


v. Wadleigh 




ii. 740 


v. Wilson i. 126, 613 


ii. 920 '.' : 






iii. 374 


v. Y. & M. Railroad Co. 




ii. 07 


v. York, Newcastle, & 


Berwick 


Railway Co. ii. 


231 


; iii. 196 


v. Young i 


.131 


; ii. 825 


Wilt v. Franklin 




iii. 381 


v. Vickers 




iii. 17G 


Wilton v. Falmouth 




ii. 709 


v. Harwood ii 


939 


; iii. 347 


v. Railroads 




ii. 322 


Wiltse v. Barnes 




ii. 188 


Wiltshire v. Cottrell 




i. 547 


v. Sims 




i. 60, 91 


Winans v. Allemainia Ins. Co. 


ii. 543 


v. Denmead 


ii. 


307, 314 


v. Huston 




ii. S50 


Winberry v. Koonce 




iii. 89 


Winch v. Fenn 


iii. 


143, 405 


u. Keeley i. 254, 255 


; iii. 


424, 435 


o. Sanders 




ii. 835 


v. Winchester 


iii. 


312, 354 


Winchester, Ex parte 


iii. 


402, 471 


v. Patterson 




ii. 413 


v. Union Bank 




i. 146 


Windham v. Doles 




i. 240 


v. Windham 




i. 531 


Windham's case 


i. U 


; ii. 037 


Windham Bank v. Norton 




i. 309 


Windle v. Andrews 




i. 326 


Windsor, Dean and Chapter of, v. 


Gover 




i. 153 


Winfield v. Dodge 




ii. 005 


Wing v. Angrave 




ii. 013 


v. Chapman 




iii. 219 


v. Clark 




i. 577 


v. Dunn 




iii. 128 


v. Harvey 




ii. 599 


v. Hurlburt 




i. 703 


v, Hill 




i. 501 


v. Schramm 




i. 405 


Wingate v. Dail 




iii. 363 


v. Foster 




ii. 550 


v. Smith 




iii. 213 


Win go v. McDowell 




i. 270 


Winks v. Hassall 




iii. 434 


Winn v. Albert 




iii. 346 


v. Bowles 




i. 251 


o. Bull 




iii. 14 


v. Col. Ins. Co. 




ii. 507 



CASES CITED. 

Winn i«. Southgate ii- 39 

v. Thomas iii. 477 

Winne v- Reynolds iii. 334 

Winnesheik Ins. Co. v. Schueller ii. 587 

Winship o. Bank of U. S. i. 205, 206 

v. Bass ii. 852 

c. Winship ii. 737 

Winslow v. Croker i. 385 

v. Dawson iii. 126 

v. Merchants Ins. Co. i. 546, 612 

v. Patten ii. 638 

v. Tarbox i. 611; ii. 400 

v. Vermont, &c. R. R. Co. ii. 197 

Winson v. McLellan i. 612 

Winsor i: Dillaway ii. 675 

v . Griggs i. 08 

v. Lombard i. 61'8, 624, 032 

v. McLellan ii. 305 

Winsted Bank v. Spencer ii. 932 

Winston v. Ewing i. 234 

v. Westfeldt i. 288 

Winstone v. Linn ii. 55 

Winter v. Branch Bank ii. 26 

v. Delaware Ins. Co. ii. 533 

v. Garlick ii. 834 

v. Iowa iii. 416 

c. Jones ii. 502; iii. 482 

v, Kretchman iii. 426 

v. Munton ii. 828 

c. Perratt ii. 688 

v. Richards i. 233 

v. White ii. 828 

Wintermute v. Clarke ii. 156, 165 

v. Redington ii. 311, 315 

Winterstoke Hundred's case i. 19 

Winthrop v. Carlton ii. 716, 865 

v. Union Ins. Co. ii. 532, 535, 674 

Wintle v. Crowther i. 88 

Wintringham v. Lafoy iii. 382 

Wirth v. Austin i. 297 

Wisconsin Bank v. Morley i. 53 

Wise v. G. W. Ry. Co. ii. 261 

v. Metcalfe i. 536 

v. St. Louis Mar. Ins. Co. ii. 478 

>: Wilson ii. 39, 55 

Wiseman i'. Chiapella i. 303 

r. Roper ' i. 467 

r. Vandeput i. 642 

Wiser v. Lockwood ii. 88 

Wiswall !•. Brinson i. 117 

Wiswould, Ex parte iii. 416 

Witbeek v. Holland ii. 203 

Witcher t: Brewer i. 208 

Witherell v. Maine Ins. Co ii. 671 

Witherow v. Witherow ii. 655 

Withers v. Atkinson ii. 802 

o. Bircham i. 15, 25 

v. Lyss i. 563; iii. 48, 444 

v. Reynolds ii. 649, 653 

r. Weaver i. 203 

Witherspoon t'. Anderson iii. 242 

v. Dubose i. 383 

Withington v. Herring i. 41, 59 

Withy e. Cottle iii. 311, 319, 323 

Witt v. Mayor, &c. of New York i. 535 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CCX1X 



Witt v. Welsh i. 356 

v. Derby Fishing Co. i. 157 

Wittersheim v. Lady Carlisle iii. 97 

Wittkovvsky v. Wasson i. 661 

Witty v. Matthews i. 530 

Wodell v. Coggeshall i. 349 

Wodrop v. Ward i. 238 

Woert v. Jenkins iii. 183 

Wohlenberg v. Lageman ii. 840 
Wolcott v. Eagle Ins. Co. ii. 483, 484, 485, 

490, 491 

v. Heath ii. 896 

v. Mount i. 617, 631 ; iii. 196, 198, 219 

v. Van Santvoord i. 300 

Wolf v. Dozer iii. 41 

v. Stix iii. 462 

v. Summers iii. 265 

v. Trochelman i. 131 

v. Western Union Tel. Co. ii. 286, 287 

Wolfe v. Frost iii. 37 

v. Goulard ii. 353, 372, 378 

o. Myers ii. 410 

v. Whiteman iii. 97 

Wolfenberger v. Young iii. 74 

Wolfersberger v. Bucher ii. 877 

Wolff v. Koppel i. 101 

Wollenwebber v. Ketterlinus i. 307 

Wolton v. Gavin ii. 899 

Wolverton v. Lacey ii. 457, 459 

Wonder v. Baltimore ii. 47 

Wood v. Adcock ii. 826 

v. Akers ii. 877 

v. A. R. R. Co. i. 52 

v. Ashe i. 618, 621 

v. Beard i. 648 

a. Bell ii. 380, 394, 650 

v. Benson i. 486 ; iii. 19 

v. Bodwell ii. 756 

v. Brown i. 146 

v. Corl i. 313 

v. Crocker ii. 210 

v. Curling ii. 149 

v. Davis iii. 15 

v. Day ii. 931 

v. Dodgson iii. 463 

v. Dudley i. 611 

v. Earl ii. 831 

v. Goodridge i. 124 

v. Griffith ii. 832 ; iii. 310, 332, 357, 

361, 373 

v. Grimwood iii. 135, 136 

v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 542, 544 

v. Hitchcock ii. 778 

v. Hubbell i. 537 

v. Jones i. 645 

v. Leadbitter ii. 642 

v. Lee ii. 691 

v. Lincoln Ins. Co. ii. 506, 508, 511 

v. Manley ii. 665 

v. McCann ii. 895 

v. Mich. South. R. R. ii. 319 

v. Milwaukee, &c. R. Co. ii. 210 

v. Morewood iii. 215 

v. Mytton i. 277, 278 

v. N. E. Ins. Co. ii. 488, 497 



Wood v. Nimrod 
v. O'Kelley 
v. Partridge 
v. Patterson 
v. Pennell 
v. Perry 
v. Pierson 
v. Pugh 
v. Roach 
v. Robbins 
c. Savage 
v. Smith 
v. Steele 
v. Tunnicliff 
v. Watkinson 
v. Warren 
v. Wellington 
v. Wood 
v. Wylds 
o. Yeatman 



ii. 458 

i. 189 

i. 254, 256 

iii. 354 

i. 193 

i. 254; ii. 086 

iii. 255 

i. 326 

i. 645 

iii. 112 

iii. 32 

i. 623 

ii. 856, 858 

ii. 7 

ii. 719 

i. 290 

i. 158 

ii. 91, 672 

iii. 82, 83 

iii. 290 



Wood and Foster's case i. 558 

Wood, &c. R. Co. v. Brooke i. 579 

Woodard v. Herbert iii. 462 

Woodbridge v. Allen iii. 75, 397 

v. Wright ii. 719 

Woodburn v. Mosher iii. 403 

Woodbury v. Blair i. 69 

Woodcock i: Bennet i. 522; iii. 358, 359 

i'. Nuth i. 644 

v. Oxford & Worcester R. R. Co. ii. 27 

r. Parker ii. 304 

Woodend v. Paulsbury ii. 712 

Wooden-Ware Co. v. United States iii. 214 

Wooderman v. Baldock i. 569 

Woodes v. Dennett i. 73 

Woodfin v. Hooper iii. 504 

Woodfolk !>. Blount iii. 300 

Woodford v. McClenahan i. 62 

Woodger v. Great Western R. R. Co. 

iii. 209 

Woodham v. Hubbard ii. 904 

Woodhouse v. Meredith i. 93 

v. Shepley ii. 64, 68 

Woodhull v. Wagner iii. 894, 395, 397 

Woodin v. Burford i. 41, 62, 79 

v. Foster i. 322 

Woodland, The ii. 454 

Woodleife v. Curties ii. 169 

Woodlife's case ii. 169 

Woodman v. Boothby i. 275 

v. Chapman i. 383 

v. Eastman i. 308, 317 

v. Stimpson ii. 304 

v. Thurston i. 315 

v. Woodman i- 380 

Woodrop-Sims, The ii. 428, 429 

Woodruff v. Col. Ins. Co. ii- 471 

v. Dobbins ii. 818 

v. Hinman i- 486 

v. King i- 207 

ii. Logan i. 354 ; ii. 54 

v. M'Gehee i- 66 

v. Plant _.i- 296 

v. Richardson iii- 187 

v. Robb !"• 376 



ccxx 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Woodruff v. Trapnall iii. 502 

v.. Woodruff ii. 92 

Woods v. Anders i. 129 

v. Ayres i- 7 

v. Blodgett i. 130 

v. Carlisle "• 877 

v. Dennett ii- 890 

v. Devin ii. 192, 276 

v. Farmare iii. 348 

v. Masterman ii. 588 

v. North i. 279 

i'. Pickett ii. 389 

v. Ridley i. 142, 278 

v. Russell ii. 380, 394, 649 

i: Wilder i. 226 

Woodstock Bank v. Downer ii. 31 

Woodward v. Barnes i. 384 

i\ Cowing i. 492 

v. Darcy ii. 852 

v. Lazar ii. 359, 361 

v. Seeley ii. 642 ; iii. 37 

v. Thacher i. 636; iii. 227 

v. Towne iii. 434 

Woodworth v. Curtis ii. 320 

v. Downer i. 218 

v. Rogers ii. 314, 325 

?■. Sherman ii. 318 

Wooland i\ Crowther iii. 437 

Wooldridge v. Wilkins i. 168, 170; iii. 239 

Wooley r. Batte i. 37 

v. Cliamberlin ii. 936 

i.'. Clements i. 322 

Woolf r. Beard ii. 247 

r. Claggett ii. 527, 533 

Woolfe r. Home i- 527 

Woollam v. Hearn iii. 309, 345, 354 

v. Ratcliff ii. 371 

Woolley v. Alexander iii. 132 

Woolsey v. Crawford i. 327 

v. Hogan iii. 411 

v. Judd ii. 330, 336 

Woolston's Appeal ii. 77 

Wooster v. Sage ii. 813 

Wooten v. Miller i. 480 

v. Read ii. 655 

Wope v. Hemenway ii. 465 

Worcester v. Green ii. 92!) 

Worcester Bank v. Hill ii. 7 

Worcester Corn Exch. Co. i. 210 

Worcester M. I. u . HardiDg ii. 942 

Word v. Cavin i. 617 

v. Vance i. 356 

v. Word ii. 91 

Wordell v. Smith i. 569 

Worden v. Sharp iii. 38 

Wordsworth r. Willan ii. 250 

Work v. Cowhick iii. 15 

Works v. Hershey ii. 822 

World Ins. Co. v. Schultz ii. 556,592, 594, 

598 

Wormack v. Rogers i. 466 

Wormley v. Lowry i. 292 

Worms v. Storey ii. 423 

Worral v. Akworth ii. 834 

Worrall v. Gheen ii. 856 



Worrall v. Harford iii 301 
v. Munn i. 52; iii. 10, 14, 338 

Worrell's Appeal i. 137, 150, 151 

Worsley v. De Mattos iii. 441 
v. Scarborough i. 81 ; iii. 299 
v. Wood i. 491 ; ii. 473, 586 

Worth v. Case i. 271 

v. Worth iii. 352 

Worthington v. Charter Oak Life Ins. 

Co. ii. 601, 615 

v. Cowles i. 67 

v. Curtis ii. 610 

v. Grimsditch iii. 83 

u. Warrington iii. 245 

u. Wigley ii. 823 

v. Young iii. 238 

Worthy v. Jones iii. 43 

v. Patterson iii. 227 

Wotton v. Cooke i. 24 

v. Shirt i. 551 

Wray v. Milestone i. 185 

Wren r. Kirton i. 94, 96 

v. Pearce iii. 17 

Wrexham v. Huddleston i. 226 

Wright v. Bigg i. 512 

v. Brosseau i. 246 

v. Burroughes i. 550 
v. Butler ii. 752 ; iii. 100 

v. Campbell iii. 444 

v. Cobleigh ii. 874 

v. Crookes i. 51 

v. Daily i. 131 

v. Dame iii. 297 

v. Dannah iii. 11 

v. De Groff iii. 39 

a. Deklyne ii. 867 

... Fairfield iii. 426, 454 

v. Gihon ii. 56 

v. Goddard ii. 772 

v. Hart i. 603 

v. Hartford Ins. Co. ii. 5S6 

v. Hazen ii. 929 

v. Herrick i. 189 

v. Hooker i. 204 

v. Howard iii. 336, 357 

v. Howell i. 636 

t>. Hunter ii. 387 
v. Laing ii. 763 ; iii. 134 

v. Lawes i. 647 

v. Lawton ii. 756 

v. London, &c. R. Co. ii. 46 

v. McAlexander iii. 116 

v. Morley ii. 6 ; iii. 437 
v. Morse i. 285 ; ii. 684 

v. Nutt ii. 6 

v. Orient Ins. Co. ii. 529 

a. Post i. 21 
v. Proud i. 93 
o. Reed ii. 753 
v. Remington i. 443 
v. Rider ii. 893 

b. Russell ii. 5, 21 
v. Shawcross i. 321 
v. Shiffner ii. 521 
v. Simpson ii. 6 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



CCXX1 



Wright v. Smith 
v. Smyth 
v. Steele 
v. Tallis 
v. Walker 
v. Ward 
v. Wheeler 
v. Wilcox 



ii. 831, 836 

ii. 879 

i. 364, 365 

ii. 337 

i. 93 

ii. 28 

iii. 130 

i. 114 



v. Wright i. 129, 136, 251, 831, 

407,460; ii. 62, 737, 828 

Wrightup v. Chamberlain iii. 229 

Wrigley, In re ii. 710 

Wrotesley v. Adams i. 531 ; ii. 682 

Wroth v. Johnson ii. 897 

Wyat ". Bulmer i. 293 

o. Hodson iii. 87, 90 

Wyatt v. Barnard ii. 342 

Wyburd v. Stanton i. Ill 

Wycoff v. Longhead iii. 153 

Wyckoff v. Anthony ii. 776 

Wyeth v. Stone ii. 306, 308, 311, 314, 324 

Wyke v. Rogers ii. 29 

Wyld v. Pickford ii. 263 

Wylie v. Marine Bank i. 109 

v. Smitherman iii. 183, 187 

Wyllis v. Ault iii. 144 

Wylly v. Collins i. 409 

Wyman v. Ballard iii. 244 

v. Gray iii. 17 

v. Goodrich ii. 11 

v. Hallowell & Augusta Bank i. 42 

v. People's Ins. Co. ii. 555, 588 

v. Smith iii. 28,- 30 

v. Winslow ii. 780 

Wyndham, Ex parte iii. 416 

v. Way i. 646 

Wynn u. Alien i. 322 

v. Allard ii. 247, 248 

v. Cox ii. 679 

Wynne v. Jackson ii. 700 

v. Price i. 522 ; iii. 325 

v. Raikes i. 304 

Wyoming Co. v. Price i. 540 



X. 



Xenos v. Wickham 



Y. 

Yager v. Merkle 
Yalden, Ex parte 
Yale, Ex parte 

v. Dederer i. 

v. Edgerton 
Yallop v. Ebers 
Yancey v. Brown 
Yandes v. Lefavour 
Yarborough v. Bank of England 
Yard ;;. Eland 
Yarnell v. Anderson 
Yate v. Roules 

i>. Willan 



ii. 471 



i. 405 
i. 129 
i. 126 
403, 408 
iii. 25 

iii. 462 
ii. 31 

ii. 746 
i. 154 
i. 480 
i. 192 
i. 22 

ii. 772 



Yates v. Boen 

v. Bond 

v. Brown 

v. Carnsew 

v.Vutt 

v. Donaldson 

v. Foot 

v. Freckleton 

v. Hoppe 

v. Nash 

v. Pym 

v. Sherrington 

v. Van Rensselaer 
Yea v. Eouraker 
Yeager v. Farwell 

v. Wallace 
Yealey v. Pink 
Yeamans v. Yeamans 
Yeatman v. Savings Inst, 

v. Woods 
Yeaton v. Berney 
Yokom v. McBride 
Yong v. Reynoll 



i. 4:14 

i. 615 

i. 117; ii. 468, 469 

iii. 420 

ii. 408 

i. 02 

ii. 897 

ii. 746 

i. 74 

i. 282 

i. 624 ; ii. 677 

iii. 439, 469 

ii. 874 

iii. 68 

i. 307 

i. 202 

i. 98 

ii. 825 

iii. 421 

i. 109 

i. 309 

iii. 246 

ii. 6 



Yonkers, &c. Ins. Co. v. Hoffman, &c. 

Ins. Co. ii. 494 

Yopst v. Yopst i. 384 

York v. Grindstone ii. 164, 165 

v. Landis ii. 6 

York Buildings v. Mackenzie i. 95 

York Co. v. Central R. R. Co. ii. 233 

Yorke v. Grenaugh ii. 164, 165 ; iii. 268 
Yorks v. Peck i. 11, 29, 30 

Yorkshire Banking Co. v. Beatson i. 204 
Yorton v. Milwaukee R. Co. ii. 246 

Yost v. American Ins. Co. ii. 614 

Youde v. Jones ii. 645 

Young, Ex parte ii. 387, 390, 391 ; iii. 449, 

463, 464 
v. Adams i. 300; ii. 753 

v. Axtell i. 190 

v. Bank of Bengal iii. 439, 469 

v. Berkley iii. 127 

v. Black ii. 868 

v. Bradley i. 557 

v. Bryan i. 325 

v. Conant Mfg. Co. ii- 050 

v. Corell ii. 917 

v. Dearborn iii- 286 

v. Duhme i. 146 

v. Durgin i. 320 

v. Eagle Ins. Co. ii. 476, 576 

v. French iii- 27 

v. Frier i. 239 

v. Frost iii' 371 

v. Hall ii- 915, 916 

^.Harris i- 314; ii. 700 

v. Hockley !"■ 4M 

v. Hunter i- 194 

v. Keighley i. 234 

v. Mackall ij|- 102 

v. MacRae «• 353 

v. Matthews i- 666 

v. McClure i- 569 

v. Miller >"• n 2 

v. Paul !"• o7 ° 



CCXX11 



INDEX TO CASES CITED. 



Young v. Rathbone 


iii. 334 


v. Reuben 


ii. 820 


v. Seott 


iii. 136 


c. Smith ii 


197, 220 


a. Stevens 


i. 436 


v. Taylor 


iii. 463 


v. Timmins 


ii. 890 


v. Turner 


iii. 176 


v. Virginia, The 


ii. 392 


v. Ward 


i. 272 


v. Washington Co. Ins. Co. h 


. 550, 551 


v. West. Un. Tel. Co. 


ii. 285 


v. Wood 


iii. 295 


v. Wright 


iii. 127 


Young, &e. Co. v. Wakefield 


ii. 814 


Young Mechanic, The ii. 


381, 401 


Young Sam, The 


ii. 383 


Youngblood v. Loury 


i. 553 


Younger v. Givens iii. 


221, 222 


Youngs v. Lee i. 291, 


292, 322 


Youqua v. Nixon i. 


490, 574 


Yoxtheimer v. Keyser 


i. 463 


Yulee v. Canora 


i. 99 


Yundt v. Hartrunft 


iii. 178 



Zacharias v. Zacharias 
Zacharie v. Orleans Ins. Co. 



iii. 75 
ii. 488 



Zachrison v. Ahman i. 109 

Zachrisson v. Poppe i. 586 

Zagury v. Furnell i. 566 

Zaleskiu. Clark i. 564; ii. 63 

Zane u. Brig President, The ii. 381, 

384 

v. Zane ■ 468, 471 

Zarega, In re iii. 404 

Zell v. German Sav. Inst. iii. 281 



Zeigler v. Day 


ii. 47 


Zenobia, The 


ii. 454 


Zent v. Heart 


iii. 88 


Zephyr, The ii 


402, 403, 442 


Zephyru9, The 


ii. 440 


Zerbee v. Miller 


ii. 52 


Zerega v. Poppe 


ii. 410 


Ziegenfuss, Ex parte 


iii. 400, 401 


Ziegler v. Bank 


ii. 113 


Zimmerman v. Rote 


ii. 862 


v. Zimmerman 


ii. 941 


Zimmermann v Marchland 


i. 541 


Zimpleman v. Veeder 


ii. 128 


Zinck v. Walker 


i. 571 


Zinn v. Rowley 


ii. 787 


Zipcey v. Thompson 


ii. 699 


Zodiac, The 


ii. 433 


Zollar v. Janvrin 


i. 191 


Zouch v. Parsons 


i. 334 


Zuchtmann v. Roberts 


i. 578 


Zwinger v. Samuda 


i. 330 



PART I. 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS 



CONSIDERED IN REFERENCE TO 



THE OBLIGATIONS 



ASSUMED BY 



THE PARTIES. 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



PRELIMINARY CHAPTER. 
SECTION I. 

OP THE EXTENT AND SCOPE OF THE LAW OF CONTKACTS. 

The Law of Contracts, in its widest extent, may be regarded 
as including nearly all the law which regulates the relations of 
human life. Indeed, it may be looked upon as the basis of 
human society. All social life presumes it, and rests upon it ; 
for out of contracts, express or implied, declared or understood, 
grow all rights, all duties, all obligations, and all law. Almost 
the whole procedure of human life implies, or, rather, is, the con- 
tinual fulfilment of contracts. 

Even those duties, or those acts of kindness and affection, 
which may seem most remote from contract or compulsion of any 
kind, are nevertheless within the scope of the obligation of con- 
tracts. The parental love which provides for the infant when, in 
the beginning of its life, it can do nothing for itself, nor care for 
itself, would seem to be so pure an offering of affection, that the 
idea of a contract could in no way belong to it. But even here, 
although these duties are generally discharged from a feeling 
which borrows no strength from a sense of obligation, there is 
still such an obligation. It is implied by the cares of the past, 
which have perpetuated society from generation to generation ; 
by that absolute necessity which makes * the performance of * 4 
these duties the condition of the preservation of human life ; 
and by the implied obligation on the part of the unconscious 
objects of this care, that when, by its means, they shall have grown 
into strength, and age has brought weakness upon those to whom 
they are thus indebted, they will acknowledge and repay the debt. 

3 



* 5 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 

Indeed, the law recognizes and enforces this obligation, to a 
certain degree, on both sides, as will be shown hereafter. 

It would be easy to go further, and show that in all the rela- 
tions of social life, its good order and prosperity depend upon the 
due fulfilment of the contracts which bind all to all. Sometimes 
these contracts are deliberately expressed with all the precision of 
law, and are armed with all its sanctions. More frequently they 
are, though still expressed, simpler in form and more general in 
language, and leave more to the intelligence, the justice, and hon- 
esty of the parties. Far more frequently they are not expressed 
at all ; and for their definition and extent we must look to the com- 
mon principles which all are supposed to understand and acknowl- 
edge. In this sense, contract is co-ordinate and commensurate with 
duty ; and it is a familiar principle of the law, of which we shall 
have much to say hereafter, and which has a wide, though far 
from a universal application, that whatsoever it is certain that a 
man ought to do, that the law supposes him to have promised to 
do. "Implied contracts," says Blackstone (vol. ii. p. 443), "are 
such as reason and justice dictate, and which, therefore, the law 
presumes that every man undertakes to perform." These con- 
tracts form the warp and woof of actual life. If they were wholly 
disregarded, the movement of society would be arrested. And 
in so far as they are disregarded, that movement is impeded or 
disordered. 

If all contracts, express or implied, were carried into full effect, 
the law would have no office but that of instructor or adviser. It 
is because they are not all carried into effect, and it is that they 
may be carried into effect, that the law exercises a compulsory 
power. 

Hence is the necessity of law; and the well-being of society 
depends upon, and may be measured by, the degree in which 
5 * the law construes and interprets all contracts wisely ; elimi- 
nates from them whatever is of fraud or error, or otherwise 
wrongful ; and carries them out into their full and proper effect 
and execution. These, then, are the results which the law seeks. 
And it seeks these results by means of principles ; that is, by 
means of truths, ascertained, defined, and so expressed as to be 
practical and operative. There are many of the rules of law 
which do not come within this definition of principles. They 
are formal or technical ; but they are in force because they are 
4 



* 



PRELIMINARY CHAPTER. * 6 

believed to be subsidiary to, and needed or useful for the compre- 
hension, application, and enforcement of principles ; and these for- 
mal rules derive their whole power and value from the principles 
which they explain or enforce and carry into effect. 

It is said that the law seeks these results by means of princi- 
ples ; and these again, in their most general form, may be said to 
be, first, those rules of construction and interpretation which have 
for their object to find in a contract a meaning which is honest, 
sensible, and just, without doing violence to the expressions of the 
parties, or making a new contract for them ; and, secondly, those 
which discharge from a contract whatever would bring upon it the 
fatal taint of fraud, or is founded upon error or accident, or would 
work an injury. And if these elements of wrong are so far vital 
to any contract, that when they are removed it perishes, then the 
law annuls or refuses to enforce that contract, unless a still greater 
mischief would thereby be done. 

Subsidiary to these are the rules and processes of the law, by 
means whereof a contract, which in itself is good, and has been 
properly construed, and is free from all removable elements of 
wrong, is enforced, or carried into execution. 



* SECTION II. *6 

DEFINITION OP CONTRACTS. 

A contract, in legal contemplation, is an agreement between 
two or more parties, for the doing or the not doing of some par- 
ticular thing, (a) 

la) "A contract is an agreement in eration and the promise and the sale, 

wh ch a party undertakes to do, or not ought to meet together, for a contract is 

to do a particular thing." Marshall,C, J., derived from con and trahere, which is a 

Sturges « Crowninsh"e!d ; 4 Wheat. 197. drawing together, so as in contracts every 

_" I contract is an agreement, upon thing which is requisite ought to concur 

sufficient consideration, to do or not to do and meet together ; namely the consid- 

aTaTcuUr thing." 2 Bl. Com. 446.- eration, of the one side, and the sale or 

L P s!denham and Worlington's case, 2 the promise on the other side. But to 

Leon 224, 225, which was an assumpsit, maintain an action upon an ^"^'n r 

founded upon an executed consideration, same is not requisite, for it is sufficient if 

Per?«Tj conceived that the action did there be a moving cause, or considera- 

we?l He and The said there was a great tion precedent, for which cause or cons.d- 

diff erence between contracts and that case : eration the promise was made. 
" For in contracts upon sale, the consid- 



* 7 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 

It has been said that the word agreement is derived from the 
phrase " aggregatio mentium." (5) This is at least doubtful, and 
was probably suggested by the wish to illustrate that principle of 
the law of contracts which makes an agreement of the minds of 
the parties or the consent and harmony of their intentions, essen- 
tial. We shall presently see that they must propose and mean 
the same thing, and in the same sense. 

The word "contract" is of comparatively recent use, as a law 
term. Formerly, courts and lawyers spoke only of " obliga- 
tions," (c) — meaning thereby " bonds," in which the word 
" oblige " is commonly used as one of the technical and formal 
terms, — " covenants," and " agreements," which last word was 
used as we now use the word " contract." The word " promise " 
is often used in instruments, and sometimes in legal proceedings. 
"Agreement" is seldom applied to specialties; "contract" is 
generally confined to simple contracts ; and " promise " re- 

* 7 fers to the engagement of a party * without reference to the 

reasons or considerations for it, or the duties of other parties. 
In the above definition of a contract, no mention is made of the 
consideration. The Statute of Frauds requires, in many cases, 
and for many purposes, that the " agreement " shall be in writing, 
and some note or memorandum thereof be signed by the party 
sought to be charged. Under this provision, it has been much 
controverted whether the word "agreement" so far implies a 
" consideration," that this also must be in writing. This question 
will be considered in a subsequent part of this work, (i) We 
have not included the consideration in the definition of the 
contract, because we do not regard it as, of itself, an essential 
part thereof. But for practical purposes it is made so by some 
important and very influential rules, and we shall treat of the 
consideration as one of the elements of a legal contract. 

(6) Per Pollard, Serjeant, arguendo in v. Warlters, 6 East, 16; Saunders t>. 

Reniger v. Fogossa, Plowd. 17. Wakefield, 4 B. & Aid. 595 ; Violett v. 

(c) See the Abridgments of Brooke, Patton, 6 Cranch, 142 ; Packard v. Rich- 

Rolle, Bacon, &c. ardson, 17 Mass. 122: Sage v. Wilcox, 6 

(rf) Vol. III.* 14-* 16. And see Wain Conn. 81. 

6 



PRELIMINARY CHAPTER. * 8 

SECTION III. 

CLASSIFICATION OF CONTRACTS. 

The most general division of contracts is into contracts by spe- 
cialty, and simple contracts. 1 

Contracts by specialty are those which are reduced to writing 
and attested by a seal — or, to use the common phrase, contracts 
under seal ; and contracts of record. These last are judgments, 
recognizances, and statutes staple. But the term " contracts by 
specialty " is sometimes confined to contracts under seal. 

Simple contracts are all those which are not contracts by spe- 
cialty. It is not accurate in point of language to distinguish be- 
tween verbal contracts and written contracts ; for whether the 
words are written or spoken, the contracts are equally verbal, or 
expressed in words. Nor is it accurate in point of law to 
* distinguish between written and parol contracts, (e) For * 8 
whether they be written or only spoken, they are, in law, if 
not sealed, equally and only parol contracts. For some pur- 
poses, and especially by the requirements of the Statute of Frauds, 
the evidence of the contract must be in writing ; and when it is 
in writing, some peculiar rules of law apply to it. (/) But it is 
a mistake to rest upon this a legal distinction between written 
and oral contracts ; and from this mistake some confusion has 
arisen, (c/) 

(e) " The law makes no distinction clared to exist by a higher sort. In 

in contracts, except between contracts this sense it is unquestionably true, as 

which are, and contracts which are not, Lord Ellenborough said in Hoare v. Gra- 

under seal. I recollect one of the most ham, 3 Camp. 57, that to incorporate 

learned judges who ever sat upon this with a written contract an incongruous 

or any other bench, being very angry parol condition, is contrary to first prin- 

when a distinction was attempted to be ciples. 

taken between parol and written con- '' (g) Wilmot, J., Pillans v. Van Mierop, 

tracts, and saying, ' They are all parol, 3 Burr. 1670-1, and Parker, J., Stack- 

unless under seal.'" Lord Abinger, C. pole v. Arnold, 11 Mass. 27, 30, recog- 

B., in Beckham v. Drake, 9 M. & W. nize three classes of contracts, but are 

92. not sustained by the authorities. See 

(J) And independently of the statute, Rann v. Hughes, 7 T. R. 350, n. ; 

a familiar rule of judicial procedure Thacher «. Dinsmore, 5 Mass. 299, 301 ; 

forbids the contradiction, by one sort Cook v. Bradley, 7 Conn. 57; Union 

of evidence, of a state of things de- Turnpike Co. v. Jenkins, 1 Caines, 386. 

1 As to express, implied, and constructive contracts, see "Woods v. Ayres, 39 
Mich. 346. 

7 



* 8 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 

The essentials of a legal contract, of which we shall now pro- 
ceed to treat, are, first, the Parties, for we cannot conceive of a 
contract which has no parties ; secondly, the Consideration, for 
this is, in legal contemplation, the cause of the contract ; thirdly, 
the Assent of the Parties, without which there is in law no con- 
tract ; and, fourthly, the Subject-Matter of the Contract, or what 
the parties to it propose as its effect. 



*BOOK I. 

OF PAETIES TO A CONTKACT. 



CHAPTER I. 

CLASSIFICATION OP PARTIES. 

Parties may act independently and severally, or jointly, or 
jointly and severally. 

They may act as representative of others, as 

Agents, 

Factors or Brokers, 

Servants, 

Attorneys, 

Trustees, 

Executors or Administrators, 

Guardians. 
They may act in a collective capacity, as 

Corporations, 

Joint^Stock Companies, 

Partnerships. 
They may be New Parties, 

By Novation, 

By Assignment, 

By Indorsement. 
They may be Parties disabled in whole or in part, as 

Infants, 

Married Women, 
* Non Compotes Mentis, * 10 

Drunkards, 

Spendthrifts, 

Seamen, 

9 



10 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

Persons under Duress, 
Aliens, 
Outlaws, 
Attainted, 
Excommunicated; 
These subjects we will proceed to consider separately. 
10 



CH - n -J OP JOINT PARTIES. 



11 



* CHAPTER II. *11 

OP JOINT PARTIES. 

Sect. I. — Whether Parties are Joint or Several. 

Wherever an obligation is undertaken by two or more, or a 
right given to two or more, it is the general presumption of law 
that it is a joint obligation or right. 1 Words of express joinder 
are not necessary for this purpose ; but on the other hand, there 
should be words of severance, in order to produce a several respon- 
sibility or a several right, (a) 

Whether the liability incurred is joint, or several, or such that 
it is either joint or several at the election of the other contracting 
party, depends (the rule above stated being kept in view) upon the 
terms of the contract, if they are express ; and where they are 
not express, upon the intention of the parties as gathered from 

(a) Hill v. Tucker, 1 Taunt. 7 ; Hat- But, in Slater v. Magraw, 12 G. & J. 
sail v. Griffith, 4 Tyr. 487 ; King v. 265, where (on the sale of a negro) the 
Hoare, 13 M. & W. 499, per Parke, B. ; form of the covenant was, " I do here- 
English v. Blundell, 8 C. & P. 332; by obligate to give the said William 
Yorks v. Peck, 14 Barb. 644. — With re- Slater a good title for said boy when 
spect to instruments under seal, it is said called on. W. M. F. Magraw (seal). 
in Shep. Touch. 375 : " H two, three, or Security : George H. Dutton (seal)," 
more bind themselves in an obligation, — a demurrer to a count declaring on 
thus, obligamus nos, and say no more, the this as a joint and several covenant, 
obligation is, and shall be taken to be, joint was sustained, and the court held that 
only, and not several." And see Ehle v. the covenant to convey the title was 
Purdy, 6 Wend. 629. — If an instrument, the covenant of Magraw alone ; that the 
worded in the singular, is executed by covenant of Dutton was a several cov- 
several, the obligation is a joint and enant as surety that Magraw would 
several one ; and those who thus execute make the title when called on for that 
it may be sued either separately or to- purpose ; and that therefore an action 
gether. Hemmenway v. Stone, 7 Mass. on the covenant to convey could not be 
58 ; Van Alstyne v. Van Slyck, 10 Barb, maintained against them jointly. See, 
383; Powell, J., Sayerv. Chaytor, 1 Lutw. also, De Ridder v. Schermerhorn, 10 
695, 697; Marsh v. Ward, Peake, Cas. Barb. 638; Allen u. Fosgate, 11 How. 
130; Clerk v. Blackstock, Holt, 474; Pr. 218. 
and see Hall v. Smith, 1 B. & C. 407. 

1 Thus, a promissory note in the form : " I promise," &c, signed by several per- 
sons, is joint as well as several. Wallace v. Jewell, 21 0. St. 163. See also Crosby 
v. Jeroloman, 37 Ind. 264, 274, citing the text with approval. 

11 



'12 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



[book I. 



* 12 all the circumstances of the case. (J) 1 It may * be doubted, 

however, whether any thing less than express words can 

raise a liability which shall be at once a joint and a several 

liability. 

Where the obligation is joint and several, an ancient and famil- 
iar rule of law forbids it to be treated as several as to some of the 
obligors, and joint as to the rest. The obligee has the right of 
choice between the two methods of proceeding ; but he must re- 
sort to one or the other exclusively, and cannot combine both ; 
that is, he must proceed either severally against each, or jointly 
against all. (c) 2 

of agreement (conveniunt) being in the 
plural, and not being repeated in the 
singular, so as to express a distinct sev- 
eral promise. Bolton v. Lee, 2 Lev. 56; 
Sewer v. Bradfield, Cro. E. 422 ; May v. 
Woodward, Freera. 248; Enys v. Don- 
nithorne, 2 Burr. 1190 ; Mansell v. Bur- 
redge, 7 T. R. 352 ; Bangor Bank v. 
Treat, 6 Greenl. 207. 

(c) Streatfleld v. Halliday, 3 T. R. 
782 ; Cabell v. Vaughan, 1 Wms. Saund. 
291, f, n. 4; Bangor Bank v. Treat, 6 
Greenl. 207. In the case of a joint and 
several debt, judgment (without satisfac- 
tion) recovered against one of the debt- 
ors, is no bar to an action against 
another. Per Popham, C. J., Brown v, 
Wootton, Cro. J. 74, cited by Parke, B., 
in King v. Hoare, 13 M. & W. 504. — 
But a judgment, though unsatisfied, re- 
covered against one of two joint debtors, 
is a bar to an action against the other, 
or to an action against both. 3 Kent's 
Com. 30; "Ward v. Johnson, 13 Mass. 
148 ; King v. Hoare, 13 M. & W. 494. — 
In Robertson v. Smith, 18 Johns. 484, 
which was the case of a solvent dormant 
partner, discovered after judgment ob- 
tained against the insolvent ostensible j 
partner, Spencer, J., while holding the ; 
plaintiff's action to be barred, suggested 
that the court, on application, might be 
induced to vacate the former judgment. — 
But Collins v. Lemasters, 1 Bail. 346; 
Treasurers v. Bates, 2 Bail. 362, and 
Sheehy v. Mandeville, 6 Cranch, 253, are 
contra. In King v. Hoare, 13 M. & W. 
494, Sheehy v. Mandeville was cited, but 
Parke, B., giving the judgment of the 
court, observed : " During the argument, 



(b) Wilde, J., in Peekham v. North 
Parish in Haverhill, 16 Pick. 274, 283. 
In the following cases the liability was 
held to be joint : Wigmore and Wells' 
case, 3 Leon. 206 ; Wightman v. Chart- 
man, Gould, 83;- Anonymous, Moore, 
260 ; Coleman v. Sherwin, 1 Salk. 137, 
1 Show. 79; Byers v. Dobey, 1 H. Bl. 
236; Exall v. Partridge, 8 T. R. 308; 
Wathen v. Sandys, 2 Camp. 640; For- 
ster v. Taylor, 3 id. 49 ; Eaden v. Titch- 
marsh, 1 A. & E. 691 ; London Gas 
Light Co. v. Nicholls, 2 C. & P. 365; 
Phillips v. Bonsall, 2 Binn. 138. In the 
following cases the liability was held to 
be several: 39 H. 6, 9, pi. 15; Bro. 
Abr. Covenant, pi. 27 ; 9. c. Viner Abr. 
Covenant (M. a), pi. 1, 2 ; s. c. Mathew- 
son's case, 5 Rep. 22 ; Brown v Doyle, 
3 Camp. 51, n. ; Gibson v. Lupton, 9 
Bing. 303; Collins v. Prosser, 1 B. & C. 
682 ; Hudson v. Robinson, 4 M. & Sel. 
475; Smith v. Pocklington, 1 Cr. & J. 
445 ; Fell v. Goslin, 7 Exch. 185 ; Harris 
v. Campbell, 4 Dana, 586; M'Cready v. 
Freedly, 3 Rawle, 231 ; Ernst v. Bartle, 
1 Johns. Cas. 319; Ludlow v. McCrea, 
1 Wend. 228; Howe v. Handley, 25 Me. 
116. In the following cases the liability 
was held to be joint and several: Constable 
v. Clobery, Pop. 161 ; Burden v. Ferrers, 
1 Sid. 189; Hankinson v. Sandilaus, Cro. 
J. 322 ; Linn v. Crossing, 2 Roll. Abr. 
148, Obligation (G) ; Lilly v. Hodges, 
1 Stra. 553, 8 Mod. 106; Robinson v. 
Walker, 1 Salk. 3'.)3, 7 Mod. 163. The 
words there were, conveniunt pro se et qvo- 
libet eorum. But Holt, C. J., dissenting 
from the majority, thought this might be 
considered joint by reason of the word 



1 Where the principal obligor is bound in a certain sura, and A,B, and C, " each 
as surety respectively " in a third of that sum, the liability of each surety is several. 
Commercial Bank v. Gorham, 11 R. I. 102. 

- Kendall v. Hamilton, 4 App. Cas. 604, follows and approves. King v. Hoare, 
supra. 

12 



CH. II. J 



OP JOINT PARTIES. 



•18 



* The question whether the eight under a contract is joint * 13 
or otherwise, enters more intimately into the nature of the 
contract, and therefore is of more importance ; and it is at the 
same time of greater difficulty. 

As a contract with several persons, for the payment to them of 
a sum of money, is a joint contract with all, and all the payees 
have therein a joint interest, so that no one can sue alone for his 
proportion ; so, the designating of the share of each will not create 
such a severance of interest as to sustain a several action ; but all 
must join in an action for the whole. (<2) But if the contract 
contains distinct grants, or promises of distinct sums to distinct 
payees, they would then have several interests, and certainly 
may, perhaps must, bring separate actions, (e) 

Where there are three or more obligees or promisees, the con- 
tract, if treated as joint by any, must be treated as joint by all. 
In no case can two sue together, leaving the other to seek his 
remedy upon the same contract, by himself. (/) 



a decision of the Chief Justice Marshall, 
in the Supreme Court of the United 
States, was cited as being contrary to the 
conclusion this court has come to ; the 
case is that of Sheehy v. Mandeville. We 
need not say we have the greatest re- 
spect for every decision of that eminent 
judge ; but the reasoning attributed to 
him by that report is not satisfactory to 
us ; and we have since been furnished 
with a report of a subsequent case, in 
which that authority was cited and con- 
sidered, and in which the Supreme Ju- 
dicial Court of Massachusetts decided 
that, in an action against two on a joint 
note, a judgment against one was a bar. 
Ward v. Johnson, 13 Tyng, 148." — 
Where one contracts in writing with 
three persons to give a bill of sale of 
two-thirds of a vessel to two of them, and 
of one-third to the other, and, in pursu- 
ance of the contract, does convey two- 
thirds ; this is not a severance of the 
cause of action, and a suit may be 
maintained for the price against the 
whole. Marshall v. Smith, 15 Me. 17. 

(rf) Lane v. Drinkwater, 5 Tyr. 40, 1 
C, M. & E. 599 ; Byrne v. Fitzhugh, 5 
Tyr. 54, 1 C, M. & R. 613. 

}e) The master of a vessel covenanted 
with the several part-owners and their 
several and respective executors, adminis- 
trators, and assigns, to pay certain mon- 
eys to them and to their several and re- 
spective executors, &c, at a certain 
banker's, and in such parts and propor- 



tions as were set against their respective 
names. Upon this covenant an action 
was brought by the covenantees jointly. 
Held, on "demurrer to the declaration, 
that the covenant was several, because 
otherwise no effect would be given to 
the words " several and respective exe- 
cutors," &c.,and because the money was 
to be paid to the banker, not as an entire 
sum for him to make distributions, but 
in several proportions to the separate 
account of each part-owner, thus making 
the interest of the covenantees several. 
Servante v. James, 10 B. & C. 410. See 
also Ford v. Bronaugh, 11 B. Mon. 14. 

(/) Contra, Bro. Abr. Covenant, 49. 
A man covenanted with twenty, and 
with each of them, to make certain sea- 
banks ; and by his not doing it the land 
of two was overflowed to their injury. 
Held by the court, that these two could 
have their action of covenant without 
the others. " Qucere," adds Brooke, 
"for it seems that each should bring 
an action by himself." The criticism of 
Brooke is undoubtedly well founded. 
It may be questioned, moreover, whether 
this case is authority even to give such 
a covenant the legitimate attributes of a 
sereral covenant. The case was cited m 
Slingsby's case (according to the report 
of the latter in 2 Leon. 47 ). There, A, B, 
and C, being parties respectively to an 
indenture tripartite, wherein A cove- 
nanted with B and C, et quokbet eorum, 
that the land which he had conveyed to 

13 



* 14 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

If a contract which is expressly, and in its very terms, joint 
and several, be made with divers persons, but for the pay- 

* 14 ment * of a sum or the accruing of some other benefit to 

one of them only, all must join in a suit upon that con- 
tract ; O) because but one thing is to be done, and all have a 
legal interest in the performance of that thing, although but one 
party has a beneficial interest. So if there be in one instrument 
a covenant with A, and another separate and distinct covenant 
with B, and both are for the payment of a sum of money to A, A 
cannot sue alone for this sum, but B must join, because other- 
wise the payer might be subjected to suits by both parties. (K) 
In general, all contracts, whether express, or implied and result- 
ing from the operation or construction of law, are joint, where the 
interest in them of the parties for whose benefit they are created, 
is joint, and separate where that interest is separate. But the 
interest which is thus important as a criterion, is an interest in 
the contract, and not in any sum of money, or other benefit, to 
be received from it. It is a strictly legal and technical interest 
created by the contract, and does not depend upon the condition 
or state of the parties aside from the contract. (J) 2 

A covenant which is single in its nature, or which is for one and 
the same cause, and so, in strict propriety, may be called one cov- 
enant and not a cluster of covenants, can never be joint and sev- 
eral in respect to the covenantees. In other words, this class of 
covenants does not exist with respect to the parties plaintiff in an 
action for covenant broken ; it never lies in the option of the cove- 
nantees to say whether they shall sue for the breach, jointly or 
severally. They must sue jointly if they can. (j) The circum- 

B was discharged of all incumbrances, B Spencer v. Durant, Comb. 115; Eccles- 

brought a several action of covenant ; ton v. Clipsham, 1 Wms. Saund. 153 ; 

and the court held, notwithstanding the Petrie v. Bury, 3 B. & C. 353; Scott v. 

case from Brooke, that C ought to have Godwin, 1 B. & P. 67, 71 ; Gibbs, C. J., 

been joined. James v. Emery, 5 Price, 533 ; Foley v. 

(g) Anderson v. Martindale, 1 East, Addenbrooke, 4 Q. B. 197 ; Pollock, C. B., 

497. Parke, B., and Rolfs, B„ Keightley v. 

(A) Id. AVatson, 3 Exch. 721, 723, 726^— Possi- 

(i) Anderson v. Martindale, 1 East, bly, an exception to this rule is to be 

497 ; English v. Blundell, 8 C. & P. 332; found in the case where the words of the 

Lord Detiman, Hopkinson v. Lee, 6 Q. B. covenant are joint and several as to the 

971, 972. covenantees, while their interest is sev- 

(j ) Slingsby's case, 5 Rep. 19 a ; eral. In such a case the law, perhaps, 

1 As where one enters into a business contract under seal, and afterwards takes a 
partner in his business, the latter cannot sue upon the contract. Duff v. Gardner, 
7 Lansing, 165. 

14 



CH. II. J OP JOINT PARTIES. * 15 

stances of each case, and the situation * and relation of the * 15 



allows the covenantees, who, upon any 
principle of construction, clearly may 
sue separately, the liberty to sue jointly. 
See Eccleston v. Clipsham, 1 Wms. 
Saund. 153 ; Withers v. Bircham, 3 B. 
& C. 250 ; Slingsby's case, 5 Rep. 19 a ; 
Rolls v. Yates, Yelv. (Metcalf's ed.), 177, 
n. — On the supposition that this ex- 
ception exists, both rule and exception 
might be expressed by stating the prop- 
osition thus : It is not possible, by any 
mere words of joinder and severance, to 
give the covenantees the election to 
sue separately or together. 

By what principles it is to be deter- 
mined whether a given contract is joint, 
or joint and several, or several, is a mat- 
ter in regard to which the authorities are 
in a state of some confusion. A doubt, 
suggested by Mr. Preston in his edition 
of the Touchstone, and taken up by the 
Court of Exchequer, has at once shaken 
the received opinion, and occasioned at 
least apparent conflict between that court 
and the Queen's Bench. It is evident 
that a covenant may be considered with 
reference either to the covenantors or 
covenantees. If A, B, and C covenant 
with X, Y, and Z, two distinct questions 
arise. Shall X, Y, and Z join, or not, 
as plaintiffs'! Shall A, B, and C be 
joined, or not, as defendants t There 
appears no reason for doubting that the 
words of joinder or severalty determine 
the answer of the second of these ques- 
tions. The covenant, with respect to 
the covenantors, may belong to either 
one of the three classes of joint, several, 
and joint and several, just as the par- 
ties have chosen to say in the covenant 
that it shall. The language of severalty 
or joinder, and not the interest, is then 
the test of the quality of the covenant 
quoad the covenantors. Enys u. Donni- 
thorne, 2 Burr. 1190. As regards the 
joinder of the covenantees there is nothing 
a priori to prevent the existence of the 
same three classes to choose amongst; 
namely, the class where they must sue 
jointly, that where they must sue sepa- 
rately, and that where it is at their 
option to sue either jointly or severally. 
But the proposition stated above, if true, 
obviously removes the third alternative. 
The covenantees either must join or must 
sever. Thus the inquiry is narrowed to 
this, By what means is it to be deter- 
mined in a given case whether they 
must or must not sue jointly ? And 
this is the point, and, as it would seem, 
the only point upon which there is a 



real conflict of authorities. A series of 
cases, received without question by the 
text-writers, went upon the principle 
that the interest which the covenantees 
take by the covenant, quite irrespective of 
words of severalty or joinder, is in all cases 
the decisive test. James v. Emery, 5 
Price, 529, 8 Taunt. 245; Withers v. 
Bircham, 3 B. & C. 254; Servante v. James, 
10 B. & C. 410 ; Lane v. Drinkwater, 5 
Tyr. 40, s. c. 1 C, M. & R. 599. But 
Mr. Preston denies the correctness of 
the rule as stated. " On the subject of 
joint and several covenants, that emi- 
nent lawyer, Sir Vicary Gihbs, assumed 
that covenants must necessarily be joint 
or several according to the interest. The 
language was, ' Wherever the interest 
of parties is separate, the action may be 
several, notwithstanding the terms of 
the covenant on which it is founded may 
be joint ; and where the interest is joint, 
the action must he joint, although the 
covenant in language purport to be joint 
and several.' James v. Emery, 5 Price, 
533. With great deference, however, the 
correct rule is, that, by express words 
clearly indicative of the intention, a cove- 
nant may be joint, or joint and several, 
to or with the covenantors or covenan- 
tees, notwithstanding the interests are 
several. Salk. 393; 2 Roll. Abr. 419; 
[possibly should be 149; see 6 Q. B. 971, 
n.]. So they may be several, although 
the interests are joint. But the implica- 
tion or construction of law, when the 
words are ambiguous, or are left to 
the interpretation of law, will be, that the 
words have an import corresponding to 
the interest, so as to be joint when the 
interest is joint, and several when the 
interest is several ; notwithstanding lan- 
guage which, under different circum- 
stances, would give to the covenant a 
different effect. Slingsby's case, 5 Rep. 
19 ; 3 Chanc. 126 ; 5 T. R. 522 ; South- 
cote v. Hoare, 3 Taunt. 89; 1 Wood, 
537; 2 Burr. 1190." Shep. Touch, by 
Preston, 166. In Sorsbie v. Park, 12 M. 
& W. 146, Lord Abinger said : " I think 
the rule is plain and certain, and re- 
quires no authority ; it is correctly stated 
by Mr. Preston in the passage in Shep. 
Touch. 166, which Mr. Temple cited. 
Where the words of a covenant are in 
their nature ambiguous, so that they 
may be construed either way, then the 
deed in which they are inserted supplies 
the mode of their construction. If it ex- 
hibit a several interest in the parties, 
you may construe it as a several cov- 
enant, and rice versa. But there is no 

15 



16 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



16 parties, and the nature of the consideration, * are all to be 



rule to say that words, which are ex- 
pressly a joint covenant by [to] several 
persons, shall be construed as a several 
covenant, unless there is something to 
lead to that construction." In this view 
Parke, B., concurred (p. 158). " The 
rule is, that a covenant will be construed 
to be joint or several according to the 
interest of the parties appearing upon 
the face of the deed, if the words are 
capable of that construction ; not that it 
will be construed to be several by rea- 
son of several interests, if it be expressly 
joint." — In Foley v. Addenbrooke, 4 Q. 
B. 197 (which was decided a little before 
Sorsbie v. Park, but was not referred to 
in that case), the doubt suggested by 
Preston was not agitated. Mills v. Lad- 
broke, 7 Man. & G., 218 [1844], was an 
action brought by a single plaintiff. It 
was contended that the covenant on 
which the action was founded, although 
several in terms, ought to be treated as 
joint by reason of the interest of the 
covenantees, who were engaged in a 
partnership transaction. Tindat, C. J., in 
overruling the objection, thus adverted to 
the doctrine of the Court of Exchequer : 
" The covenant, therefore, entered into 
by the defendant, as representing Kings- 
cote, with the shareholders, is, in point 
of form, not a covenant with all the 
covenantees jointly, but a several cove- 
nant with each. And we think this is 
so clearly the case, that if the general 
rule as laid down by Sir Vicary Gibbs, in 
James v. Emery, is qualified according 
to the suggestion of Mr. Preston, in a 
note to Sheppard's Touchstone, p. 166, 
which was adopted by the Court of Ex- 
chequer in the case of Sorsbie v. Park, 
all reference to the nature of the plain- 
tiffs interest would be unnecessary. 
But, assuming on the authority of the 
several cases referred to in the argu- 
ment, that the unqualified rule of law is, 
that the action shall follow the nature 
of the interest of the covenantees, with- 
out regard to the precise form of the 
covenant, so that the action must be 
joint where the interest in the subject- 
matter of the covenant is joint, and sev- 
eral where the interest of each covenantee 
is a several interest, we think, upon 
reference to the deed itself, the plaintiff 
has such several interest in the subject- 
matter as will enable him to sue alone 
on this several covenant." [His lordship 
then proceeds to examine the language 
of the deed.] It was not long before 
Hopkinson v. Lee, 6 Q. B. 964 [1845], 
afforded an opportunity for the expres- 

16 



sion of the opinion of the Court of 
Queen's Bench. This was an action by 
a trustee upon articles of agreement un- 
der seal, to which the defendant and T 
were parties, of the one part, and the 
plaintiff and his cestui que trust, parties of 
the other part. The agreement recited 
a loan by the plaintiff to E of money in 
the hands of the plaintiff, belonging to 
the cestui que trust; in consideration of 
which defendant and T covenanted sev- 
erally and respectively " with and to 
[the plaintiff] his executors, administra- 
tors, and assigns, and also as a distinct 
covenant with and to [the cestui que trust] 
her executors, administrators, and as- 
signs," that they, the covenantors, would 
pay, or cause to be paid, interest at five 
per cent per annum on the money lent to 
E. It was held that the cestui que trust 
ought to have been joined as a plaintiff. 
Lord Denman, in the opinion, referred 
with approbation to the rule that wordB 
of severalty do not prevent a covenant 
from being joint where the interest is 
joint, and said that Mr. Preston's excep- 
tion was not grounded on any judicial 
authority. His Lordship added (p. 971), 
" We think there is no ground for Mr. 
Preston's apprehension that words per- 
fectly plain and unambiguous, confining 
the contract expressly to one person, and 
excluding all others from its operation, 
will be strained by the law so as to com- 
prehend those whom it took pains to ex- 
clude. The true explanation of the rule 
is rather this : that the whole covenant, 
taken together, binds to both covenantees, 
and not to either of them alone, though 
separately named in some of its words, 
by reason of the joint interest in the sub- 
ject-matter, of the action appearing on 
the face of the deed itself. Such being 
the state of the authorities, a special case 
was reserved from the assizes for the 
Court of Exchequer, where certain per- 
sons, with whom a covenant had been 
made, sued the covenantors upon it. 
The deed, being fully set out, was found 
to make a covenant with the plaintiffs for 
themselves and others ; and in Michaelmas 
Term, 1843, the court held, in strict con- 
formity with all the cases, that a non- 
suit ought to be entered, because those 
others had not been joined as plaintiffs 
in bringing the action, though the cove- 
nant declared on was, in its terms, made 
with them alone. But the plaintiff here 
places his whole reliance on some dicta 
which fell from the late Chief Baron and 
from Parke, B., applicable, not to that 
case, but only to the converse of it, 



CH. II.] OF JOINT PARTIES. * 17 

looked into, to ascertain who is really interested, * and who * 17 



which were represented as at variance 
with the old law. Unluckily, no refer- 
ence was made to Anderson v. Martin- 
dale, as the court, justly thinking the 
general rule too clear for argument, 
stopped the learned counsel who sup- 
ported it. Lord Abinger thought the 
rule plain and certain, and that it re- 
quired no authority : ' it is correctly 
stated by Mr. Preston ; ' he then cites 
the rule with the exception. Parke, B., 
also thinks the correct rule is laid down 
by Gibbs, C. J., in James v. Emery (5 
Price, 533), with the qualification stated 
by Mr. Preston. These learned judges 
could not intend to overrule Anderson v. 
Martindale (1 East, 497), which was 
not brought before them ; nor, if they 
did, could we agree to be bound by their 
extrajudicially declaring such an inten- 
tion where their decision itself pursued 
the doctrine of that case." — In Brad- 
burne v. Botfleld, 14 M. & W. 559, 572 
[1840], the matter was thus left by 
Baron Parke : " There is no occasion 
to refer to the cases relating to the rule 
of construction, as to covenants being 
joint or several, according to the inter- 
est of the parties, which is perfectly well 
established. In the ease of Sorsbie v. 
Parke (12 M. & W. 146), Lord Abinger 
and myself, on referring to the estab- 
lished rule, as laid down by Lord Chief 
Justice Gibbs, in the case of James v. 
Emery (2 Moore, 195), approved of Mr. 
Preston's qualification and explanation 
of it in his edition of the Touchstone, 
166, namely, that, if the language of the 
covenant was capable of being so construed, 
it was to be taken to be joint or several, 
according to the interest of the parties 
to it. Mr. Preston adds, that the gen- 
eral rule proposed by Sir Vicary Gibbs, 
and to be found in several books, would 
establish that there was a rule of law too 
powerful to be controlled by any inten- 
tion, however express, and I consider such 
qualification to be perfectly correct, and 
at variance with no decided case, as it 
is surely as competent for a person, by 
express joint words, strong enough to 
make a joint covenant, to do one thing 
for the benefit of one of the covenantees, 
and another for the benefit of another, 
as it is to make a joint demise where it 
is for the benefit of one. I mention this, 
because the Court of Queen's Bench, 
in the case of Hopkinson v. Lee (14 
Law J. (n. b.) Q. B. 104), have supposed 
that Lord Abinger and myself had sanc- 
tioned some doctrine at variance with 
the case of Anderson v. Martindale, and 



Slingsby's case, which it was far from 
my intention, and I have no doubt from 
Lord Abinger's, to do ; it being fully es- 
tablished, I conceive, by those cases, 
that one and the same covenant cannot 
be made both joint and several with the 
covenantees. It may be fit to observe, 
that a part of Mr. Preston's explanation, 
that by express words a covenant may 
be joint and several with the covenant- 
ors or covenantees, notwithstanding the 
interests are several, is inaccurately ex- 
pressed; it is true only of covenantors, 
and the case cited from Salkeld, p. 393, 
relates to them; probably Mr. Preston 
intended no more, and I never meant to 
assent to the doctrine that the same cov- 
enant might be made, by any words, 
however strong, joint and several, where 
the interest was joint ; and it is this part, 
I apprehend, of Mr. Preston's doctrine, 
to which the Court of Queen's Bench 
objects. I think it right to give this 
explanation, that it may not be supposed 
that there is any difference on this point 
with the Court of Queen's Bench." — 
Afterwards [1849] came the case of 
Keightley v. Watson, 3 Exch. 716. That 
was an action of covenant by one plain- 
tiff on a deed executed by one Dobbs 
of the first part, the plaintiff of the 
second part, and the defendants of the 
third part. The deed, after reciting that 
Dobbs had agreed to purchase certain 
land of the plaintiff, which same land 
Dobbs had agreed to sell to the defend- 
ants, stated that it was thereby cove- 
nanted by each party thereto, that Dobbs 
should sell, and the defendants should 
purchase, the said land, at £7,335, £900 
to be paid upon the execution of the 
deed, and £6,435 on the 27th of Novem- 
ber, 1851. The deed then contained the 
following covenant : " And the defend- 
ants for themselves, their heirs, &e., 
hereby covenant, with the said plain- 
tiff, his executors, &c, and, as a sepa- 
rate covenant with the said Dobbs, his 
executors, &c, that they the said de- 
fendants, and their heirs, &c, shall, on 
performance of the covenant and agree- 
ment, hereinbefore contained, on the 
part of the said Dobbs, pay to the said 
plaintiff, his executors, &c, or to the said 
Dobbs, his executors, &c, in case the 
said plaintiff, his executors, &c, shall 
then have been paid his or their pur- 
chase-money, payable, &c, the sum of 
£6,435, being the remainder of the said 
purchase-money, on or before the 27th 
November, 1851. And further, that the 
said defendants, their heirs, &c, shall in 

17 



18 



THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. 



[book I. 



* 18 has sustained the damage arising from a breach of * the con- 
tract, and whether such damage was joint or several. (&) 



the mean time, and until the whole 
of the said sum of .£(J ; 43o shall be paid 
off, pay to the said plaintiff, his execu- 
tors, &c, interest on so much of the 
purchase-money as shall from time to 
time remain unpaid, at the rate of £o 
per cent per annum, from the date of 
these presents," &c. Held, that plain- 
tiff might probably sue alone for interest 
on the unpaid portion of the purchase- 
money, the covenant being several. 
Pollock, C. B., said : " I am of opinion 
that in this case trie plaintiff is entitled 
to the judgment of the court. I con- 
sider that the inquiry really is as to the 
true meaning of the covenant, at the 
same time bearing in mind the rule, — 
a rule which I am by no means willing 
to break in upon, — that the same cove- 
nant cannot be treated as joint or sev- 
eral at the option of the covenantee. If 
a covenant be so constructed as to be 
ambiguous, that is, so as to serve either 
the one view or the other, then it will 
be joint, if the interest be joint, and it 
will be several, if the interest be sev- 
eral. On the other hand, if it be in its 
terms unmistakably joint, then, although 
the interest be several, all the parties 
must be joined in the action. So, if the 
covenant be made clearly several, the 
action must be several, although the in- 
terest be joint. It is a question of con- 
struction. What then, in this case, did 
the parties mean *? The words of the cove- 
nant are, ' And the said R. Watson, H. 
Watson, and J. Smith, for themselves, 
their heirs, executors, and administrators, 
thereby covenant with the said W. T. 
Keightley, his executors, administrators, 
and assigns, and as a separate covenant 
with the said A. A. Dobbs, his executors, 
administrators, and assigns, that they 
will do so and so. If I am to put a con- 



struction upon that, I should say that it 
is intended to be a several or separate 
covenant. In the case of Hopkinson v. 
Lee, it seems to have been understood at 
one time by this court, that there were 
joint words. There are certainly none. 
But the nature of the interest, upon look- 
ing into that particular case, may possi- 
bly justify that decision. The words of 
this instrument are several, and its terms 
disclose a several interest ; the covenant, 
therefore, must be construed according 
to the words as a several covenant ; and 
it appears to me that the words used by 
the parties were intended to create such 
a covenant. I think, therefore, that the 
plaintiff is entitled to sue alone." Parke, 
B., in the course of an opinion of consid- 
erable length, said : " The rule that cove- 
nants are to be construed according to 
the interests of the parties, is a rule of 
construction merely, and it cannot be 
supposed that such a rule was ever laid 
down as could prevent parties, whatever 
words they might use, from covenanting 
in a different manner. It is impossi- 
ble to say that parties may not, if they 
please, use joint words, so as to express 
a joint covenant, and thereby to exclude 
a several covenant, and that, because a 
covenant may relate to several interests, 
it is therefore necessarily not to be con- 
strued as a jaint covenant. If there be 
words capable of two constructions, we must 
look to the interests of the parties which 
they intended to protect, and construe 
the words according to that interest. I 
apprehend that no case can be found at 
variance with that rule, unless Hopkin- 
son v. Lee may he thought to have a 
contrary aspect. During the course of 
the argument in Bradburne v. Botfleld, I 
certainly was under the impression, from 
reading the case of Hopkinson v. Lee, 



(k) In Windham's case, 5 Rep. 7, it 
is stated that joint words in a grant are 
sometimes taken severally. 1. In respect 
of the several interests of the grantors ; 
as if two tenants in common, or several 
tenants, join in a grant of a rent-charge, 
yet in law this grant shall be several, al- 
though the words are joint. 2. In respect 
of the several interests of the grantees, 
&c. 19 H. 0, 63, 64. A warranty made 
to two of certain lands shall enure as 
several warranties, in respect that they 
are severally seized, the one of part of 
the lands, and the other of the residue in 

18 



severalty. 6 E. 2 ; Covenant, Br. 49. 
[But this case does not seem to be law. 
See note (m) supra } A joint covenant 
taken severally in respect of the several 
interests of the covenantees. Vide 16 
Eliz. Dyer, 337, 338 [infra, note (c)], be- 
tween Sir Anthony Cook and Watton, a 
good case. 3. In respect that the grant 
cannot take effect but at several times. 
4. In respect of the incapacity and im- 
possibility of the grantees to take jointly. 
6. In respect of the cause of the grant, or 
ratione subjected material. 6. Nc res destruatur 
et ut evitetur absurdum. 



CH. II.] 



OF JOINT PARTIES. 



•19 
•19 



^ * The nature, and especially the entireness (0 of the con- 
sideration, is of great importance in determining whether 
the promise be joint or several ; for if it moves from many persons 
jointly, the promise of repayment is joint ; (m) but if from many 
persons, but from each severally, there it is several, (w) Where 
the payment is in the first place of one sum in solido, and this 
is afterwards to be divided among the payees, there, generally, 



that there were in that case words capa- 
ble of such a construction as to make the 
covenant a joint covenant. If that had 
been so, then the words subsequently in- 
troduced would not have made it several, 
unless there had also been an interest in 
respect of which it could he several, ac- 
cording to the rule referred to by the 
Lord Chief Baron, as laid down in Slings- 
by's case, that it is not competent to the 
court to hold the same covenant joint or 
several at the option of the covenantee." 
Rolfe, B., gave the following opinion, 
which is cited at length as containing 
within a small compass a clear and able 
review of the whole subject: "I am of 
the same opinion. It seems to me that 
the question turns entirely upon the rule, 
as stated by my Brother Parke, which 
was distinctly laid down by this court in 
the cases cited, and in which I fully con- 
cur. It appears to me that Mr. Preston's 
suggestion was perfectly well founded, 
that the rule in Slingsby's case was not a 
rule of law, but a mere rule of construc- 
tion. Prom that case it appears, that, if 
a covenant be cum quolibet et qualibet eortim, 
that may be either a joint or several cove- 
nant, and it will depend upon the context 
whether it is to be taken as a joint or 
several ; but it cannot be both. The rule 
given in Slingsby's case is not very satis- 
factory to my mind ; namely, with regard 
to the difficulty which arises as to the 
proper person to recover damages. If a 
party choose to enter into a covenant 
which creates such a difficulty, I do not 
see what the court has to do with it. It 
is clear that parties can so contract by 
separate deeds ; why, then, should they 
not be able equally to do so by separate 
covenants in the same deed ? If they so 
word one covenant as to make it a joint 
and separate covenant, had it not been 
otherwise decided, I confess I should 
have seen nothing extraordinary in hold- 
ing that if they choose so to contract as 
to impose upon themselves that burden, 
and state it to be both joint and several, 
the court ought so to construe it. But 
Slingsby's case has laid down the oppo- 
site rule. I take it, that from that time, 



the rule has always been, — whether dis- 
tinctly expressed or not, it is not neces- 
sary to consider, — but the rule has been 
that you are to look and see from the 
context what the parties meant. Apply- 
ing that rule here, I see no doubt about 
the question. They have said, in terms, 
that it is to be a separate covenant. Ac- 
cording to the other construction, if 
Dobbs had satisfied Keightley, and Dobbs 
had died, Keightley might have to sue 
for the money coming to Dobbs, and nice 
versa ; or, suppose Dobbs had not satisfied 
Keightley, and Keightley had died, Dobbs 
would have had to sue for the money 
coming to Keightley's representatives. 
The parties have expressed themselves in 
words showing it was to be a separate 
covenant with each, and I think we 
should so hold it ; consequently the plain- 
tiff is entitled to our judgment." Plait, 
B., concurred in the judgment. — Prom 
the whole we may gather that the Court 
of Exchequer maintain the general prin- 
ciple that it is competent for the parties 
to make the contract, by express words, 
what they please, as well with respect 
to the joinder of parties as with respect 
to any other legal quality of the con- 
tract. The rule, carried to its extent, 
would permit the making of a covenant 
joint, or several, or joint and several, as to 
the covenantors ; and joint, or several, or 
joint and sevtral, as to the covenantees. 
But the Court of Exchequer add that the 
rule is to be taken with this qualification, 
namely, that one of the six cases above 
enumerated is excluded by the doctrine 
(settled, perhaps, on authority rather than 
principle), that no covenant can be joint 
and several as to the covenantees. Of course 
it is not to be doubted that in this respect 
all contracts, whether under seal or not, 
are governed by the same principles. 

{1) Chanter v. Leese, 5 M. & W. 698, 
701 ; 1 Roll. Abr. 31, pi. 9. 

(m) Ivans v. Draper, 1 Roll. Abr. 31, 
pi. 9 ; Winterstoke Hundred's case, Dyer, 
370, a. But see Jones o. Robinson, 1 
Exch. 454, infra, note (c). 

(n) Bell v. Chaplain, Hardres, 321. 

19 



* 20 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

* 20 the * interest of the payees is joint ; (o) but where the firtst 

payment is in several sums among the several payees, there, 
generally, their interest is several, (p) So if a sum in solido is 
advanced to one by many persons, the promise of repayment is a 
promise to all jointly ; (q) but if several sums are advanced sepa- 
rately by each, there the promise is to each severally, (r) And 
if the several persons raise the sum by separate and distinct con- 
tribution ; but, when raised, it is put together and advanced as 
one sum, there the promise of repayment is to all jointly, (s) 

Both a joint obligation or right, and a several obligation or 
right may coexist ; for there may arise from the same contract, 
one joint duty to all, and also several duties to each of the 
parties. (£) 

In analogy with the rule in the case of contracts, it is well es- 
tablished, that there can be no joint action for an injury, unless 
that injury be a joint injury to the plaintiffs. Therefore husband 
and wife cannot sue jointly for assault and battery of them, or for 
slander of them, (w) 

Whatever rule be adopted as the leading principle of construc- 
tion, the question whether the right created by a contract is joint 
or several, must be left in any particular instance so much to 
mere authority, that we close the subject with a reference to the 
decisions collected in the note, (w) 

(o) Lane v. Drinkwater, 5 Tyr. 40 ; action was held properly brought ; where 

Byrne v. Fitzhugh, id. 54. it was held that a several action should 

(p) Thomas and , Styles, 461. have been joint ; where a several action 

(q) May v. May, 1 C. & P. 44. Money was held properly brought ; where it was 

advanced on the joint credit of two par- held that a joint action should have been 

ties may be recovered by them in a joint several : — 

action against the person for whose ben- 1. Where a joint action was held properly 

efit it was paid. Osborne v. Harper, 5 broui/ht. 

East, 225. Wakefield & Bingley v. Brown, 

(r) Brand v. Boulcott, 3 B. & P. 235. 9 Q. B. 209. Covenant. Bingley, being 

(s) May v. May, 1 0. & P. 44. owner of a term of sixty-one years, 

(() Story v. Richardson, 6 Bing. N. C. granted an annuity to Samuel W., and 

123 ; Peckham v. North Parish in Haver- for securing payment, assigned the terra 

hill, 16 Pick. 274. (wanting one day) to Robert W. By 

(u) 9 Ed. 4, 51 ; Cole ». Turner, 6 indenture, reciting these facts, Robert 

Mod. 149. The husband should sue alone W., at the request of Samuel W. and 

for the injury to him, and the husband of Bingley, demised, and Bingley de- 

and wife should sue jointly for the injury mised and confirmed the premises to 

to her. Gazinsky et ux. v. Colburn, 11 Sophia B., at a rent payable to Samuel 

Cush. 10. W., while the premises remained sub- 

(v) It is attempted in this note to col- ject to the annuity, and afterwards to 

lect at least the most important cases in Bingley. Sophia B. covenanted to and 

which the question of the propriety of with Samuel W. and Robert W., and 

the joinder of plaintiffs has been passed their respective executors, &c, and also 

upon. These cases fall, it is evident, with and to Bingley, his executors, &c, 

within one of four classes : Where a joint to pay the rent, while the premises were 

20 



CH. II.] 



OP JOINT PARTIES. 



21 



•SECTION II. 



21 



OP SOME INCIDENTS OP JOINDEE. 



Parties are not said to be joint in law, merely because they 
are connected together in some obligation or some interest 



eubject to the annuity, to Robert [sic] 
W., and afterwards to Bingley, and also 
to make certain repairs. The action 
was upon the covenant to repair. Held, 
on demurrer, that Samuel W., being 
dead, Robert W. and Bingley could sue 
jointly. — Rose b. Poulton, 2 B. and 
Ad. 822. Covenant. Demurrer. The 
covenant declared upon was, in terms, 
with the plaintiffs and G., jointly and 
severally. G. was also one of the cove- 
nantors, but was dead at the time of the 
bringing of the action. The court held, 
that whether or not one of the cove- 
nantees could, if he had chosen, have 
sued separately, the action, as brought, 
was well maintainable. — Pease v. 
Hiest, 10 B. & C. 122. A, wishing to 
obtain credit with his bankers, in 1817, 
prevailed upon three persons to join 
him in a promissory note, whereby 
they jointly and severally promised to 
pay the bankers or order £300. Upon 
two of the partners retiring from the 
banking-house, a balance was struck 
between the old and new firm, and the 
promissory note was delivered to the 
new firm, but not indorsed to them. 
Held, that the action was well brought 
in the name of the surviving members 
of the old firm. — Kitchin v. Buckley, 
T. Raym. 80 ; 1 Lev. 109 ; s. o. 1 Sid. 
157; nom. Kitchin v. Compton. Cove- 
nant for repairs against lessee for years. 
One Randall demised the tenement to 
the defendant, and afterwards granted 
a moiety of the reversion to Kitchin, 
and afterwards the other moiety to 
Knight. Kitchin and Knight brought 
this action jointly. After verdict for 
the plaintiffs, it was moved in arrest of 
judgment, that the plaintiffs, being ten- 
ants in common, ought not to join. But 
the court held that the action was prop- 
erly brought, and said : " This is a per- 
sonal action merely, in which tenants 
in common may join." — Vaux v. Dra- 
per, Styles, 156, 203 ; 1 Roll. Abr. 31, pi. 
9. Assumpsit. The several cattle of the 
two plain iffs having been distrained, 
defendant, in consideration of £10 paid 



to him by the plaintiffs, promised to pro- 
cure the cattle to be redelivered to them. 
Held, on motion in arrest of judgment, 
that the joint action was good. Rolle, 
C. J., said : " The consideration given is 
entire, and cannot be divided, and there 
is no inconvenience in joining the action 
in this case ; but if one had brought the 
action alone, it might have been question- 
able." Jerman, J., dissented, and thought 
several promises should be intended. 

American Cases. — Smith v. Tall- 
cott, 21 Wend. 202. In an agreement 
under seal for the sale of lands, hus- 
band, wife, and trustee of the wife, 
were parties of the first part. The 
trustee did not execute the deed — 
though by an indorsement on the back 
(under seal) he bound himself to do 
what should be necessary on his part 
to carry the contract into effect. Held, 
that an action against the parties of the 
second part was properly brought in 
the joint names of husband, wife, and 
trustee. — Pearson v. Parker, 3 N. H. 
366. Plaintiffs, being sureties for de- 
fendant, discharged the debt, in part, 
with money raised upon the joint note 
of the plaintiffs, and in part with their 
joint note given directly for the resi- 
due. Held, that their action against the 
principal debtor was well brought joint 
ly. — Wright v. Post, 3 Conn. 142. , 
Twenty persons, desirous to support a 
public right of fishery, entered into an 
agreement to defend such right through 
a trial at law, each promising to pay his 
proportion of the expense to such of 
them as should be sued for occupying 
the fishery. Three of them were sued 
jointly, and, after an unsuccessful de- 
fence, each paid from his private funds 
one-third part of the execution. Held, 
that these three could maintain a joint 
action against a fourth, to recover his 
twentieth part of the expense incurred ; 
the joint liability of the plaintiffs, coupled 
with defendant's promise, and not the pay- 
ment of the money, being the cause of 
action. — Haughton v. Bayley, 9 Ired. 
L. 337. The two plaintiffs, each out of 
21 



22 



THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



22 * which is common to them both. They must be so con- 
nected as to be in some measure identified. They have not 



his own stock, delivered goods to defend- 
ant, to be peddled, and took a bond, pay- 
able to themselves jointly, for the faithful 
accounting therefor. Held, that they 
could maintain a joint action upon 
the bond, notwithstanding their several 
interests. See also Doe d. Campbell, 
r. Hamilton, 13 Q. B. 077; Beer v. 
Beer, 9 E. L. & E. 468 ; JIagnay v. Ed- 
wards, 20 id. 264; Arden v. Tucker, 4 

B. & Ail. 815; Powis i\ Smith, 5 B. & 
Aid. 800; Wallace v. McLaren, 1 Man. 
& li. 510; Townsend v. Neale, 2 Camp. 
100; Osborne v. Harper, 5 East, 225; 
Miilgley v. Lovelace, Carth. 289; Yate 
v. Routes, 1 Bulst. 25 ; Clement r. Hen- 
ley, 2 Roll. Abr. 22 (F), pi. 2; Parker 
i'. Greg!,', 3 Foster (N. H.), 416; Saun- 
ders u. Johnson. Skin. 401. 

2. /;/ the following cases it was held that 
a screed 'iclio/i should have been joint. 

Lucas p. Beale, 20 Law jour. (n. 8.) 

C. P. 134, 4 E. L. & E. 358. Assump- 
sit. The plaintiff, acting on behalf of 
the members of an orchestra, to which 
he himself belonged, signed a proposal, 
" on behalf of the members of the or- 
chestra," to continue their services, pro- 
vided the defendant would guarantee 
certain salary then due to them. The 
defendant accepted this proposition, but 
failed to pay the salary due. The plain- 
tiff alone brought an action for the 
whole money due to himself and the 
rest, and stated the contract to be with 
himself and the rest. The jury found 
that he acted on behalf of himself as 
well as the rest, field, that the con- 
tract was joint, and that he could not 
recover. — Lockiiart ". Barxard, 14 
M. & W. 074. Assumpsit. A hand-bill, 
relating to a stolen parcel, offered a 
reward to " whoever should give such 
information as should lead to the early 
apprehension of the guilty parties." The 
informal ion was communicated first by 
plaintiff to C. in conversation, after- 
wards to a constable by plaintiff and C. 
jointly. _ Held, that C. ought to have 
joined in the action for the reward. — 
Hopkinson r. Lee, (! Q. B. 904 [For 
an abstract of this case, and for the com- 
ments made upon it by the Court of 
Exchequer, see note (/) sujira.] — Byrne 
v. Fitziiugii, 5 Tyr. 54 ; s. c. 1 C , M. & R. 
013. Before Puttesou, J., and Gurnet/, 
li. The agreement of defendant was 
that, in consideration of plaintiff and B. 
using their endeavors to charter ships 
and procure passengers on board of 

22 



them, and not engaging with any other 
emigrant broker, they, the defendants, 
undertook to pay plaintiff and B. a com- 
mission of £5 per cent on the amount 
of the net passage-money made by the 
ships, one-half to be paid to plaintiff, 
and the other half to B. ; Lane v. Drink- 
water, being cited, held, that plaintiff, 
suing without B., should be non-suited. 
— Hatsall v. Griffith, 4 Tyr. 487. 
A broker was employed to sell a ship 
belonging to three part-owners, two of 
whom communicated with him. To 
them he paid their shares of the pro- 
ceeds of the sale; but, after admitting 
the third part-owner's share to be in his 
hands, refused to pay it to him without 
the consent of the other two. An ac- 
tion of assumpsit having been brought 
by the third part-owner for the share, 
held, that he was not entitled to recov- 
er. — Petrie v. Bury, 3 B. & C. 353. 
Covenant. Demurrer. The covenant 
declared upon was with the plaintiff 
and two others, for the use of a third 
party. The declaration averred that 
the two other covenantees had never 
sealed the deed. /Lid, notwithstand- 
ing, that as all might sue, all must sue, 
and that the declaration was bad. — 
Soutiicote v. Hoare, 3 Taunt. 87. 
Covenant upon an indenture of three 
parts. Held, on demurrer, that a cove- 
nant with A and B, and with every of 
them, is joint, though A is party of the 
first part, and B party of the second 
part, to the deed. — Guidon v. Rob- 
son, 2 Camp. 302. Action by the draw- 
er and payee of a bill of exchange 
against the acceptor. The bill sued 
upon was drawn payable to Guidon & 
Hughes, under which firm the plaintiff 
traded. There was no one associated 
with him as partner ; but he had a clerk 
named Hughes, and Lord Ellenhorough 
held that such clerk should have been 
joined. — Slint.sby's Cask, 5 Rep. 18 
b. ; s. c. 3 Leon. 160 ; s. o. 2 Leon. 47 ; 
s. c. Jenk. Cent. 262. R. B. by deed cov- 
enanted with four persons and their as- 
signs, et ad it rum quolibet eorum, that he 
was lawfully and solely seized of a rec- 
tory. Two of the covenantees brought 
covenant against 1). B. and held ill, be- 
cause it was a joint covenant, and the 
others ought to have joined. The court 
said : " When it appears by the decla- 
ration that every of the covenantees 
hath, or is to have, a several interest or 
estate, there, when the covenant is 



CH. II. J 



OF JOINT PARTIES. 



23 



Several and * respective shares, which being united make * 23 
a whole ; but these together constitute one whole, which, 



made with the covenantees, et cum quo- 
libet eorum, these words, cum quolilet 
eorum make the covenant several in 
respect of their several interests. As 
if a man by indenture demises to A 
black acre, to B white acre, to C green 
acre, and covenants with them, and 
quolibet eorum, that he is lawful owner 
of all the said acres, &c, in that case in 
respect of the said several interests, by 
the said words et cum quolibet eorum, the 
covenant is made several ; but if he de- 
mises to them the acres jointly, then 
these words, cum quolibet eorum, are void, 
for a man by his covenant (unless in 
respect of several interests), cannot 
make it first joint and then make it sev- 
eral by the same or the like words, cum 
quolibet eorum ; for, although sundry per- 
sons may bind themselves et quemlibet 
eorum, and so the obligation shall be 
joint or several at the election of the 
obligee, yet a man cannot bind himself 
to three, and to each of them, to make 
it joint or several at the election of sev- 
eral persons for one and the same cause, 
for the court would be in doubt for 
which of them to give judgment, which 
the law would not suffer, as it is held in 
3 H. 6, 44 b." See also Bradburne v. 
Botfield, 14 M. & W. 559 ; Sorsbie v. Park, 
12 M. & W. 146 ; Lane v. Drinkwater, 5 
Tyr. 40, 1 C, M. & R. 599; English v. 
Blundell, 8 C. & P. 332; Decharms b. 
Horwood, 10 Bing. 526 ; Hill v. Tucker, 
1 Taunt. 7 ; Anderson !'. Martindale, 1 
East, 497 ; Spencer v. Durant, Comb. 
115; Thimblethorp v. Hardesty, 7 Mod. 
116; Chanter v. Leese, 4 M. & W. 200; 
Wetherell v. Langston, 1 Exch. 634 ; Foley 
v. Addenbrooke, 4 Q. B. 197 ; Teed v. Ell- 
worthy, 14 East, 210 ; Scott v. Godwin, 
1 B. & P. 67. 

American Cases. — Sweigakt i\ Berk, 
8 S. & R. 308. Seven of ten joint obli- 
gees brought an action (living the other 
obligees) against the obligor. Held that 
it could not be maintained. Semble, an 
action could not have been maintained 
by one, although brought m respect ot 
separate interests. — Doe ». Halsey, lo 
Johns. 34. Assumpsit by T). & D., part- 
ners, against H. M. being shown to be a 
member of the firm, held, that he ought 
to have been joined as plaintiff.— bras 
v. Harris, 8 B. Mon. 55. Debt on a penal 
bond. The bond was executed by the 
defendant in favor of the plaintiff and 
several others, as joint obligees. Ihe 
plaintiff brought the action alone to re- 



cover the penalty. Held, that the action 
was not well brought. Aliter, if the ac- 
tion had been covenant on the bond ; for 
in that case, so far as each of the obli- 
gees in the bond has a separate interest 
in the performance of its stipulations, 
the cause of action is several, and not 
joint. See Pearce v. Hitchcock, 2 Comst. 
388. — Tapscott v. Williams, 10 Ohio, 
442. Where lands descended to copar- 
ceners, with warranty, and they were 
evicted before severance, it was held that 
one of them could not sue alone on the 
warranty for his share of the damages. 

3. In the following cases a several action 
was held to be properly brought. 

Keigi-itley v. Watson, 3 Exch. 716. 
[For an abstract of this ease see note (/) 
supra.] — Jones v. Robinson, 1 Exch. 
454. The declaration stated that the 
plaintiff and A B carried on business in 
copartnership ; and in consideration that 
they would sell defendant their business, 
and become trustees for him in respect 
of all debts, &c, due to plaintiff and 
A B in respect thereof, defendant prom- 
ised plaintiff to pay him all the money 
he had advanced in respect of the co- 
partnership, and for which it was ac- 
countable to plaintiff, and also promised 
plaintiff and A B that he would dis- 
charge all the debts due from the plain- 
tiff and A B as such copartners, and all 
liabilities to which they are subject. 
The declaration then averred that plain- 
tiff and A B did sell the business to 
defendant and became trustees for him 
in respect of all debts, &c, due to plain- 
tiff and A B in respect thereof, and that, 
at the time of the promise, plaintiff had 
advanced a certain sum, for the non-pay- 
ment of which the action was brought. 
On motion in arrest of judgment, the 
defendant contended that the considera- 
tion moved from tlie plaintiff and A B 
jointly, and therefore (as the considera- 
tion is the essential part of a contract, 
without which the promise is nothing), 
A B should have been joined as co-plain- 
tiff ; but the court held that the separate 
interest of the plaintiff in the partner- 
ship fund was the consideration upon 
which the promise sued upon in this 
case was founded ; and, therefore, the 
rule for which the defendant contended 
did not apply. — Palmer v. Sparshott, 
4 Man. & G. 137. By an agreement, not 
under seal, between defendant of the 
one part, and plaintiff and F. of the other 
part — reciting that plaintiff and F. 
23 



24 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I 



* 24 whether it be an interest * or an obligation, belongs to alL 
Hence arises an implied authority to act for each other, 



had assigned certain property to defen- 
dant for .£150 apiece, and that it had 
been agreed that defendant should re- 
tain £50 out of each £150 — the defen- 
dant, in consideration of the two several 
sums of £50 and £50 so retained, agreed 
with plaintiff and F., their executors, 
&c, to indemnify plaintiff and F., and 
each of them, their heirs, executors, etc., 
and their, and eacli and every of their, 
estates and effects, from the costs of 
a certain action. Held, that plaintiff 
might maintain assumpsit upon this agree- 
ment without joining F. — Poole v. 
Hill, 6 M. & W. 835. Covenant. By 
articles of agreement, reciting that the 
defendant had contracted with J., as the 
agent of the plaintiff and the other 
owners of the property, for the purchase 
6f the lands therein mentioned, the de- 
fendant covenanted with the plaintiff, 
and the several other parties beneficially 
interested, to perform such contract by 
paying the purchase-money on a certain 
day, &c. I/eld, that this covenant was 
several, and that the plaintiff might sue 
alone for the non-payment of his share 
of the purchase-money, without joining 
the other parties beneficially interested. 
■ — Place v. Delegal, 4 Bing. N. C. 426. 
Assumpsit. One Evans, as attorney for 
plaintiffs, executors of Miers, having 
sold an estate, to a share of the proceeds 
of which W. was entitled as legatee, and 
defendant claiming W.'s share of such 
proceeds, under an agreement with W. 
plaintiffs paid the amount to defendant, 
on receiving from him a guaranty in 
these terms : " Mr. John Evans, and also 
Messrs. Place & Meahry [the plaintiffs], 
as the executors of the will of the late 
Mr. John Miers : In consideration of 
your having paid, &c, I hereby undertake 
to indemnify and save you and each of 
you harmless, &c. C. Delegal." Held, 
that plaintiffs might sue on this guar- 
anty without joining Evans. — Thicker 
v. Shepherd, 2 Chitt. 052. The plaintiff 
and one It., being insurance brokers 
and partners, effected n policy of in- 
surance on the defendant's ship. The 
premium was not paid to the underwri- 
ter till after R. had become bankrupt, 
when it was paid by the plaintiff alone 
out of his private property. The plain- 
tiff brought this action alone to recover 
the amount of the premium thus paid. 
Held, that the action was well brought. 
— Glossop v. Colman, 1 Stark. 25. As- 
sumpsit. Plaintiff had held out his son 

24 



as his partner, and had made out bills 
and signed receipts in their joint names ; 
but held by the court of K. B. that he 
was not precluded from maintaining his 
action by showing that his son was not in 
fact his partner. — Davenport v. Rack- 
strow, 1 C. & P. 89. Halloc/c, B., S. P. 
— Kell v. Nainisy, 10 B. & C. 20 S. P. 
" A party with whom the contract is 
actually made may sue without joining 
others with whom it is apparently made." 
Parte, J. — Garret !». Taylor, 1 Esp. 
Nisi Prius, 117. " Three persons had 
employed the defendant to sell some 
timber for them, in which they were 
jointly concerned. Two of them he had 
paid their exact proportion, and they had 
given him a receipt in full of all demands. 
The third now brought his action for 
the remainder, being his share ; and 
it was objected, that as this was a joint 
employment by three, one alone could 
not bring his action. But it was ruled 
by Lord Mansfield, that where there had 
been a severance as above stated, that one 
alone might sue. 4 G. 3 MS." — Kirk- 
man v. Newstead, 1 Esp. Nisi Prius, 117. 
" Action for the use and occupation of a 
house. It appeared that the house was 
the property of six tenants in common, 
to all of whom, except the plaintiff, the 
defendant had paid his rent ; and this 
action was for his share of the rent. It 
was objected that one tenant in common 
alone could not bring this action, but 
that all ought to join ; but Lord Mans- 
field overruled the objection, and the 
plaintiff^ recovered. Sin. Westm. M. 
177ii, MS." [The above two cases from 
Espinasse's Nisi Prius are of doubtful 
authority. See note to Hatsall v. Grif- 
fith, 4 Tyr. 488, and Walford on Parties, 
460.]— Wotton r. Cooke, Dyer, 337 b. 
Covenant. Three purchased lands jointly 
in foe and covenanted each with the others 
and their heirs, it eorum utrique, to convey 
to the heirs of those who happened to 
die first, their respective third parts. 
Two of the three having died, the heir 
of one of them brought this action 
against the survivor, alleging that he had 
not conveyed to him according to his 
covenant. It was moved, in arrest of 
judgment, that the covenant was joint, 
and not several, for the word " utrique " 
in Latin is conjunctim , and not separatim ; 
sed von allocatur, and judgment was given 
for the plaintiff. 

American Cases. — Hall v. Leigh, 8 
Cranch, 60. Plaintiff and P. consigned 



CH. II.] 



OP JOINT PAETIES. 



*25 



which is in some cases carried * very far. Thus, if several * 25 
plaintiffs sue for a joint demand, and the defendant pleads 



to defendant a quantity of cotton, of 
which they were joint owners. They 
gave defendant separate and different 
instructions for the disposition of their 
respective moieties, each distinctly con- 
fining his instructions to his own moiety. 
Held, reversing judgment of circuit court, 
that plaintiff could maintain an action 
for the violation of his instructions, with- 
out joining P. — Swett b. Patrick, 2 
Fairf. 179. Defendant conveyed land 
with warranty to A, B, and C. Held, on 
demurrer, that a several action on. the 
warranty was well brought by A. — 
Sharp v. Conkling, 16 Vt. 354. Cove- 
nant. By indenture between the plaintiff 
and others, of the first part, and the de- 
fendant of the other part, the defendant 
covenanted with the parties of the first 
part that he would turn from its natural 
channel a certain stream of water which 
flowed over the land of the covenantees ; 
and whereas, the water, when diverted, 
would pass over the land of the plain- 
tiff, that he- would so convey it as not 
to injure said land. The plaintiff brought 
the action without joining the other cove- 
nantees, and alleged breaches of both 
covenants. Held, that he might recover 
on the second covenant, but not on the 
first. Redjuld, J., said the court were will- 
ing to abide by the rule that, where the 
interest in the subject-matter secured 
by the covenant is several, although 
the terms of the covenant will more 
naturally bear a joint interpretation, 
yet, if they do not exclude the infer- 
ence of being intended to be several, 
they shall have a several construction 
put upon them. See also Catlin i\ Barn- 
ard, 1 Aik. 9 ; Harrold v. Whitaker, 10 
Jur. 1004; Mills v. Ladbrooke, 7 Man. 
& G. 218; Simpson o. Clayton, 4 Bmg. 
N. C. 758 ; Withers v. Bircham, 3 B. & C. 
254; Johnson v. Wilson, Willes, 248; 
Lloyd v. Archbold, 2 Taunt. 324; Story 
o. Richardson, 6 Bing. N. C. 123; Owston 
v. Ogle, 13 East, 538 ; Lahy v. Holland, 
8 Gill, 445. 

4. In the following cases it was held that 
a joint action should have been several. 

Seaton u. Booth, 4 A. & E. 528. 
Assumpsit. A, B, & C, being interested 
in certain lands, but having no common 
legal interest in any portion of them, 
agreed together, according to their re- 
spective interests, to put them up for 
sale, and the lands were so put up, under 
the direction of their agents, in lots. 
Each lot was described in a separate 



paper, containing the conditions of sale, 
in which it was stipulated, among other 
things, that if the purchaser should he 
let into the premises before payment of 
the purchase-money, he should be consid- 
ered tenant at will to the vendors, and 
pay interest at the rate of four per cent 
on the amount of purchase-money, as 
and for rent. Defendant bought four of 
the lots, and was let into possession, and 
held for several years without paying the 
purchase-money ; whereupon the vendors 
brought their joint action against him, 
to recover rent. Their declaration con- 
tained two counts : one upon the contract 
between the plaintiffs and defendant for 
the sale of the property; the other for 
use and occupation. Held, that the ac- 
tion could not be sustained on eitheF 
count ; not on the first, because no joint 
contract with all the plaintiffs was 
proved; not on the second, because no 
joint ownership in the plaintiffs, and 
occupation under them was proved. — 
Wilkinson v. Hall, 1 Bing. N. C. 713. 
Action of debt against lessee for double 
value, under stat. 4 Geo. II c. 28, for 
holding over. Held, that tenants in com- 
mon could not maintain such action 
jointly where there had been no joint 
demise. " If there be no joint demise, 
there must be several actions for rent, for 
a joint action is not maintainable except 
upon a joint demise." Tindal, C. J. — 
Servante v. James, 10 B. & C. 410. Cove- 
nant. The defendant, who was master 
of a vessel, covenanted with the plain- 
tiff and others, part-owners, and their 
several and respective executors, adminis- 
trators, and assigns, to pay certain moneys 
to them and to their and every of their 
several and respective executors, adminis- 
trators, and assigns, at a certain banker's, 
and in such parts and proportions as were 
set against their several and respective 
names. The action was brought by all 
the covenantees jointly. Held, that the 
covenant was several, and so the action 
not well brought, but each covenantee 
should have brought a separate action. 
— Graham v. Robertson, 2 T. E. 282. 
Plaintiffs, together with A & B, being 
owners of one ship, and the defendant of 
another, a prize was taken, condemned, 
and shared by agreement between them ; 
afterwards the sentence of condemnation 
was reversed, and restitution awarded, 
with costs, which was paid solely by the 
plaintiffs, A and B having in the mean 
time become bankrupts. An action could 

25 



26 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



* 26 in bar an accord and satisfaction with * one of the plaintiffs, 

but without any allegation that the other plaintiffs had 
authorized the accord and satisfaction, the plea is nevertheless 
good. (?c) For a release of a debt, or of a claim to damages, 
by one of many who hold this debt or claim jointly, is a full dis- 
charge of it, and this whether they hold this debt or claim in their 
own right, or as executors or administrators, (x) This has been 
extended to the case where the release is given by one of joint 
plaintiffs, who, although a party to the record, is not a party in 

interest, but whose name the actual parties in interest were 

* 27 obliged to use with their own in bringing the * action. (?/) 

Nevertheless, if in such a case the party taking the release, 
and pleading it in bar, is aware that the party giving it had no 
interest in the claim released, the court would disregard the 
release ; (z) and upon such facts as these the court have ordered 
the release to be given up and cancelled, (a) 

If two or more are jointly bound, or jointly and severally 



not be brought by the plaintiffs alone for 
a moiety of the restitution money and 
costs, because it was either a partnership 
transaction, when A and B ought to be 
joined ; or not, when separate actions 
should be brought by each of the persons 
paying. See also Smith v. Hunt, 2 Chitt. 
142 ; Brandon !\ Hubbard, 2 Br. & B. 11 ; 
Tippet v. Hawkey, 3 Mod. 3>3 ; Make- 
peace v. Coutes, 8 Mass. 451, overruled in 
Capen v. Barrows, 1 Gray, 370 ; Brand v. 
Boulcott, 3 B. & P. 235 ; Kelby v. Steel, 
6 Esp. 194. 

American Cuscs, — Bor.GS y. Curtin, 
10 S. & R. 211. Two firms, C. & B. and 
J. & D., having become sureties for A., 
gave their joint and several note for the 
debt of A. Held, that the two firms, on 
payment by them of the note, could not 
maintain a joint action against A., it not 
appearing that the payment was made 
out of a joint fund of the two firms. 
" The action of assumpsit must be joint 
or several, accordingly as the promise 
on which it is founded is joint or sev- 
eral. Where the promise is express, there 
can be little difficulty in determining 
to which class it belongs, as its nature 
necessarily appears on the face of the 
contract itself; and if it be joint, all to 
whom it is made must, or at least may 
sue on it jointly . . . But an imjjliid 
promise, being altogether ideal, and 
raised out of the consideration only by in- 
tendment of law, follows the nature of 
the consideration ; and as that is joint or 

26 



several, so will the promise be." Gibson, 
J. — Carthrae v. Brown, 3 Leigh, 98. 
C. covenanted with B. & J. that he 
would pay B. and J. $300, namely, to 
each of them one moiety thereof. Held, 
a several covenant, so that B., as the 
survivor of the two, could not maintain 
an action to recover the whole sura. 
— Uljier v. Cunningham, 2 Greenl. 117. 
Assumpsit for money had and received. 
Goods, belonging to some and not to all, 
of sundry joint debtors, were taken in ex- 
ecution and wasted. Held, that all the 
debtors could not maintain a joint action 
against the sheriff, and that those only 
ought to have sued whose property was 
actually wasted. 

(w) Wallace ». Kensall, 7 M. & W. 
264. 

(x) Bac. Abr. Release, D. K. ; Jacomb 
i'. Harwood, 2 Ves. Sen. 265 ; Murray 
v. Blatchford, 1 Wend. 583 ; Napier v. 
McLeod, 9 Wend. 1211 ; Decker ?\ Living- 
ston, 15 Johns. 470 ; Pierson v. Hooker, 3 
Johns. 68; Austin v. Hall, 13 Johns. 286; 
Bulkley v. Dayton, 14 Johns. 387 ; Bruen 
!'. Marquand, 17 Johns. 58 ; Helsey ». 
Fairbanks, 4 Mason, 206 ; Tuckerman 
i'. Newhall, 17 Mass. 581 ; Wiggin v, 
Tudor, 23 Pick. 444. 

(»/) Wilkinson v. Lindo, 7 M. & W. 
81 ; Gibson ». Winter, 5 B. & Ad. 96. 

(e) Gram o. Cadwell, 5 Cowen, 489; 
Legh v. Legh, 1 B. & P. 447. 

(a) Barker i\ Richardson, 1 Y. & J. 
362. 



CH. II.] OF JOINT PARTIES. * 28 

bound, and the obligee releases to one of them, all are dis- 
charged. (6) Formerly a very strict and technical rule was 
applied to these cases ; thus, where an action was brought against 
one of three who were bound jointly and severally, a plea in bar 
that the seal of one of the others was torn off was held good. 
And where three were bound jointly and severally, and the seals 
of two were eaten off by rats, the court inclined to think the 
obligation void against all. (c) But if the seals had remained on 
until issue were joined, their removal afterwards would not have 
avoided the bond, (d) 

Where a technical release, that is, a release under seal, is given 
to one of two joint debtors, and the other being sued, pleads the 
joint indebtedness and the release, it is no answer to say that the 
release was made at the defendant's request, and in consideration 
that he thereupon promised to remain liable for the debt, and 
unaffected by the release ; (e) for this would be a parol exception 
to a sealed instrument; or rather a parol renewal in part, of 
a sealed instrument which was wholly discharged. This being 
the reason, it should follow that only a release under seal should 
have the effect of excluding this answer ; and the weight of 
authority is certainly and very greatly in favor of this limita- 
tion. (/) It has, however, been held in this country, that 
a release which is not under seal, to * one of many joint * 28 
debtors, of his share or proportion of the debt, operates in 
law as a full discharge of all. (#) But though the word release 
be used, even under seal, yet if the parties, the instrument being 
considered as a whole and in connection with all the circum- 
stances of the case and the relations of the parties, cannot 
reasonably be supposed to have intended a release, it will be 
construed as only an agreement not to charge the person or party 
to whom the release is given, and will not be permitted to have 
the effect of a technical release ; (A) for a general covenant not to 

(6) Co. Lit. 232 a ; Bac. Abr. Release, (e) Brooks v. Stuart, 9 A. & E. 854; 

G • Vin Abr. Release, G. a ; Dean v. Parker v. Lawrence, Hob. 70. 
Newhall, 8 T. R. 168 ; Hutton v. Eyre, 6 (/) Shaw v. Pratt 22 Pick. 305; 

Taunt 289 ; Lacy v. Kynaston, 1 Ld. Walker v. McCulloch, 4 Greenl. 421 ; 

Raym 690 ■ s. c. 12 Mod. 551 ; Clayton Lunt v. Stevens, 24 Me. 534 ; Harrison v. 

v Kynaston Salk. 574 ; Milliken v. Close, 2 Johns. 448 ; Rowley v. Stoddard 

Brown, 1 Rawle, 391 ; Johnson v. Collins, 7 Johns. 210 ; McAUester v. Sprague, 34 

20 Ala 435 Me - 296 i Pond "■ Williams > 1 Gra y- 6S0 - 

(c) Bayly v. Garford, March, 125 ; (.?) Milliken v. Brown, 1 Rawle, 391. 

Seiton , Henson, 2 Show. 29. [h ) Solly v. Forbes 2 Br. 4 B^ 46 ; 

Id) Nichols v. Haywood, Dyer, 59 pi. McAUester v. Sprague, 34 Me. 296 ; Burke 

12 13 • Michaell v. Stockworth, Owen, 8. v. Noble, 48 Penn. St. 168. 
' ' 27 



* 29 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

sue is not itself a release of the covenantee, but is so construed 
by the law, to avoid circuity of action ; and a covenant not to sue 
one of many, who are jointly indebted, does not discharge one who 
is a joint debtor with the covenantee, nor in any way affect his 
obligation, (i) 

It may be added, though not strictly within the law of con- 
tracts, that the effect of a release of damages to one of two 
wrong-doers is the same as a release of debt ; it is in its opera- 
tion a satisfaction of the whole claim arising out of the tort, 
and discharges all the parties. (/) And in actions against two or 
more defendants for a joint tort, it has been said that damages 
should be assessed against all jointly for the largest amount 
which either ought to pay. (F) The true rule, however, must be, 
that the plaintiff is entitled to compensation for all the injury he 
has received, and for this there should be judgment against all 
who joined in doing the wrong. Several damages should not 
be assessed ; but if they are, the plaintiff may elect which sum 
he. will, and remitting the others, enter judgment for this sum 

against all. (7) 
* 29 * No release by the party injured, or claimant, has the 

effect of discharging all, although given but to one, unless it 
be a voluntary release ; for if one of two who owe jointly, either 
a debt or compensation for a wrong, be discharged by operation 
of law, without the concurrence or consent of the party to whom 
the debt or compensation is due, he does not hereby lose his right 
to enforce this claim against those not discharged, (m) But it is 
said, that if the discharge by operation of law is at the instance 
of the plaintiff, or be caused by him, it then operates as a dis- 
charge of the other debtors, (n) 

The legal operation of a release to one of two or more joint 
debtors may be restrained by an express provision in the instru- 
ment, that it shall not operate as to the other. For if a release 

(i) Lane v. Owings, 3 Bibb, 247; croft, 2 Str. 910; Onslow v. Orchard, 1 

Shed v. Pierce, 17 Mass. 628 ; Couch v. Str. 422 ; Brown v. Allen 4 Esp 158 ■ 

Mills, 21 Wend. 424 ; Rowley v. Stoddard, Austen v. Willward, Cro. E. 860 • Smith- 

7 Johns. 209 ; McLellan v. Cumberland son p. Garth, 3 Lev. 324. 
Bank, 24 Me. 566 ; Bank of Catskill v. (I) Johns v. Dodsworth, Cro. C. 192 ■ 

Messenger, 9 Cowen, 37 ; Durell v. Wen- Walsh v. Bishop, Cro. C. 243 ; Heydon's 

dell, 8 N. H. 369 ; Bank of Chenango v. Case, 11 Eep. 5 ; Halsey v. Woodruff 9 

Osgood, 4 Wend. 607 ; Lancaster v. Har- Pick. 555 ; Rodney v. Strode, Carth. 19. 
rison, 6 Bing. 731 ; s. c. 4 Mo. & P. 561 ; (m) Ward v. Johnson, 13 Mass. 152. 

Dean v. Newhall, 8 T. R. 168. „) Roberston v. Smith, 18 Johns. 

(?) Brown v. Marsh, 7 Vt. 320. 459 

(h) Bull. N. P. 15 ; Lowfleld v. Ban- 

28 



CH. II. J OP JOINT PARTIES. * 30 

containing such a proviso be pleaded by the other in bar to an 
action against both, a replication that the action is brought against 
both, only to recover of the other, is good. (0) 

If an action be brought against many, and to this an accord 
and satisfaction by one be pleaded in bar, it must be complete, 
covering the whole ground, and fully executed. It is not enough 
if it be in effect only a settlement with one of the defendants for 
his share of the damages ; nor would it be enough if it were only 
this in fact, although in form an accord and satisfaction of the 
whole claim, (p) 

Joint trustees are not necessarily liable for each other, or 
bound by each other's acts. Each is liable for the acts of others, 
only so far as he concurred in them, or connived at them, actively 
or negligently. Each is, in general, responsible only for money 
which he has himself received ; and if he signs a receipt with the 
others, because the receipt would have no force without his signa- 
ture, he may, at least in equity (unless he is himself in default), 
show that he did not receive the money, and thus remove or 
limit his liability ; but if this be not shown, the joint receipt 
is evidence against all. (9/) A trustee may thus * explain * 30 
his receipt, because he is obliged to join with the others in 
giving one ; but a co-executor not being under this necessity, it 
is said that he is bound by the receipt he signs, (r) And, in gen- 
eral, any co-executor or co-trustee who does jointly with the others 
any act which it is not necessary for him to do, is bound thereby 
to any party who shall suffer therefrom, (s) 

If two or more persons are bound jointly to pay a sum of 
money, and one of them dies, at common law his death not only 
severs the joinder, but terminates the liability which belonged to 
him, so that it cannot be enforced against his representatives ; (0 
but if they were bound jointly and severally, the death of one has 

(0) Twopenny v. Young, 3 B. & C. Eden, 360 ; Griffin v. Macaulay, 7 Gratt. 

211 ; s. c. 5 Dow. & R. 261 ; Lancaster v. 476 

Harrison, 4 Mo. & P. 561 ; s. c. 6 Bing (r) Sadler v. Hobbs 2 Br . Ch. 114 , 

726 ; Solly v. Forbes, 2 Br. & B. 38 ; North Chambers v. Minclun, 7 Ves. 198 

- ™f^ 13 Q- B. 536. See P o st , J^^^S^^^ 

f BruteTH W* * ' ^ S^S^ * B ^' ^ 
^Fellows .Mitchell, 1 P. Wm, 83, Hooper 2 Mass. 572 ; Yorks v. Peck, 14 
and Cox's note; Westly v. Clarke, 1 Barb. 644. 



* 31 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

not this effect, (u) If bound jointly, the whole debt becomes the 
debt of the survivors alone, and if they pay the whole, they can 
have at law no contribution against the representatives of the 
deceased, because this would be an indirect revival of a liability 
which death has wholly terminated, (v) But where the debt was 
made joint by fraud or error, equity will relieve by granting con- 
tribution ; as it will if the debt were for money lent to both and 
received by both, so that both actually participate in the bene- 
fit, (w) If the last survivor dies, leaving the debt unpaid, his rep- 
resentatives alone are chargeable, and have no contribution against 
the representatives of the other deceased obligor. 

Such were the rules of the common law ; but in most of the 
United States these rules are changed by statute. The represen- 
tatives of the deceased continue to be bound by his obligation. 
If the debtors were jointly bound, the creditor could bring but one 
action when all were alive, and that against all ; and then obtain- 
ing judgment and taking out execution against all, he might levy 
it on all or either as he chose, leaving them to adjust their 

* 31 proportion by contribution. After the death of a * joint 

debtor, the creditor cannot join the survivors and the repre- 
sentatives of the deceased in one action, even if the statute gives 
the creditor, where one of many joint debtors dies, the same 
remedy by action as if the contract were joint and several ; inas- 
much as an executor cannot be joined with the survivors in an 
action upon a contract which was originally joint and several, 
because one would be charged de bonis teslatoris, and the other de 
bonis propriis, which cannot be ; (x) but the creditor may elect 
which to sue. (j/) He may sue either, or both, in distinct actions, 
and may levy his executions upon either or both. But he can 
get, in the whole, only the amount of his debt ; and the survivors 
and the representatives of the deceased, or the representatives of 
all the debtors, if all are deceased, have against each other a claim 
for contribution, if either pay more than a due proportion. (2) 

If one or more of several joint obligees die, the right of action 
is solely in the survivors, and if all die, the action must be brought 

(«) Towers v. Moore, 2 Vern. 99 ; (x) Kemp v. Andrews, Carth. 171 ; 

May v. Woodward, Freem. 248. Hall v. Huffam, 2 Lev. 228. 

(w) See note (c), p. 32, post. (y) May !'. Woodward, Freem. 218; 

(w) Waters v. Riley, 2 Har. & G. 313 ; Enys v. Donnithorne, 2 Bur. 1190. 
Simpson ><. Vaughan, 2 Atk. 33 ; Yorks v. (z) Peaslee ». Breed, 10 N. H. 489 ; 

Peck, 14 Barb. 044. Baehelder v. Fiske, 17 Mass. 464. 

30 



CH. II.] 



OF JOINT PARTIES. 



32 



by the representatives of the last survivor, (a) But if the right 
under the contract be several, the representatives of the deceased 
party may sue, although the other obligees are living. (6) 



SECTION III. 



OF CONTRIBUTION. 



Where two or more persons are jointly, or jointly and severally, 
bound to pay a sum of money, and one or more of them pay the 
whole, or more than his or their share, and thereby relieve the 
others so far from their liability, those paying may recover from 
those not paying, the aliquot proportion which they ought 
to pay. (e) Some things have been said about this * right to * 32 
contribution, in the preceding section ; we add that the per- 
sons not paying, but being relieved from a positive liability by the 
payment of others who were bound with them, are held by the law 
as under an implied promise to contribute each his share to make 
up the whole sum paid, (d) And this rule applies equally to 



(a) Rolls v. Tate, Yelv. 177 ; Ander- 
son v. Martindale, 1 East, 497 ; Stowell's 
Admr. v. Drake, 3 Zabr. 310. 

(b) Shaw 7i. Sherwood, Cro. E. 729. 

(c) Harbert's Case, 13 Rep. 13 a, 15 b ; 
Layer v. Nelson, 1 Vern. 456 ; Toussaint 
v. Martinnant, 2 T. R. 104 ; Kemp v. Fin- 
den, 12 M. & W. 421 ; Browne i<- Lee, 6 
B. & C. 689 ; Sadler v. Nixon, 5 B. & Ad. 
936; Holmes v. Williamson, 6 M. & Sel. 
159 ; Blackett v. Weir, 5 B. & C. 387 ; 
Lanchester v. Tricker, 1 Bing. 201 ; Boul- 
ter v. Peplow, 9 C. B. 193. In Offley and 
Johnson's case, 2 Leon. 166 [1584], the 
Court of King's Bench held that one 
surety had no right at common law to 
recover contribution from a co-surety. 
" The first case of the kind in which the 
plaintiff succeeded was before Gould, J., 
at Dorchester." Buller, J., 2 T. R. 105. — 
The action for money paid to recover 
contribution is founded upon the old writ 
de contributione faciendd. Tindnl, C. J., 
Edger v. Knapp, 5 Man. & G. 758, citing 
Fitzherbert's Natura Brevium, 878, in 
the edition of 1794, p. 162. From the 
passage in Fitzherbert, as the English 
version is amended by the learned repor- 
ter of Edger v. Knapp, 5 Man. & G. 758, 
759, it seems that a parcener distrained 



upon is entitled to contribution without 
any express agreement on the part of her 
coparceners, while to entitle a. joint feoffee 
to contribution, under similar circum- 
stances, the other feoffees must have 
agreed to contribute. In analogy to the 
case of feoffees, one partner, in order to 
entitle himself to recover contribution of 
his copartner, is bound to show a contract 
independent of the relation of partner : 
Tindal, C. J., 5 Man. & G. 759. It is not 
sufficient for him to show that the pay- 
ment made on account of his copartners 
was made by compulsion of law. Sadler v. 
Nixon, b B. & Ad. 936. — In Hunter v. 
Hunt, 1 C. B. 300, plaintiff and defend- 
ant respectively were under-lessees, at 
distinct rents, of separate portions of 
premises, the whole of which were held 
under one original lease, at an entire 
rent. Plaintiff, having paid the whole 
under a threat of distress, brought an 
action against defendant to recover the 
proportion of rent due from him, as for 
money paid to his use : Held, that the 
action was not maintainable. See Sprin- 
ger v. Springer, 43 Penn. St. R. 518. 

(d) Contribution was at first enforced 
only in equity, and Lord Eldon regretted 
(not without reason, in the opinion of 

31 • 



33 



THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. 



[book I. 



those who are bound as original co-contractors, and to those who 
are bound to pay the debt of another or answer for his default, as 

co-sureties, (e) 
* 33 * The payment, to establish a claim for contribution, must 

be compulsory. Hence, if one of many who must pay a cer- 
tain debt, might show if sued that he was bound to pay only a cer- 
tain proportion and could defend himself against a further claim, 
his payment of more than his share gives him no claim for con- 
tribution, (f) But this does not mean that there must be a suit, 
but only a fixed and positive obligation. (^) The law requires no 
one to wait for a suit, if he has no defence ; and not always, even 
if he has a defence. (A) And if he resists a suit in which he has 

Baron Parke, 6 M. & W. 168), that courts 
of law ever assumed jurisdiction of the 
subject. It is universally admitted that 
the duty of contribution originates in the 
equitable consideration that those who 
have assumed a common burden ought to 
bear it equally ; from this equitable obli- 
gation the law implies a contract, since 
all who have become jointly liable may 
reasonably be considered as mutually 
contracting among themselves with ref- 
erence to the duty in conscience. Lord 
Eldon, Craythorne r. Swinburne, 14 Ves. 
ICO, 169 (adopting the view taken by 
Romilly arguendo) ; Campbell v. Mcsier, 4 
Johns. Ch. 334; Lansdale v. Cox, 7 Monr. 
401 ; Fletcher v. Grover, 11 N. H. 308 ; 
Johnson v. Johnson, 11 Mass. 359 ; Chaf- 
fee v. Jones, 19 Pick. 264; Horbach v. 
Elder, 18 Penn. 33 ; Powers v. Nash, 37 
Me. 322 ; Holmes v. Weed, 19 Barb. 128 ; 
Yates v. Donaldson, 5 Md. 389. — As- 
sumpsit for money paid is the usual ac- 
tion for enforcing contribution, and its 
propriety, before taken for granted, was 
confirmed in Kemp v. Finden, 12 M. & W. 
421. 

(e) The payee of a note, given by 
the defendant's testator as principal, 
neglected to present it to the executor 
within two years after the original grant 
of administration, and was by statute 
barred of his action against him. The 
plaintiff who signed the note as surety 
was held not to be discharged by the 
creditor's neglect to present his claim, 
and having paid the note was entitled 
to recover the amount of the executor. 
Sibley v. McAllaster, 8 N. H. 389. See 
also Chipman v. Morrill, 20 Cal. 130. 
Bachelder v. Fiske, 17 Mass. 464, was 
perhaps the earliest case where the ex- 
ecutor of a deceased co-debtor was held 
liable at law for contribution. The court 
there met the technical objections that 

32 



were raised, with the maxim, Ubi jus ibi 
remedium. And see McKenna i'. George, 
2 Rich. Eq. 15 ; Riddle v. Bowman, 7 
Foster (N. H.), 236. 

The surviving surety on a joint ad- 
ministration bond, on account of which 
he was compelled to make large pay- 
ments, sought to recover contribution 
from the representatives of a deceased 
co-surety : it was held, that in the case of 
a joint bond, the remedy at law survives 
against the surviving obligor, and is lost 
against the representatives of him who 
dies first; that where all the obligors are 
principals, equity will enforce contribu- 
tion though the remedy at law is gone, 
but in case of a surety it will not inter- 
fere to charge him beyond his legal lia- 
bility in the absence of fraud, accident, 
or mistake ; that although a surety who 
has paid the debt may compel his living 
co-surety to contribute, he has no such 
right either at law or in equity, against the 
estate of a deceased co-surety, because 
the liability of the creditor was termi- 
nated by his death and cannot be indi- 
rectly revived. Waters v. Riley, 2 Har. 
& G. 305. But see the able dissenting 
opinion of Archer, J. 

(f) Lucas v. Jefferson Ins. Co., 6 Cow. 
635. See also Mutual Safety Ins. Co. r. 
Hone, 2 Comst. 235. 

(.7) Pitt u. Purssord, 8 M. & W. 538; 
Maydew v. Forrester, 5 Taunt. 615; 
Davies v. Humphreys, 6 M. & W. 153 ; 
Lord Kenyan, Child o. Morley, 8 T. R. 
614; Frith i\ Sprague, 14 Mass. 455; 
Russell v. Failer, 1 O. St. 327. 

(h) It has been held that a surety pay- 
ing when he had a good defence, which 
defence, however, was not available to 
the principal if he had been sued by the 
creditor, may recover of the principal. 
Shaw v. Loud, 12 Mass. 461. 



CH. II.] 



OF JOINT PARTIES. 



*34 



no sufficient defence, lie cannot, generally, recover from the party 
for whom he pays, the costs of this suit, (i) And where a 
contract is broken, the surety may * pay without suit and * 34 
hold the principal, and a co-surety may pay and hold the co- 
sureties to contribution. (/) And the right to contribution arises 
although the co-surety paid the debt after giving a bond for it 
without the knowledge of the co-sureties. (&) 



(i) Whether contribution can be re- 
covered for the costs of a suit sustained 
in resisting payment, is left in doubt by 
the authorities. Lord Tenterden ruled 
against contribution for costs in Roach v. 
Thompson, Mo. & M. 489 ; Gillet v. Rip- 
pon, id. 406; Knight v. Hughes, id. 247 ; 
in the latter case intimating that there 
might be a distinction between a case be- 
tween two sureties (the case before him) 
and a case of surety against principal. 
But in Kemp v. Finden, 12 M. & W. 421, 
where the plaintiff and defendant had ex- 
ecuted as sureties a warrant of attorney, 
given as collateral security for a sum of 
money advanced on mortgage to the prin- 
cipals, and, on default being made by the 
principals, judgment was entered up on 
the warrant of attorney, and execution 
issued against the plaintiff, it was held 
that he was entitled to recover from the 
defendant as his co-surety a moiety of 
the costs of such execution. Parke, B., 
said : " They were costs incurred in a pro- 
ceeding to recover a debt for which, on 
default of the principals, both the sure- 
ties were jointly liable ; and the plaintiff 
having paid the whole costs, I see no rea- 
son why the defendant should not pay 
his proportion." — A surety to a note was 
subjected to costs in consequence of its 
non-payment by the principal; there was 
an agreement in writing to save him 
harmless ; held, that he was entitled to 
recover the costs so paid by him in an 
action against the principal. Bonney v. 
Seely, 2 Wend. 481. In Cleveland v. 
Covington, 3 Strob. L. 184, it was held 
that as a general rule a principal was 
liable for costs incurred by the surety, 
and was therefore incompetent as a wit- 
ness in an action against him. Where a 
judgment, recovered against an insolvent 
principal, and his two sureties, was paid 
by one of them, held, that he could recover 
of his co-surety one half of the costs. 
Davis !'. Emerson, 17 Me. 64. And in 
Fletcher ». Jackson, 23 Vt. 593, the right 
of a co-surety to recover costs and ex- 
penses is said to depend altogether upon 
the question -whether the defence was 
made under such circumstances as to be 
regarded as hopeful and prudent ; if so, 

VOL. I. 



the expenses of defence may always be 
recovered. — But not if the surety be 
notified that there is no defence. Beck- 
ley v. Munson, 22 Conn. 299. — In Board- 
man v. Page, 11 N. H. 431, where an 
action was commenced by the holder of a 
note against all the co-signers, and judg- 
ment was recovered against one only, it 
was held that upon payment of damages 
and costs of the judgment, the party 
against whom the judgment was recov- 
ered was not entitled to contribution from 
the other co-signers in respect to the 
costs — the same not being a burden 
common to all the co-signers of the 
note. — It would seem not unreasonable 
to conclude, notwithstanding the nisi 
prius decisions of Lord Tenterden, that 
where the party from whom contribu- 
tion is sought was at the time of the 
former action directly liable for the debt 
to the creditor, so that if the latter had 
chosen he might have been sued by him, 
contribution may be recovered for the 
costs of the judgment, though not per- 
haps for costs incurred in resisting pay- 
ment of the judgment. Yet in the late 
case of Henry v. Goldney, 15 M. & W. 
494, 496, an action ex contractu being 
brought against A, and he pleading in 
abatement the pendency of another ac- 
tion for the same cause against B, it was 
contended that the plea ought to be sus- 
tained, to prevent A from being twice 
vexed for the same cause ; but Alderson, 
B., observed : " How is A vexed by an 
action being brought against B t B can- 
not recover against A his proportion of the 
costs." 

(j) It has been held in Kentucky 
that the principal must be insolvent to 
render a co-surety liable to contribute to 
another who has paid the debt. Pearson 
v. Duckham, 3 Litt. 386 ; Daniel v. Bal- 
lard, 2 Dana, 296. But this is opposed 
to the prevailing doctrine. Cowell v. 
Edwards, 2 B. & P. 268 ; Odin v. Green- 
leaf, 3 N. H. 270. 

(/!) Dunn v. Slee, Holt, 399; where 
it was also held by Parke, J., that time 
given to one surety is no bar to an action 
afterwards by that surety against a co- 
surety. M 

t 33 



* 35 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

If a plaintiff in an action ex contractu recovers judgment and 
takes out an execution, a defendant upon satisfying the execution 
makes out a claim for contribution against other parties, by show- 
ing either that such parties were co-defendants in the action, or 
that they were jointly liable in fact for the debt which was 

* 35 made a cause of action against him alone. (I) But * in 

the latter case the joint liability must not be a liability as 
copartners, (m) 

At law a surety can recover from his co-surety only that co- 
surety's aliquot part, calculated upon the whole number, without 
reference to the insolvency of others of the co-sureties ; (n) but in 
equity it is otherwise, (o) 

If one co-surety takes security from the principal for his pro- 
portion of the burden, or for the whole, the other co-surety shall 
share in the benefit of it. (j?) 

The contract of contribution is a several contract. (q~) And 
hence a surety may release one of his co-sureties without barring 
his right of action against the rest ; for a release of one surety 
discharges the others only from such a proportion of the debt as 
they would be entitled to have recourse to the discharged party 
for, upon their payment of the whole debt, (r) But if two co-sure- 

(!) In Murray v. Bogert, 14 Johns. Cowell v. Edwards, 2 B. & P. 268. — Shaw, 
318, it was luiil that where A who claims C. J., Chaffee v. Jones, 19 Pick. 2(1.3 ; Cur- 
contribution of B & C, on the ground of rier v. Fellows, 7 Foster (N. H. ), 366. 
having paid a judgment, shows neither (o) Peter v. Rich, 1 Chanc. 34; Cow- 
that B & C were parties to the judgment, ell v. Edwards, 2 B & P. 268. — And in 
nor that the debt was a joint one, not aris- Vermont the rule of equity has been held 
ing out of a partnership transaction, he to be the rule of law also. Mills v. Hyde, 
must be nonsuited. The reporter's ab- 10 Vt. 50. So also, Henderson v. McDuf- 
stract seems incorrect, in so far as it rep- fee, 5 N. H. 38, but there the decision 
resents the court as holding that the mere went, partly at least, on the necessity of 
absence of proof that the defendants were the case, there being no court to adminis- 
parties to the judgment was fatal to the ter equitable relief. It has been decided in 
claim of contribution. Such a doctrine South Carolina, that co-sureties who are 
would lie directly in the face of Holmes not within the jurisdiction, as well as in- 
v. Williamson, 6 M. & Sel. 158 ; Burnell solvent co-sureties, are to be excluded in 
v. Minot, 4 Moore, 340; Boardman v. the calculation of the proportion to be 
Paige, 11 N. II. 431. contributed by those against whom pay- 

(m) Sadler c. Nixon, 5 B. & Ad. 936; ment can be enforced. McKenna v. 

Edgar r. Kiiapp, 5 Man. & G. 708 ; Mur- George, 2 Rich. Eq. 15. 
ray r. Bogert, 14 Johns. 318 ; Pearson v. (p) Miller !•. Sawyer, 30 Vt. 412; 

Skelton, 1 M. & W. 504, where the former Parliam v. Green, 64 N. C. 436. 
action was ex delicto. But where the ('/) Kelby !•. Steel, 5 Esp. 194; Gra- 

joint contractors were, together with ham v. Robertson, 2 T. R. 282; Brand v. 

many others, partners in a joint-stock Boulcott, 3 B. & P. 235 ; Birkley v. Pres- 

company, of which they were the con- grave, 1 East, 220 ; Parker v. Ellis, 2 

tract committee men, contribution was Sandf. 223. 

enforced between them on account of the (r) Crowdus v. Shelby, 6 J. J. Marsh, 

joint liability incurred by them as such 61 ; Fletcher v. Grover, 11 N. H. 368 ; 

committee. Boulter v. Peplow, C.B. 493. Fletcher v. Jackson, 23 Vt. 581. 

(n) Browne v. Lee, 6 B. & C. 689; 

U 



CH - IL ] OP JOINT PARTIES. * QQ 

ties pay the debt out of a joint fund, their right of action against 
the principal, and as it would seem against other co-sureties is 
joint, (s) 

_ The contract on which the assumpsit is founded dates from the 
time when the relation of co-surety or co-obligor is entered into; al- 
though the cause of action does not arise till the payment. 
* Hence the discharge of one of the joint debtors (by what- * 36 
ever cause) from his direct liability to the creditor, does not 
relieve him in law, any more than in equity, from his obligation to 
indemnify such of the remaining joint debtors as have borne 
more than their original proportion of the debt, (t) 

The undertaking which is to serve as the foundation of a claim 
of contribution must be joint, not separate and successive, (ft) 
Thus, the second indorser of a promissory note is not liable to the 
first, though neither be indorser for value ; (w) unless there is 
an agreement between the indorsers that, as between themselves 
there shall be co-sureties ; (y~) and this is true even if they are 
indorsers of accommodation paper, (w) And a guarantor cannot 
be compelled to contribute in aid of a surety, (x) 

Directors of an association who have authority to contract debts 
on the credit of members of the corporation, those debts being 
reasonable and necessary for carrying on the business, may have 
a bill in equity against the members for contribution towards the 
payment of these debts ; but not for costs and expenses of suits 
instituted against them by creditors of the association ; unless a 

(s) Osborne v. Harper, 5 East, 225; (v) Weston v. Chamberlain, 7 Cush. 

Boggs v. Curtin, 10 S. & R. 211 ; Pearson 404 ; Hogue v. Davis, 8 Gratt. 4. See 

v. Parker, 3 N. H. 366; Jewett v. Corn- also Westf all v. Parsons, 16 Barb. 645; 

forth, 3 Greenl. 107 ; Fletcher v. Jackson, Pitkin v. Flanagan, 23 Vt. 160. 
23 Vt. 593; Contra, Gould v. Gould, 8 (w) McNelly v. Patchin, 23 Mo. 40; 

Cowen, 168. But Kelby v. Steel, 5 Esp. Dunn v. Wade, id. 207. 
194, on the authority of which this case (x) Longley v. Griggs, 10 Pick. 121. 

seems to have been decided, is quite dis- In Harris v. Warner, 13 Wend. 400, it 

tinguishable from Osborne v. Harper. was held that the defendant, who was the 

(t) Accordingly where the liability of last of four sureties for H. in a joint 

one joint maker of a promissory note was promissory note, was not bound to make 

continued by partial payments within six contribution to the plaintiff who was the 

years, but the remedy of the holder against first surety and had paid the debt, the 

the other was barred by the statute of defendant having qualified his undertak- 

limitations, the debtor who continued lia- ing by adding to his signature the words 

ble could notwithstanding recover contri- " surety for the above names." In Keith 

bution from the other after paying the v. Goodwin, 81 "Vt. 268, it was held that 

debt. Peaslee v. Breed, 10 N. H. 489 ; the guarantor of a note on which sureties 

Boardman v. Paige, 11 N. H. 431 ; Howe had already signed, stood in relation to 

v. Ward, 4 Greenl. 195. those who had signed before him as 

(U) Prescott v. Perkins, 16 N. H. 805. surety for them jointly, not jointly with 

(u) McDonald v. Magruder, 3 Pet. them. 



470 ; Decreet v. Burt, 7 Cush. 651. 



35 



* 37 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

due regard to the interests of the association required a defence 
against those suits, (xx) 

The right of contribution exists against all who are sureties for 
the same debt, although their primary liability depends upon dif- 
ferent instruments. Where two bonds, for example, are given for 
the performance of the same duty, and A and B sign as sureties in 
one, and C and D in the other, A, if he pay the debt, may in equity 
recover one fourth of the whole from each of the rest, (jf) 

A party acquires a right to contribution as soon as he pays 
more than his share, but not until then ; (2) and conse- 
* 37 quently * the statute of limitations does not begin to run 
until then, (a) 

The law does not, generally at least, raise any such implied 
promise, or right to contribution, among wrong-doers, or where 
the transaction was unlawful. Qb) l If money be recovered in an 
action grounded upon a tort it gives no ground for contribu- 
tion, (c) Still, however, contribution is sometimes enforced where 
he who is to be benefited by it did not know his act to be illegal, 
or where it was of doubtful character, (i) 

(xx) Tyrrell v. Washburn, 6 Allen, having sold ten casks of goods and sent 

466. them to the plaintiffs to deliver to buyer, 

(y) Deering v. Winchelsea, 2 B. & P. subsequently ordered the plaintiffs to de- 

270 ; Mayhew v. Criekett, 2 Swanst. liver a portion of them to another per- 

184 ; Craythorne v. Swinburne, 14 Ves. son, which order they obeyed. It was 

160. Semb'e, the same principle may be held, that a promise to indemnify the 

applied at law ; Branson, C. J., Norton v. plaintiffs might be implied from the facts 

Coons, 3 Denio, 130, 132 ; Chaffee v. on which they could recover for the 

Jones, 19 Pick. 260, 264 ; Enicks o. Pow- injury sustained in consequence of ful- 

ell 2 Strob. Eq. 106. filling the order, although they had no 

,J Z K V, "■ Hum P hre ys, 6 M. & W. right to detain the goods or change their 

153 ; Lord Eldon, Ex parte Gifford, 6 Ves. destination — the general rule that be- 

808; Lytlei'. Pope, 11 B. Mon. 297. tween wrong-doers there is neither in- 

(n) Davies v Humphreys, 6 M. & W. demnity nor contribution not applying 

A^ nd r "■ Ca ^ er ! 12 I , red ' L - 242 ' where the act j s not clearly illegal in 
(6) Pitcher o. Bailey, 8 East, 171; itself, and is done bona fide. — In Adam- 
Booth v. Hodgson, 6 1. E. 405. But in son v. Jarvis, 4 Bing. 66 72 Bent C J 
Bailey -v. Bussing, 28 Conn. 455, it is said said : "It was certainly decided iiiMerrv- 
that this rule has so many exceptions weather v. Nixan, that one wrongdoer 
that it can hardly with propriety be could not sue another for contribution ; 
caled a general rule. See Atkins u. Lord Kenyan, however, said, 'that the 
Johnson, 43 Vt. 78. decision would not affect cases of indem- 
(c) Merryweather v. Nixan, 8 T. R. nit,/, where one man employed another to 
I ,o ; ™ brother .,»' Ansley, 1 Camp, do acts, not unlawful in themselves, for 
■AH; Wilson v. Milner 2 Camp. 452; the purpose of asserting B right.' This 
Ihweatt v Jones 1 Rand. 328. is the only decided cas? on the subject 

nt { K H S l\ Gl S? ]ns ' 2 A ' & E ' 67 ' 4 that is "rtelllgMe. There is a case of 
iNev. & M. 64. There the defendants Walton u. Hanbury and others (2 Vern. 

1 When acts, which are not apparently illegal, are done by one person at the 
request of another, a promise to indemnify may be inferred. Dugdale v. Lovering, 
1j> lx, iU O) Jr. Uo. 

36 



CH. II.] 



OP JOINT PAETIES. 



*38 



The implied promise and the right to contribution resting upon 
it, may be controlled by circumstances or evidence showing a 
different understanding between the parties ; thus, a surety 
cannot exact contribution of one who became co-surety at his 
request, (e) 1 

* The commercial law of Prance, and of continental Eu- * 38 
rope generally, admits the right to contribution, and regu- 
lates it much as the law of England and this country. (/) The 
civil law wholly rejects it. (<?) But by a decree of the Emperor 
Hadrian, a co-surety being sued, might require the plaintiff to pro- 
ceed against all liable jointly with him. He could not therefore 
be compelled to pay the whole unless through his own neglect. (Ji) 



692), but it is so imperfectly stated, that 
it is impossible to get at the principle of 
the judgment. The case of Philips v. 
Biggs (Hardres, 164), was never de- 
cided ; but the Court of Chancery seemed 
to consider the case of two sheriffs of 
Middlesex, where one had paid the dam- 
ages in an action for an escape, and sued 
the other for contribution, as like the case of 
two joint obligors. From the inclination 
of the court in this last case, and from 
the concluding part of Lord Kenyan's 
judgment in Merry weather v. Nixan, and 
from reason, justice, and sound policy, 
the rule that wrong-doers cannot have 
redress or contribution against each 
other, is confined to cases where the per- 
son seeking redress must be presumed to 
have known that he was doing an unlaw- 
ful act."— Wooley v. Batte, 2 C. & P. 
417 ; a party having recovered damages 
in case against one of two joint coach 
proprietors for an injury sustained by 
the negligence of their servants ; held, 
that such proprietor (he proving that he 
was not personally present when the 
accident happened) might maintain an 
action against his co-proprietor for con- 

i Contra, Bagott v. Mullen, 32 Lid. 332. Paul v. Berry, 78 111. 158, and Robertson 
v. Deatherage, 82 111. 511, are to the effect that sureties may by agreement terminate 
the right to contribution. 

o I 



tribution. See also Ives v. Jones, 3 Ired. 
Xi. 538. But there can be no recovery in 
such case if the two proprietors are part- 
ners. Pearson v. Skelton, 1 M. & W. 
504. See Thweatt v. Jones, 1 Band. 
328. 

(e) Turner v. Davies, 2 Esp. 478 ; 
Bycrs o. McClanahan, 6 G. & J. 256; 
Daniel v. Ballard, 2 Dana, 296 ; Taylor 
v. Savage, 12 Mass. 98, 103. And see 
Thomas r. Cook, 8 B. & C. 728; Harris 
v. Warner, 13 Wend. 400; Bobison v. 
Lyle, 10 Barb. 612 ; Keith v. Goodwin, 
31 Vt. 268. But such an agreement 
cannot be shown by parol evidence when 
the guaranteed obligation is in writing. 
Norton t\ Coons, 2 Seld. 33. 

(f) Code Civ. Art. 2033 ; 1 Pothier on 
Obligations, by Evans, 291. 

(g) Dig. 46, 1, 39. 

(h) Inst. 3, 21, 4. If the surety, on 
paying the debt, took the precaution to 
obtain a subrogation, he might exercise 
the actions of the creditor against his 
co-sureties; 1 Pothier on Obligations, 
by Evans, 291; Cod. 8, 41, 11; Dig. 
46, 1, 39. 



i 39 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK 



*39 *CHAPTEE III. 

AGENTS. 

Sect. \. — Of Agency in General. 

The law of agency is now of very great importance. Such is 
the complexity of human affairs in civilized society, that very few 
persons are able to transact all their business, supply all their 
wants, and accomplish all their purposes, without sometimes 
employing another person to represent them, and act for them, 
and in their stead. Such person becomes their agent, and the 
person employing an agent is his principal. 

There are two principles in relation to the law of agency, on 
one of which it is founded, while the other measures the responsi- 
bility of the principal for the acts of an agent. The first of these 
is, that the agent is but the instrument of the principal, who acts 
by him ; and a principal assumes the relations, acquires the 
rights, and incurs the obligations which are the proper results of 
his acts, equally, whether he does these mediately, or directly ; 
whether he uses an unconscious and material instrument, or a 
living and intelligent, instrument ; whether he signs his name by 
a pen which he takes from the table, or by a man whom he 
requests to sign his name for him. In either case, the thing done 
is the act of the principal ; and, to a considerable extent, the law 
identifies the agent with the principal, although for some purposes, 
and in some respects, the agent incurs his own share of responsi- 
bility, or acquires his own rights, by the act which he performs as 
the act of another. The second of these principles is, that, as 
between the principal and a third party who has supposed himself 
to deal with a principal by means of one purporting to be 
* 40 his agent, the principal is responsible * for and is bound by 
the acts of his agent on either of two grounds, which may 
co-exist, and may not. One of these is, that he has actually 
created this agency ; the other is, that he has, by words or acts, 
38 



CH - m -J AGENTS. 



41 



fully authorized the third party to believe the person to be his 
agent. If he has justified the belief of the third party, that this 
person had from him sufficient authority to do, as his agent, that 
precise thing, it is no answer, on his part, to say that the agent 
had no authority, or one which did not reach so far, and that it 
was a mistake on the part of the third party. It may have been 
his mistake, but the question then is, whether the principal led 
this third party into the mistake. And in deciding this question, 
all the circumstances of the transaction, and especially the 
customary usages in relation to such transactions, come into 
consideration. 

^ This principle applies to, and may indeed be said to create, the 
distinction between a general agent and a particular agent, (a) 
A general agent is one authorized to transact all his principal's 
business, or all his business of some particular kind. A par- 
ticular agent is one authorized to do one or two special things. 
But it is not always easy to find a precise rule which determines 
with certainty between these two kinds of agency. A manufac- 
turing corporation may authorize A to purchase all their cotton, 
and he is then their general agent for this special purpose, 
or to purchase all the cotton they may * have occasion to * 41 
buy in New Orleans, and then he may be called their 
general agent for this special purpose in that place. Or to 
purchase the cargoes that shall come from such a plantation, or 
shall arrive in such a ship or ships, or five hundred bales of 
, cotton, and then he should rather be regarded as their particular 
agent for this particular transaction. 

(a) See Jacques v. Todd, 3 Wend. 83; except for those. In the case of a par- 
Anderson v. Coonley, 21 Wend. 279 ; ticular agent, the scope of authority is 
Savage v. Rix, 9 N. H. 263 ; Whitehead measured by the express directions he 
v. Tuckett, 15 East, 400. The term has received ; in the case of a general 
Agency seems to imply two quite distinct agent the law permits usage to enter in 
things, namely, a contract between prin- and enlarge the liability of the principal, 
cipal and agent, and the legal means by This usage, however, is not a uniform, 
which the principal is made, without his unvarying rule ; in other words there is 
direct participation, a party to a contract no common scope of authority predicable 
with a third person. No advantage, but of every general agent. To say of a 
only confusion, seems to result from certain one that he is a general agent is 
blending these two things. If, in con- not enough to describe his powers, or to 
sidering agency in the latter aspect, the determine the extent of his principal's 
domestic contract between principal and liability ; it is next to be ascertained for 
agent could be excluded from the mind, what particular business he is thus gen- 
and reserved for separate observation, it eral agent'. This done, the agency is 
might conveniently be laid down as the brought within a class, and the qualities 
rule of law that the principal is in all attach to it which the law, using the 
cases bound for acts of the agent done light of mercantile custom, affixes to the 
within the scope of his authority, and never class at large. 

39 



41 



THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK 



But there is a material distinction between authority, and 
instructions uncommunicated, and not intended to be com- 
municated to the third party dealing with the agent. Such in- 
structions qualify the liability of the principal neither in the case 
of a general agency nor of a particular agency, (aa) x 



(aa) The sound rule of law issetforth 
by Parker, C. J., giving the judgment of 
the court in Hatch v. Taylor- 10 N. H. 
538: "It is, we think, apparent enough, 
that all which may be said to a special 
agent, about the mode in which his 
agency is to be executed, even if said at 
the time that the authority is conferred 
or the agency constituted, cannot be 
regarded as part of the authority it- 
self, or as a qualification or limitation 
upon it. There may be, at all times, 
upon the constitution of a special agency, 
and there often is, not only an authority 
given to the agent, in virtue of which he 
is to do the act proposed, but also cer- 
tain communications, addressed to the 
private ear of the agent, although they 
relate to the manner in which the author- 
ity is to be executed, and are intended as 
a guide to direct its execution. These 
communications may, to a certain extent, 
be intended to limit the action of the 
agent ; that is, the principal intends and 
expects that they shall be regarded and 
adhered to, in the execution of the 
agency ; and should the agent depart 
from them, he would violate the instruc- 
tions given him by the principal at the 
time when he was constituted agent, and 
execute the act he was expected to per- 
form in a case in which the principal did 
not intend that it should be done. And 
yet, in such case he may have acted en- 
tirely within the scope of the authority 
given him, and the principal be bound by 
his acts. This could not be so, if those 
communications were limitations upon 
the authority of the agent. It is only 
because they are not to be regarded as 
part of the authority given, or a limita- 
tion upon that authority, that the act of 
the agent is valid, although done in vio- 
lation of them ; and the matter depends 
upon the character of the communica- 
tions thus made by the principal, and 
disregarded by the agent. Thus, where 
one person employs another to sell a 
horse, and instructs him to sell him for 
$100, if no more can be obtained, but to 
get the best price he can, and not to 
sell him for less than that sum, and not 
to state how low he is authorized to sell, 



because that will prevent him from ob- 
taining more. Such a private instruction 
can with no propriety be deemed a limi- 
tation upon his authority to sell, because 
it is a secret matter between the princi- 
pal and agent, which any person pro- 
posing to purchase is not to know, at 
least until the bargain is completed. 
And if no special injunction of secrecy 
was made, the result would be the same ; 
for from the nature of the case, such an 
instruction, so far as regards the mini- 
mum price, must be intended as a private 
matter between the principal and agent, 
not to be communicated to the persons 
to whom he proposed to make a sale, 
from its obvious tendency to defeat the 
attempt to obtain a greater sum, which 
was the special duty of the agent. It 
will not do to say that the agent was not 
authorized to sell, unless he could obtain 
that price. That is the very question, 
whether such a private instruction limits 
the authority to sell." pp. 545-547 
" No man is at liberty to send another 
into the market to buy or sell for him as 
his agent, with secret instructions as to 
the manner in which he shall execute 
his agency, which are not to be commu- 
nicated to those with whom he is to deal ; 
and then, when his agent has deviated 
from those instructions, to say that he 
was a special agent, — that the instruc- 
tions were limitations upon his authority, 
— and that those with whom he dealt, in 
the matter of his agency, acted at their 
peril, because they were bound to in- 
quire, where inquiry would have been 
fruitless, and to ascertain that of which 
they were not to have knowledge. It 
would render dealing with a special agent 
a matter of great hazard. If the princi- 
pal deemed the bargain a good one, the 
secret orders would continue sealed ; 
but if his opinion was otherwise, the in- 
junction of secrecy would be removed, 
and the transaction avoided, leaving the 
party to such remedy as he might enforce 
against the agent. Prom this reasoning, 
we deduce the general principle, that 
where private instructions are given to a 
special agent, respecting the mode and 
manner of executing his agency, intended 



1 See Fatman v. Leet, 41 Ind. 133 ; Crazan v. Smith, ib. 288. 
40 



CH. III.] 



AGENTS. 



42 



The importance of the distinction between a general agent and 
a special or particular agent, lies in the rule, that if a particular 
agent exceed his authority, the principal is not bound ; (6) 
but if a general agent exceed his authority the * principal * 42 
is bound, (e) * provided the agent acted within the ordinary 
and usual scope of the business he was authorized to transact, and 
the party dealing with the agent did not know that he exceeded 
his authority, (d) 2 

Any specific authority must be strictly pursued ; as, for 
example, one known to be an agent to settle claims, and with 
specific authority to this effect, cannot be supposed to have 
authority to commute them, (e) 3 Nor can the agency be enlarged 



to be kept secret, and not communicated 
to those with whom he may deal, such 
instructions are not to be regarded as 
limitations upon his authority ; and not- 
withstanding he disregards them, his act, 
if otherwise within the scope of bis 
agency, will be valid, and bind his em- 
ployer." pp. 548, 549. See also Berth- 
old v. Goldsmith, 24 How. 536, where 
one who had been employed as a special 
agent for a particular purpose in refer- 
ence to sales of property, in the profits 
of which he was to share, was declared 
in regard to other transactions of his 
own relating to the disposal of the same 
property, not to be a partner as to third 
parties, and neither a general nor special 
agent. Trickett o. Tomlinson, 13 C. B. 
(n. s.) 663; Edmunds v. Bushell, Law 
Kep. 1 Q. B. 97. 

lb) Flemyng v. Hector, 2 M. & W. 
178; Todd v. Emly, 7 M. & W. 427; 8 
id. 505 ; East India Co. v. Hensley, 1 Esp. 
Ill ; Woodin v. Burford, 2 Cr. & M. 391 ; 
Jordan v. Norton, 4 M. & W. 155 ; Sykes 
v, Giles, 5 M. & W. 645 ; Waters v. Brog- 
den, 1 Y. & J. 457 ; Daniel v. Adams, 
Ambl. 495. And see Reaney v. Culbert- 
eon, 21 Penn. St 507. 

(c) Duke of Beaufort v. Neeld, 12 CI. 
& F. 248, 273; Nickson v. Brohan, 10 
Mod. 109 ; Monk ». Clayton, Molloy, B. 
2, ch. 10, § 27. 



(d) Forman v. Walker, 4 La. An. 409 ; 
Campbell v. Hicks, 4 H. &N. (Exch.) 851. 

(e) Kingston i.-. Kincaid, 1 Wash. C. 
C. 454. That the authority given to the 
agent must in all cases be strictly pur- 
sued, see Robertson i\ Ketchum, 11 Barb. 
652, and Cooley v. Willard, 34 111. 69. 
The exception, extending the principal's 
liability in favor of third parties, is only 
made where such third parties are igno- 
rant that restrictions have been imposed 
upon the agent. In Attwood v. Munnings, 
7 B. & C. 283, Bayley, J., said : " This 
was an action upon an acceptance im- 
porting to he by procuration, and, there- 
fore, any person taking the bill would 
know that he had not the security of the 
acceptor's signature, but of the party pro- 
fessing to act in pursuance of an author- 
ity from him. A person taking such a 
bill, ought to exercise due caution, for he 
must take it upon the credit of the party 
who assumes the authority to accept, and 
it would be only reasonable prudence to 
require the production of that authority." 
The authority in that case was contained 
in two powers of attorney, and it was 
decided that, taking the proper construc- 
tion of them, the agent had exceeded his 
authority, and so the principal was not 
bound. This case is confirmed by Well- 
ington v. Herring, 5 Bing. 442. Goods 
were shipped on board of plaintiff's ship, 



i Thus where a general agent gave, without authority, a lease under seal in his 
principal's name, and received rent thereunder, its surrender to hini_ » agoodde fence 
to the principal's action for further rent. Amory v. Kannoffsky, 11 / Mass. 351. bee 

Th ? Thyistutahhough Kent was expressly forbidden to do the act in question, 
Bell v Offutt 10 Bush, 632 ; Minterw. Pacific R. Co. 41 Mo. 503 

• Nor does an agent's authority to draw bills of exchange on time or s,gh , mdude 
the drawhig of pof t-dated bills. New Tork Iron Mine v. Citizens' Bank, 44 Mich. 

^ 41 



43 



THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. 



[book I. 



so as to hold any principal but the one employing the agent; 

thus, the agent of a partnership is not the agent of the 
* 43 members severally, (ee) The * rule is, as to the public, that 

the authority of a general agent may be regarded by them 
as measured by the usual extent of his general employment. (/) 
The obvious reason for this is, that the public may not be 
deceived to its injury by previous acts which the agent was fully- 
authorized to do. By such authority the principal does, as it were, 
proclaim and publicly declare him to be his agent, and must abide 
the responsibility of so doing. It would not be right for the prin- 
cipal to say to one who dealt with his general agent : " you knew 
that he was my general agent, for I authorized you and everybody 
else to believe this, but in this particular instance I had revoked or 
limited the authority, and the revocation or limitation shall affect 
you although you did not know it." But a principal may well 
say to one who dealt with an agent for a particular purpose, it 
was your business first to ascertain that he was my agent, and 
then to ascertain for yourself the character and extent of his 
agency. (/) 

We think the distinction between a general agency and a spe- 
cial agent useful, and sufficiently definite for practical purposes, 



and by the bills of lading, which were in- 
dorsed to the defendants, were to be deliv- 
ered on payment of freight. The bills were 
indorsed by the defendants to their fact- 
ors, to whom the goods were delivered, 
and the freight charged. Assumpsit was 
brought against the defendants on the 
bankruptcy of the factors, but was not 
sustained on the ground that authority 
to receive the goods was given only on 
immediate payment of the freight. Tobin 
v. Crawford, 5 M. & W. 235. And see 
Hogg ... Snaith, 1 Taunt. 347 ; Acey i: 
Ferine, 7 M. & W. 157; Esdaile v. La 
Nauze, 1 Y. & Coll. 394 ; Maanss v. Hen- 
derson, 1 East, 335 ; Murray v. East India 
Co., 5 B. & Aid. 204; Gardner v. Baillie, 
6 T. R. 591 ; with which compare Howard 
?•. Baillie, 2 H. Bl. 618 ; Stainback t>. Bank 
of Virginia, 11 Gratt. 260; Same v. Read, 
id. 281. The ruling of Heath, J., in Hicks 
v. Hankins, 4 Esp. 114, seems to admit of 
question. For instance, where the au- 
thority of a general agent has been cir- 
cumscribed, see Odiorne <■. Maxcy, 13 
Moss. 178; White v. Westport Cotton 
Man. Co. 1 Pick. 215; Salem Bank a. 
Gloucester Bank, 17 Mass. 1 ; Wyman v. 
Ilallowell & Augusta Bank, 14 Mass. 58; 
Kerns v. Piper, 4 Watts, 222 ; Terry o. 

42 



Fargo, 10 Johns. 114 ; Reynolds v. Row- 
ley, 4 La. An. 409. Except the master of 
a vessel and an acceptor for honor, no 
agent can borrow money on his principal's 
account without special authority. Haw- 
tavne v. Bourne, 7 M. & W. 595. See 
post, pp. * 81 & * 82. 

(ee) Johnston v. Brown, 18 La. An. 
330. 

(/•) Pickering v. Busk, 15 East, 38; 
Whitehead v. Tuckett, 15 East, 400. But 
if an injury is to result to one man from 
the omission or neglect of an agent of 
another, the principal must be held liable. 
And when the defendants sent their agent 
to employ the plaintiff, who was a physi- 
cian, to visit a boy who had been injured 
while in their service, directing the agent 
to tell the plaintiff that they would pay 
him for his first visit, and the agent 
neglected so to do, and employed the 
plaintiff generally to attend the boy so 
long as he might need medical aid, and 
the plaintiff attended upon the boy on 
the credit of defendants, held, that de- 
fendants were liable to the plaintiff for 
his services in attending the boy. Barber 
u. Briton & Hall, 26 Vt. 112. 

(ff) Barry v. Anderson, 22 Ind. 36; 
Davenport v. Peoria Ins. Co. 17 la. 276. 



CH - In -J AGENTS. # 44 

although it may have been pressed too far, and relied upon too 
much in determining the responsibility of a principal for the acts 
of an agent. It may indeed be said, that every agency is, under 
one aspect, special, and under another, general. No agent has 
authority to be in all respects and for all purposes an » alter 
ego " of his principal, binding him by whatever the * agent * 44 
may do in reference to any subject whatever ; and therefore 
the agency must be special so far as it is limited by place, or time, 
or the extent or character of the work to be done. On the other 
hand every agency must be so far general, that it must cover 
not merely the precise thing to be done, but whatever usually and 
rationally belongs to the doing of it. 

Of late years, courts seem more disposed to regard this distinc- 
tion and the rules founded upon it, as altogether subordinate to 
that principle which may be called the foundation of the law of 
agency > namely, that a principal is responsible, either, when he 
has given to an agent sufficient authority, or, when he justifies a 
party dealing with his agent in believing that he has given to this 
agent this authority. (#) 

Where the agency is implied from general employment, it may 
survive this employment, and will be still implied in favor of 
those who knew this general employment, but have not had notice 
of the cessation of the employment, and cannot be supposed to 
have knowledge thereof. (K) Hence the common and very proper 
practice of giving notice by public advertisement when such an 
agency is revoked. 

In order to judge correctly of the extent of an agent's author- 
ity, the distinction must be noticed between those acts which are 
within his authority, and those which are only within an appear- 
ance of authority, for which the principal is not responsible ; for 
a principal is responsible only for that appearance 'of authority 
which is caused by himself, and not for that appearance of con- 
formity to the authority which is caused only by the agent. An 
agent's authority is that which is given by the declared terms of 

(g) In Mechanics Bank v. N. Y. &c. quite insufficient to Solve a great variety 

E. Co. 3 Kernan, 632, it is said by Com- of cases. It is unprofitable to dwell upon 

stock, J., in giving the decision of the that distinction." 

court of appeals, " There are in the books, (h) v. Harrison, 12 Mod. 346 ; 

many loose expressions concerning the Monk v. Clayton, Molloy, B. 2, ch. 10, § 

distinction between a general and a spe- 27, cited per curiam, 10 Mod. 110; Emmett 

cial agency. The distinction itself is v. Norton, 8 C. & P. 506. 
highly unsatisfactory, and will be found 

43 



* 45 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

his appointment, notwithstanding secret instructions ; or that with 

which he is clothed by the character in which he is held out to the 

world, although not within the words of his commission. 

* 45 Whatever is done under an authority * thus manifested, is 

actually within the authority, and the principal is bound for 
that reason ; for he is bound equally by the authority which he 
actually gives, and by that which, by his own acts, he appears to 
give. But it is obvious that an agent may clothe his act with all 
the indicia of authority, and yet the act itself may not be within 
either the real or apparent authority. The appearance of the 
authority is one thing ; and for that the principal is responsible 
only so far as he has caused that appearance. The appearance of 
the act is another ; and for that it seems the agent alone is 
responsible. It is a fundamental proposition, that one man can 
be bound only by the authorized acts of another. He cannot be 
charged because another ho^ds a commission from him, and 
falsely asserts that his acts are within it. (i) This distinction 
has been well illustrated by recent adjudications. Thus a master 
of a ship is the general agent of the owners to perform all things 
relating to the usual employment of his ship, and, among other 
things, to sign bills of lading for goods put on board, and ac- 
knowledge the nature, quality, and condition of the goods. But 
if he signs a bill of lading for goods which have never been 
shipped, he exceeds his authority ; and although the act, judged 
by its appearance and the representation of the agent, is strictly 
within the authority, yet the principal is not bound. (&) x So, if 
the master signs a bill of lading for a greater quantity of goods 
than those on board, the same principle applies. (7) And where 
the servant of a wharfinger fraudulently signed a receipt, purport- 
ing to be an acknowledgment that certain wheat had been deliv- 
ered at his employer's wharf, no such wheat having in fact been 
delivered, and thereby wilfully induced one C to pay the price 
thereof to the pretended vendor ; it was held that the wharfinger 
was not liable, the servant having authority only to give receipts 
for goods which had in fact been delivered at the wharf, (to) 
Again, where a railroad corporation appointed an agent to issue 

(i) Per Comstock, J., in Mechanics Bank (I) Hubbersty v. Ward, 8 Exch. 330. 

v. N. Y. &c. R. Co. 3 Kernan, 599. ( m ) Coleman v. Riches, 16 C. B. 104. 

(£) Grant v. Norway, 10 C. B. 665. 

1 Baltimore &c. R. Co. v. Wilkens, 44 Md. 11. 
44 



CH. III.] AGENTS. * 46 

certificates for stock, upon a transfer on the company's books by 
a previous owner, and a surrender of that owner's certificate ; 
and the agent fraudulently issued * certificates for his own * 46 
benefit, without a compliance with either of the above condi- 
tions, his acts were held to be beyond the scope of his authority, 
and his principals not bound, (n) And where an agent author- 
ized in writing to purchase goods to a certain amount, had ex- 
ceeded the amount, but assured a seller that he had not, and the 
seller sold the goods on this assurance, it was held by a majority 
of the court (Wilde, J., dissenting), that the principal was not 
held, (o) 1 We have some doubts of the last decision ; and, cer- 
tainly, care must be taken not to extend this principle too far. 
Thus, an agent may be authorized to give notes for his principal 
in order to raise money to be used in the business of the latter. 
A third person may inspect the power, advance the money in good 
faith, and the agent appropriate it to his own use ; and this the 
agent may have intended at the time. In such a case, the prin- 
cipal would be responsible, not because the act of the agent ap- 
peared to be within the authority, but because the power actually 
included the transaction. A power given to an agent to borrow 
money, upon notes or otherwise, implies that the money may be 
paid to him, and so the whole transaction is strictly and literally 
authorized. The misappropriation of the proceeds by the agent 
is a mere breach of trust, relating to money in his hands, and 
upon the principles of trust, his intention to misappropriate would 
not affect an innocent party. But suppose the power to give the 
note is on its face conditional. It then has no existence until 
the condition has been actually fulfilled. And if one advances 
money to the agent on his declaration that the conditions 
have been fulfilled, and it turns out that the conditions had 
not occurred on which the exercise of the power depended, then 
he was trusting to the representation of the agent, and must look 
to him alone. As the principal never authorized the transac- 
tion at all, he is bound neither by the contract nor by the 
representation, (j?) 

in) Mechanics Bank „. N. Y. &c. R. Bank v. N. Y. &c R. Co. 3 Kernan, 599. 

Co. 3 KerTan? 699. ^ R1 , fee North River Bank „. Aymar, 3 Hill, 

to) Mussey v. Beecher, 3 Cush. 611. AbA. 
(p) Per Comslock, J., in Mechanics 

i In Palmer v. Cheney, 35 la. 281, the principal was declared liable in such a case. 

45 * 



* 47 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

It has been held that " a general and special agent to 

* 47 transact * all manner of business," though created by a 

power of attorney under seal, does not necessarily include 
therein authority to sell. Such a power is regarded as a vague 
and indefinite instrument, under which a prudent man would not 
accept a title to property, (q) 

For the power of the agent to submit questions in which his 
principal is interested, to arbitration, see the section on Arbitra- 
tion in the second volume. 



SECTION II. 

IN WHAT MANNER AUTHORITY MAY BE GIVEN TO AN AGENT. 

The facts being undisputed, the question whether the alleged 
agent had sufficient authority, is a question of law. (qq) An 
agent, generally, may be appointed by parol, and so authorized to 
do any thing which does not require him to execute a deed for his 
principal, (r) 1 The rule of the common law, that an agent can- 
not affix a seal for his principal, unless his authority to do this is 
under seal, is still generally recognized as in force, (rr) He may 
be authorized by parol to make and sign contracts in writing, and 
it seems to be now settled that he may be authorized without 
writing, to make even those contracts which are not binding upon 
his principal unless in writing signed by him. (s) And even a 
parol ratification is equivalent to an orignal authority, (f) 

(q) Hodge v. Coombs, 1 Black, 102. under seal, could not be admitted in 

(77) Gulick v. Grover, 4 Vroom, 403. evidence in an action of assumpsit against 

(r) 2 Kent, Com. 612. The receipt of the principal. But see contra, Cooper v. 

an authorized agent is the receipt of the Rankin, 5 Binn. 613, and page * 52, infra, 

principal. Mackersy v. Ramsays, 9 CI. notes (m), (0). 

& F. 818, 850. — A tender made to an au- (s) Shaw v. Nudd, 8 Pick. 9 ; Ewing 

thorized agent is as if made to his prin- v. Tees, 1 Binn. 450 ; Clinen v. Cooke, 1 

cipal. Moffat v. Parsons, 5 Taunt. 307. Sch. & L. 22 ; Coles v. Trecothick, 9 Ves. 

{rr) Rowe v. Ware, 30 Ga. 27'8 ; Echols 234, 250. — But by an express provision 

v. Cheney, 28 Cal. 157. See also Morri- of the Statute of Frauds, an agent, to 

son v. Bowman, 29 Cal. 337 ; Gordon v. grant or assign a term for more than 

Bulkeley, 14 S. & R. 331. And in Ban- three years, or an estate of freehold, 

orgee v. Hovey, 5 Mass. 11, it was held must be authorized thereto in writing. 

(Sewell, J., dissenting), that a sealed in- 29 Car. IX c. 3, § 3. 
strument executed in the name of the (t) Maclean v. Dunn, 4 Bing. 722. 

principal by an agent, not authorized 

1 Manhattan Ins. Co. v. La Pert, 52 Tex. 604. 
46 



CH. III.] AGENTS. * 48 

An authority is presumed or raised by implication of law, on 
the ground that the principal has justified the belief that he has 
given such authority, in cases where he has employed a person in 
his regular employment ; («) 1 as where one sends goods 
*to an auctioneer, or to a common repository room for *48 
sale, the bailee has an implied authority to sell, (v~) And 
such presumptions frequently arise in the case of a wife ; (w) or 
of a domestic servant ; (x) or of a son who has been permitted 
for a considerable time to transact a particular business for the 
father, (y) 2 as to sign bills, &c. ; or where one has been repeat- 
edly employed to sign policies of insurance for another. (z) So 
the acceptance of the agency by the agent may be inferred from 
his acting under it ; and this has been held even where he writes 
to his principal refusing the agency, (zz) 

It must be remembered, however, that an agent employed for a 
special purpose, derives from this no general authority from his 

(«) Dows v. Greene, 16 Barb. 72 ; (z) Brockelbank v. Sugrue, 5 C. & P. 

Lyell v. Sanbourn, 2 Mich. 109 ; Thomp- 21 ; Haughton >•. Ewbank, 4 Camp. 88, 

son v. Bell, 10 Exch. 10. where it was held sufficient proof of an 

(v) Lord Ellenborough, Pickering v. agent's authority to subscribe a policy of 

Busk, 15 East, 38. insurance for an insurer, that the insurer 

(w) Prestwick v. Marshall, 7 Bing. was in the habit of paying iosses upon 
565 ; Huckman v. Fernie, 3 M. & W. 505 ; policies so subscribed by* him, without 
Att'y-Gen. o. Riddle, 2 Cr. & J. 493 ; producing the power of attorney under 
Plimmer o. Sells, 3 Nev. & M. 422. — which the agent testified that he acted. — 
After separation, the wife is still her An authority to draw is not an authority 
husband's agent for the procurement of to indorse ; Robinson v. Yarrow, 7 Taunt, 
such things as are reasonable and neces- 455 ; yet the fact that a confidential 
sary for herself. Emmett v. Norton, 8 clerk had been accustomed to draw, 
C. & P. 506. So where the person co- taken in connection with the fact that 
habited with is only a mistress, and his master had in one instance author- 
known to be in fact only a mistress, if ized him to indorse, and on two other 
she is allowed to pass ostensibly as wife, occasions had received money obtained 
Ryan v. Sans, 12 Q. B. 460. by his indorsement, is evidence from 

(x) A master is not responsible for a which a jury may infer a general author- 
contract entered into by a servant to ity to indorse. Prescott v. Flynn, 9 
whom he had always given cash for Bing. 19. As to what will amount to 
making purchases. Rusby v. Scarlett, 5 proof of an implied authority to a clerk 
Esp. 75. So with any particular agent in a mercantile house to sign shipping 
who obtains on credit goods which the papers in the names of his principals, 
principal gave him money to purchase, see Dows v. Greene, 32 Barb. 490. 
Lord Abinger, C. B., Flemyng v. Hector, (zz) George v. Sandel, 18 La. An. 
2 M. & W.' 181. 635. 

(y) Watkins v. Vince, 2 Stark. 368. 

1 But not if the former employment was without the principal's knowledge, 
Cobb v. Hall, 49 la. 366 ; nor if a mere temporary employment, nearly a year before, 
Green v. Hinkley, 52 la. 633 ; nor to sell from the fact that a purchasing clerk was 
employed fifteen months before to make a single sale. Cupples v. Whelan, 61 Mo. 
583. See Wilcox v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. 24 Minn. 269 ; Whelan v. Reilly, 61 Mo. 565. 

2 A sale of intoxicating liquors by a son, as clerk, in a public house kept by his 
father, will warrant the conviction of the latter for an illegal sale. Commonwealth 
t;. Holmes, 119 Mass. 195. 

47 



* 49 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

principal. («) J Where the belief of the authority of an agent 
arises only from previous action on his part as an agent, the 
persons so treating with him must, on their own responsibil- 
ity, ascertain the nature and extent of his previous employ- 
ment. (7>) This may be such as to estop the principal from 
*49 * denying his authority in the particular transaction; but 
if not, then they have no remedy, unless against the agent 
himself who misled them, (c) 



SECTION III. 

SUBSEQUENT CONFIRMATION. 

As agency may be presumed from repeated acts of the agent, 
adopted and confirmed by the principal previously to the contract 
in which the question is raised, (cf) so agency may be confirmed 
and established by a subsequent ratification ; the common law 
having adopted the civil law maxim, u omn r is ratihabitio retrotrahi- 
tur el mandato cequiparatur. , \e~) 2 The rule may be stated thus : 

(a) Reynelly. Lewis, 15 M. & W. 517 ; agreed with the holder of the note of a 

Dawson ». Morrison, 16 L. J. C. P. 240 ; firm, that it should be renewed upon part 

Cox v. Midland Railway Co. 3 Exch. 2G8; payment at maturity and a new note 

Rusby v. Scarlett, 5 Esp. 75; Burness v. given for the balance, such agreement 

l'ennel, 2 H. L. Cas. 619 ; Kaye v. Brett, will be an authority to one of the part- 

5 K.xch. 269; Thatcher o. Bank of New ners, after the dissolution, to give a new 

York, 5 Sardf. 121. note in the firm name in renewal, and 

(A) Schiminelpennich v. Bayard, 1 the termination of the partnership is not 
Pet. "201 ; Parsons v. Armor, 8 id. 413 ; a revocation of such authority. 
Blane v. Proudfit, 3 Call, 207 ; Kilgour (c) Pourie v. Eraser, 2 Bay, 200. 
ti. Fiulyson, 1 H. Bl. 155, where a power (d) Townsend v. Inglis, Holt, 278; 
given, on the dissolution of a partner- Haughton v. Ewbank, 4 Camp. 88; Bar- 
ship, to one of the partners to receive all ber v. Gingell, 3 Esp. 60. There the 
debts owing to, and to discharge all apparent acceptor of a bill of exchange, 
claims against the late partnership, was setting up as a defence that his signa- 
lield not to authorize him to indorse a ture had been forged, it was held a good 
bill of exchange in the partnership name, answer that the defendant had paid other 
though drawn by him in that name, and bills of the drawer under similar circum- 
accepted by a debtor of the partnership stances. And see Brigham v. Peters, 1 
after the dissolution. In Richardson v. Gray, 147. 

Moies, 31 Mo. 430, it is said that when (e) 18 Vin. Abr. Ratihabilh; Lucena 

the partners had, prior to the dissolution, v. Craufurd, 1 Taunt. 325 ; Clark's Ex- 

1 Thus a horse-car conductor cannot agree to give a free passage, Wakefield v. So. 
Boston R. Co. 117 Mass. 544; nor an engineer contract for a railroad, Gardner v. 
Boston, &c. R. Co. 70 Me. 181 ; nor a passenger agent make freight contracts, Tay- 
lor v. Chicago, &c. R. Co. 74 111. 80. See Reed v. Ashburnham R. Co. 120 Mass. 43. 

2 Ratification maybe inferred from a principal's acts, Bearce v. Bowker, 115 
Mass. 121); Gibson v. Norway Bank, 09 Me. 579; as where an agent to sign notes in 

48 



CH. III. J 



AGENTS. 



49 



where any one contracts as agent, — but not unless he contracts 
as agent, (/) — without naming a principal, his acts enure to the 
benefit of the party, although at the time uncertain or unknown, 
for whom it shall turn out that he intended to act, provided 
the party thus entitled to be principal ratify the contract, (g) 1 



ecuto'rs v. Van Riemsdyk, 9 Cranch, 158; 
Fleckner v. United States Bank, 8 Wheat. 
363 ; Bell v. Cunningham, 3 Pet. 81 ; Hooe 
v. Oxley.l Wash. (Va.) 19; Moss t>. Ros- 
sie Lead Mining Co. 5 Hill (N. Y.), 137 ; 
Rogers v. Kneeland, 10 Wend. 218 ; Marsh 
v. Keating, 1 Bing. N. C. 198 ; Bigelow v. 
Dennison, 23 Vt. 505. — If any stranger, 
in the name of the mortgagor "or his heir 
(without his consent or privity), tender 
the money, and the mortgagee aceepteth 
it [which, however, he is not bound to do], 
this is a good satisfaction, and the mort- 
gagor or his heir, agreeing thereunto, 
may re-enter into the land. Co. Lit. 
206 b. 

(/) Collins v. Suau, 7 Rob. 623. 

(jr) Wilson v. Tumman, 6 Man. & G. 
242. " Ratum quis habere von potest quod 
ipsius nomine non est qestum." See also 
Saunderson v. Griffith's, 5 B. & C. 909; 
and Routh v. Thompson. 13 East, 274 ; 
Foster i>. Bates, 12 M. & W. 226 ; Hull i>. 
Pickersgill, 1 Br. & B. 282. This doc- 
trine has frequent application in cases 
of marine insurance. See Hagedorn v. 
Oliverson, 2 M. & Sel. 485; Finney v. 
Fairhaven Ins. Co. 5 Met. 192. — A notice to 
quit, given by an unauthorized agent, can- 
not be made good by an adoption of it by 
the principal after the proper time for giv- 
ing it, the agent having acted in his own 
name in giving the notice, nor it seems, if 
he acted in the name of the principal. 
Doe v. Goldwin, 2 Q. B. 143 ; Right v. 
Cuthell, 5 East, 491. — In Bird r. Brown, 
4 Exch. 786, a very important distinction 
was taken by the Court of Exchequer. 



A, a merchant at Liverpool, sent orders 
to B, at New York, to purchase certain 
goods, which were shipped accordingly in 
five ships and consigned to A, who, after 
the receipt of the goods by one of them, 
stopped payment on the 7th of April, 
1846. B, pursuant to directions from A, 
had drawn bills for the goods partly on A, 
and partly on C, with whom A had deal- 
ings. I), a merchant at Liverpool, and 
who also had a house of business at New 
York, purchased there several of the bills, 
which were drawn at sixty days' sight, 
and dated some on the 28th, and others on 
the 30th of March, 1846. On ihe 8th of 
May, a fiat in bankruptcy issued against 
A, and his assignees were appointed. 
The other four vessels arrived respect- 
ively on the 4th, 5th, 7th, and 10th of that 
month, and immediately on the arrival 
of each, and while the transitus of the 
goods on board continued, D, on behalf 
of B, but not being his agent, and with- 
out any authority from him, gave notice 
to the masters and consignees, claiming 
to stop the goods in transitu. On the 11th 
of May the assignees made a formal de- 
mand of the goods still on board and 
undelivered, from the master and consign- 
ees of each of the four ships, at the same 
time tendering the freight; but they 
refused to deliver them, and on the same 
day delivered the whole to D. On the 
next day the assignees made a formal 
demand of the goods from him, but he 
refused to deliver them up. On the 28th 
of April, B heard at New York that A 
had stopped payment, and on the next 



his principal's absence so signs after the latter's return as an indorser, and the prin- 
cipal with knowledge receives a dividend thereon from the bankrupt maker, and 
agrees to hold him harmless, Harrod v. McDanicls, 126 Mass. 413; as by acceptance 
of a policy, of an agent's execution of a premium note, Monitor Ins. Co. v. Buffum, 
115 Mass. 343 ; as by their appearance as witnesses of the parties to an arbitration, 
of the submission signed by attorney, Blakely v. Graham, 111 Mass. 8; as the failure 
to object by the only stockholder not previously informed, of the corporation super- 
intendent's purchase of goods, Lyndeborough Glass Co. v. Mass. Glass Co. Ill Mass. 
315; as by acceptance of the consideration with knowledge, of an agent's release of 
a mortgage, Tooker v. Sloan, 3 Stewart, 394 ; or as by acceptance of rents there- 
under, of an unauthorized lease of a mining right, Chamberlin v. Collinson, 45 la. 
429. An insured's ratification, after a loss, of unauthorized insurance is sufficient. 
Excelsior Ins. Co. v. Royal Ins. Co., 7 Lansing, 138. See Fort v. Coker, 11 Heiskell, 
579, as to a conditional ratification; Owensboro Bank v. Western Bank, 13 Bush, 
526! as to ratifying an agent's taking of insufficient security. 

i Williams v. North China Ins. Co. 1 C. P. D. 757 ; Francis v. Kerker, 85 111. 190. 
vol. i. 4 49 



51 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



50 



•61 



And, on the other * hand, if the principal accept, receive, 
and hold the proceeds or beneficial results of such a contract, 
he will be estopped from * denying an original authority, or 



day he executed a power of attorney to 
E, of Liverpool, authorizing him to stop 
the goods in transitu. This was received 
by E on the 13th of May, who on that 
day adopted and confirmed the previous 
stoppage by D. B afterwards adopted 
and ratified all which had been done both 
by E and D. Held, that the title of A to 
the goods was not devested by the above 
stoppages m(ransi'(K, andeonsequently that 
trover for them was maintainable by the 
assignees against B. Pollock, C. B., deliv- 
ering the judgment, said : " The doctrine 
' omnis ratihabitio retrotrahitur et ntandato 
cequiparatur' is one intelligible in principle, 
and easy in its application when applied to 
cases of contract. If A. B., unauthorized 
by me, makes a contract on my behalf 
with J. S., which I afterwards recognize 
and adopt, there is no difficulty in dealing 
with it as having been originally made by 
my authority. J. S. entered into the con- 
tract on the understanding that he was 
dealing with me, and when I afterwards 
agree to admit that such was the case, 
J. S. is precisely in the condition in which 
he meant to be ; and if he did not believe 
A. B. to be acting for me, his condition 
is not altered by my adoption of the 
agency, for he may sue A. B. as princi- 
pal at his option, and has the same equi- 
ties against me if I sue, that he would 
have had against A. B. In cases of tort 
there is more difficulty. If A. B. pro- 
fessing to act by my authority, does that 
which /irima facie amounts to a trespass, 
and I afterwards assent to and adopt his 
act, there he is treated as having from 
the beginning acted by my authority, and 
I become a trespasser, unless I can justify 
the act which is to be deemed as having 
been done by my previous sanction. So 
far there is no difficulty in applying the 
doctrine of ratification even in cases of 
tort — the party ratifying becomes as it 
were a trespasser by estoppel — he cannot 
complain that he is deemed to have au- 
thorized that which he admits himself to 
have authorized. The authorities, how- 
ever, go much further, and show that in 
some cases where an act, which if unau- 
thorized would amount to a trespass, has 
been done in the name and on behalf of 
another, and without previous authority, 
there a subsequent ratification may enable 
the party on whose behalf the act was 
done, to take advantage of it, and to 
treat it as having been done by bis direc- 

50 



tion. But this doctrine must be taken 
with the qualification that the act of rati- 
fication must take place at a time, and 
under circumstances, when the ratifying 
party might have himself lawfully done 
the act which he ratifies. Thus in Lord 
Audley's case, a fine with proclamations 
was levied of certain land, and a stranger 
within five years afterwards, in the name 
of him who had right, entered to avoid 
the fine ; after the five years, and not 
before, the party who had the right to 
the land ratified and confirmed the act of 
the stranger ; this was held to be inopera- 
tive, though such ratification within the 
five years would probably have been 
good. Now the principle of this case, 
which is reported in many books, Cro. E. 
561; Moore, 457, pi. 630; Poph. 108, pi. 2, 
and is cited with approbation by Lord 
Coke in Margaret Podger's case (9 Eep. 
106 a), appears to us to govern the pres- 
ent. There the entry to be good must 
have been made within the five years ; it 
was made within that time, but till rati- 
fied it was merely the act of a stranger, 
and so had no operation against the 
fine ; by the ratification it became the 
act of the party in whose name it was 
made, but that was not until after the 
five years — he could not be deemed to 
have made an entry till he ratified the 
previous entry — and he did not ratify 
until it was too late to do so. In the 
present case the stoppage could only be 
made during the transitus ; during that 
period, the defendants, without authority 
from Illins, made the stoppage. After 
the transitus was ended, but not before, 
Illins ratified what the defendants had 
done ; from that time the stoppage was 
the act of Illins. But it was then too 
late for him to stop ; the goods had 
already become the property of the plain- 
tiffs, free from all right of stoppage. 
We are therefore of opinion that there 
must be judgment for the plaintiffs." — 
It is somewhat remarkable, in view of 
the present state of the law, that it was 
at one time strenuously contended that 
the doctrine of ratification reached less 
broadly in contract than in tort; and that 
although a principal unknown at the time 
could afterwards adopt the act of the 
agent in the latter case, he could not in 
the former. See Hagedorn i\ Oliverson, 
2 M. & Sel. 485, and per Parke, J., in 
Hull v. Pickersgill, 1 Br. & B. 287. 



CH - m -] AGENTS. 



52 



a ratification. (K) 1 And if a party does not disavow the acts 
of his agent as soon as he can after they come to his knowl- 
edge, he makes these acts his own. (»') 2 Nor will the delay of 
a third party to assert his rights against the principal for the 
acts of the agent, discharge the former from his liability, if the 
relative position of principal and agent have not in the mean 
time been altered. But the failure of the principal to notify the 
agent of his dissent, does not, as between them, ratify the act ; (/fc) 
for the agent knew his own want of authority. An adoption of 
the agency in part, adopts it in the whole, because a principal is 
not permitted to accept and confirm so much of a contract 
made by one * purporting to be- his agent, as he shall think * 52 
beneficial to himself, and reject the remainder. (I) 3 

(A) Holt, C. J., in Bolton v. Hillers- &c. Co. v. Dandridge, 8 G. & J. 248, 323 ; 
den, 1 Ld. Raym. 224, 225; Thorold v. Hays v. Stone, 7 Hill (N. Y.), 128; Cope- 
Smith, 11 Mod. 72; Byrne v. Doughty, land v. Mercantile Ins. Co. 6 Pick. 198.— 
13 Ga. 46; Johnson o. Smith, 21 Conn. Conduct which would be sufficient to 
627. The principal, when he has once charge an individual as principal, may 
affirmed a contract made by the agent not amount to ratification in the case of 
without authority, and even fraudulently, a State. Delafield v. Illinois, 26 Wend, 
cannot afterwards disaffirm it ; bringing 102 ; Warden v. Eichbaum, 3 Grant, 42 ; 
assumpsit against the third party is an Drennen r. Walker, 21 Ark. 539. 
affirmance. Smith o. Hodson, 4 T. R. (i) Bredin v. Dubarry, 14 S. & R. 27 ; 
211,217. Yet if the party, alleged to be Veazie v. Williams, 8 How. 134; Bene- 
principal, after denying that the agent diet v. Smith, 10 Paige, 126 ; McCulloch 
had authority from him to purchase v. McKee, 16 Penn. 289 ; Brigham v. Pe- 
goods, receive them from the agent in ters, 1 Gray, 139. 
payment of a debt due from the latter, (k) Lewin v. Dille, 17 Mo. 64. 
the original seller (whatever other rem- (/) Wilson v. Poulter, 2 Stra. 859; 
edy he may have) cannot hold such sup- Smith v. Hodson, 4 T. R. 211 ; Hovil v. 
posed principal liable as having ratified Pack, 7 East, 164 ; Brewer v. Sparrow, 
the purchase made by the agent. Hast- 7 B. & C. 310 ; Wright v. Crookes, 1 
ings v. Bangor House, 18 Me. 436. — The Scott, N. R. 685 ; Hovey v. Blanchard, 
ratification of an act of an agent, in 13 N. H. 145 ; Farmers Loan Co. v. 
order to bind the principal, must be with Walworth, 1 Comst. 447 ; N. E. Marine 
a full knowledge of all the material Ins. Co. u. De Wolf, 8 Pick. 56 ; Culver 
facts. Freeman v. Rosher, 13 Q. B. v. Ashley, 19 id. 300 ; Bigelow v. Den- 
780 ; Owings v. Hull, 9 Pet. 607 ; Penn., nison, 23 Vt. 565 ; Hodnet e. Tatum, 

1 Perkins v. Boothby, 71 Me. 91. 

2 If a principal receives money borrowed on notes given in his name by his agent 
without authority and fails to disavow the same within a reasonable time after 
demand, he will be held to have ratified the act and to be bound by the notes. Gold 
Mining Co. v. National Bank, 96 U. S. 640. So where an attorney without authority 
received a bond in settlement of a debt due his principal, and the latter's silence 
would tend to mislead him. Maddux v. Bevan, 39 Md. 485. Bosseau v. O'Brien, 
4 Bissell, 395, decided that a principal's failure to answer his agent's letters or in- 
quiries as to a sale is not a ratification. A principal must disavow within a "reas- 
onable time " or " promptly," Saveland v. Green, 40 Wis. 431 ; Daniell v. Griffin, 46 
Ala. 520; or ns soon as he can, Kelsey v. Crawford Bank, 69 Penn. St. 426; Peck v. 
Ritchey, 66 Mo. 114; otherwise he will be bound, Western, &c. R. Co. v. MeElwee, 
6 Heiskell, 208; Walker v. Walker, 7 Baxter, 260. 

8 Mundorff v. Wickersham, 63 Penn. St. 87 ; Seago v. Martin, 6 Heiskell, 308, 
in which latter case the cash proceeds of certain sales of corn save one were 
accepted. 

51 



52 



THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



A ratification is too late if it defeats the intervening rights of 
a third party. (ZZ) 

Where the party who undertakes to act as agent has affixed a 
seal to an instrument which did not need a seal, a parol ratifica- 
tion will make the instrument obligatory upon the principal as a 
simple contract, (m) l And where one acting as agent has, 
without authority, entered into a contract in writing required by 
the Statute of Frauds to be in writing, the principal is bound by 
an oral ratification. (n~) But it has been held, that a parol ratifi- 
cation cannot make that the deed of the principal which origi- 
nally did not bind him from the agent's want of an authority 
under seal, (o) 2 

It may be stated as a general rule, that no act operates a 
ratification, unless, with a full knowledge of the circumstances, it 
was intended so to operate, or unless it was such an act as 



9 Geo. 70 ; Elam v. Carruth, 2 La. An. 
375 ; Cook v. Bank of Louisiana, id. 
324. It seems the delivery of money 
to the agent for payment hy him to a 
person with whom the agent had con- 
tracted without authority, is such a 
ratification (though the delivery of the 
money be not made known to the other 
contracting party), that if the agent 
embezzle the money, the principal is 
still bound by the contract. Lord El- 
lenboroiir/h, in Rusby v. Scarlet, 5 Esji. 
77. — In Burn v. Morris, 4 Tyr. 4*5, 
trover was maintained against the finder 
of a bank-note for £20 by the owner. 
The defendant got the note changed at 
the Bank of England, and afterwards, 
being taken before the Lord Mayor, £7 
(being part of the proceeds of the note) 
were found upon her and were restored 
to the plaintiff. It was contended that 
this receipt of the £7 was a ratification 
of the defendant's act, and precluded the 
plaintiff from treating it as a conversion ; 
and Brewer v. Sparrow, 7 B. & C 310, 
was cited. But Lord Lt/nd/iurst, C. 15., 
said: " In that case the whole proceeds 
of the sale were taken ; this is an adop- 
tion of the act : here the receipt of the 
£7 does not ratify the act of the parties, 



it only goes in diminution of damages." 
— If the principal, upon being informed 
of what has been done, by one acting as 
his agent, does not give notice of dissent 
in a reasonable time, his assent shall be 
presumed. Cairnes c. Bleecker, 12 Johns. 
300 ; Richmond Manuf. Co. v. Stark, 4 
Mason, 296; Crans v. Hunter, 28 N. Y. 
389. 

(//) Stoddart's case, 4 Court of Claims, 
511. 

(m) Hunter v. Parker, 7 M. & W. 
322 ; Despatch Line v. Bellamy Manuf. 
Co. 12 N H. 205; Worrall v. Munn, 1 
Sold. 229; Randall v. Van Vechten, 19 
Johns. 61 ; Bank of Metropolis v. Gutt- 
schlick, 14 Pet. 29 ; Mitchell a. St. An- 
drew's, &c. Co. 4 Fla. 200 ; Wood v. A. R. 
It. R. Co. 4 Seld. 100 ; Crozier i: Carr, 11 
Tex. 376. But see Wheeler o. Nevins, 34 
Me. 54. 

(n) Maclean v. Dunn, 4 Bing. 722. 

(o) Steiglitz v. Egginton, Holt, 141, 
per Gibbs, C. J. ; Stetson v. Patton, 2 
Greenl. 358 ; Despatch Line v. Bellamy 
Manuf. Co. 12 N. H. 205; Parke, B., 
Hunter v. Parker, 7 M. & W. 343.— 
In Blood v. Goodrich, 9 Wend. 77, Sav- 
age, C. J., advanced the opinion that a 
ratification in writing might suffice. 



1 State v. Spartanburg, &c R. Co. 8 S. C. 129. 

s The unauthorized execution of a deed, whether of an individual or a partner- 
ship, may be ratified by parol. Holbrook v. Chamherlin, 116 Mass. 155. See also 
Bartlett v. Drake, 100 Mass. 174. So the taking possession of land ratifies a mort- 
gage executed without authority by an agent. Pouch v. Wilson, 59 Ind. 93. But 
Pollard i: Gibbs, 55 Ga. 45, was to the effect that an unauthorized execution under 
seal of a crop lien must be ratified under seal. 

52 



CH. III. J 



AGENTS. 



52 



justifies third parties who are interested in the question, in be- 
lieving that it was a ratification, (oo) 1 And the ignorance of the 
principal, although it arose from his own negligence, will invali- 
date the ratification, (op) The evidence of ratification should be 
as clear as that required for an original authority, (oq) 

The ratification of the tort of an agent does not, in general, 
relieve the agent from liability ; although by such ratification in 
tort as well as in contract, a liability is incurred by the princi- 
pal, (p ) 



(oo) Gillie v. Bailey, 17 N. H. 18; 
Dickenson v. Conway, 12 Allen, 487 ; 
Hazelton v. Batchelder, 44 N. H. 40; 
Coombs v. Scott, 12 Allen, 493 ; Holde- 
men v. Baker, 44 N. H. 414; Brass v. 
Worth, 40 Barb. 648 ; Johnson v. Craig, 
21 Ark. 539. 

(op) Coombs v. Scott, 12 Allen, 493. 

(oq) Wisconsin Bank v. Morlev, 19 
Wis. 62. 

(p) It appears indeed to be said in 2 
Greenl. Evid. § 68, that a man cannot 
become a trespasser by ratification. " If 
the act of the agent was in itself unlaw- 
ful, and directly injurious to another, no 
subsequent ratification will operate to 
make the principal a trespasser; for an 
authority to commit a trespass does not 
result by mere implication of law. The 
master is liable in trespass for the act of 
his servant, only in consequence of his 
previous express command." But, as it 
seems, the cases recognize no greater 
difficulty in becoming a trespasser by 
ratifying the trespass of the agent, than 
in becoming liable ex contractu by ratify- 
ing the agent's contract. In neither case 
can the principal be made liable, unless 
the agent, at the time of the tort or the 
contract, undertook to act for him; but 
if the agent, though without any pre- 
cedent authority, did undertake to act 
for the principal, and he subsequently 
ratify, " in that case," in the language of 
Tindal, C. J., Wilson v. Tumman, 6 Man. 
& G. 242, " the principal is bound by the 
act, whether it be for his detriment or 
his advantage, and whether it be founded 
on a tort or a contract, to the same extent, 
as, by, and with all the consequences 
which follow from, the same act done by 
his previous authority. Wilson v. Tum- 
man was an action of trespass against 
T., who had ratified the trespass of 
agents ; but they in committing the tres- 
pass had not acted for T., but for an- 



other person ; and on this account it was 
held that T. was not liable. In Barker 
v. Brahara, 3 Wils. 376, De Grey, C. J., 
said explicitly, "one assenting to a tres- 
pass after it is done is a trespasser." In 
Co. Lit. 180 b, it is stated, that "if A 
disseize one to the use of B, who knowetli 
not of it, and B assent to it, in this case, 
till the agreement, A was tenant of the 
land, and after the agreement, B is ten- 
ant of the land, but both of them be dis- 
seizors; for Oram's ratihabitio retrotrahitur it 
mandato a quiparatur." And where a bailiff 
seized a beast for a heriot where none 
was due, and the lord agreed to the seiz- 
ure and took the beast, the whole court 
agreed that the lord was liable in tres- 
pass, and the only question made was, 
whether the plaintiff might elect to bring 
trover instead. Bishop v. Montague, Cro. 
E. 824. See also Wilson v. Barker, 4 B. 
& Ad. 614, 616, where 4 Inst. 317, is 
cited by Parke, J. ; Hull v. Pickersgill, 
1 Br. & B. 282, 286 ; Pollock, C. B., Bird 
t\ Brown, 4Exch. 786, cited supra, p. *49, 
note g. This matter of trespass by rati- 
fication was very thoroughly discussed, 
and the law respecting it settled substan- 
tially as it has ever since remained, so 
early as 38 Ed. 3, 18; Lib. Ass. 223, pi. 
9, s. u. ; and see the resolution of the 
court stated Bro. Abr. Ejectione Custodie, 
pi. 5, 8, Trespass, pi. 113, 256. — As to 
trespass with battery, or a trespass consti- 
tuting a statutory offence, see Bishop r. 
Montague, Cro. E. 824 ; Hawk. P. C, B. 
2, Ch. 29, § 4 ; but with this last compare 
Gould, 42 ; Moore, 53, pi. 155 ; and Co. 
Lit. 180 b, note 4. 

An interesting and important question 
arose in Buron v. Denman, 2 Exch. 167. 
The defendant, a naval commander, sta- 
tioned on the coast of Africa, with in- 
structions for the suppression of the 
slave trade, went beyond his instructions 
in firing the baracoons of the plaintiff, a 



1 See Phosphate Co. v. Green, L. K. 7 C. P. 43. 



53 



* 53 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

* 53 * An agent who has the power to appoint a sub-agent, may 

ratify his act, and thereby make it binding on the agent's 
principal, (g) * 



*54 "SECTION IV. 

SIGNATURE BY AN AGENT. 

The manner in which an agent should sign an instrument for 
his principal has given rise to some controversy. There has 
been a tendency to discriminate in this respect ; to say, for in- 
stance, that if A signs " A for B," this is the signature of A, and 
ho is the contracting party, although he makes the contract at the 
instance and for the benefit of B. But if he signs " B by A," 
then it is the contract of B made by him through his instrument 
A. In the first case A is the principal ; in the second, B is the 
principal and A his agent. But the recent cases, and the best 
reasons, are, for determining in each instance and with whatever 
technical inaccuracy the signature is made, from the facts and 
the evidence, that a party is an agent or a principal, in accordance 
with the intention of the parties to the contract ; if the words are 
sufficient to bear the construction, (V) 2 But it is still requisite 

Spanish subject, and carrying off certain dinary case of ratification by subsequent 

slaves of which he was there lawfully authority between private individuals, 

possessed. The Lords of the Admiralty If an individual ratifies an act done on 

and the Secretaries of State for the for- his behalf, the nature of the act remains 

eign and colonial departments, respec- unchanged, it is still a mere trespass, and 

tivcly, by letter, adopted and ratified the party injured has his option to sue 

what the defendant had done. Held, by cither ; if the crown ratifies an act, the 

Alderson, Piatt, and Rolfr, BB., that such character of the act becomes altered, for 

ratification was equivalent to a prior the ratification does not give the party 

command, and rendered what otherwise injured the double option of bringing 

would have been a trespass on the part his action against the agent who com- 

of the defendant, an act of state for mitted the trespass or the principal who 

which the crown was alone responsible, ratified it, but a remedy against the 

Parke, B., doubted : " I do not say that crown only (such as it is), and actually 

I dissent ; but I express my concurrence exempts from all liability the person who 

with some doubt, because, on reflection, commits the trespass." 
there appears to me a considerable dis- (q) Newton v. Bronson, 3 Kern. 587. 

tinction between the present and the or- (r) See Mechanics Bank v. Bank of 

1 The ratification of an unauthorized sub-agent's acts binds the principal equally 
as if authorized, as in the collection of money, Strickland u. Hudson, 55 Miss. 235; 
but such ratification docs not render the principal liable to pay for the sub-agent's 
services, Homan v. Brooklyn Ins. Co. 7 Mo. App. 22. See also Grace v. American Ins. 
Co. 16 Blatchford, 433 ; Danahcr p. Garlock, 33 Mich. 295, as to sub-agents. 

2 Thus a draft headed by the name of an insurance company and designating in 

54 



CH. III.] AGENTS. * 55 

that the name of the principal appear as such in the signature of 
a deed, (s) It has been regarded as an established principle, 
that no person is held to be the agent of another in making a 
written contract, unless his agency is stated in the instrument 
itself, and he therein stipulates for his principal by name. (t) 1 
In Stackpole v. Arnold, (u) * Chief Justice Parker considers * 55 
this rule as applicable to every written contract. But the 
rule is qualified, if not contradicted by authorities of much weight, 
and we do not regard it as of great force except in cases of 
sealed instruments, (v) Indeed, Chief Justice Parker, in the 
later case of New England Marine Ins. Co. v. De Wolf, (w) seems 
to confine it to these cases. The rule stated by Mr. Smith 
(2 Leading Cases, note to Thompson v. Davenport), is this : parol 
evidence may always be admitted to charge an unnamed principal ; 
but not to discharge the actual signer. Good reasons may be 
given for this rule ; but it is not sustained by all the authorities. 

Columbia, 6 Wheat. 326, 337; Long v. Courtney, 5 Pet. 319, 350. See Beck- 
Colburn, 11 Mass. 97 ; Abbey v. Chase, ham v. Drake, 9 M. & W. 79. 
6Cush. 54; Sheldon v. Kendall, 7 Cush. (t) Long v. Colburn, 11 Mass. 97; 
217 ; Wilks v. Black, 2 East, 142 ; Wil- Magill v. Hinsdale, 6 Conn. 464 ; Han- 
burn v. Larkin, 3 Blackf. 55 ; Hunter v. cock v. Fairfield, 30 Me. 299. 
Miller, 6 B. Mon. 612; Whitehead v. (h) 11 Mass. 27. 
Reddick, 12 Ired. L. 95; Mc Call v. Clay- (i>) Evans v. Wells, 22 Wend. 324; 
ton, 1 Busb. L. 422 ; Sydnor v. Hurd, 8 Pinckney v. Hagadorn, 1 Duer, 89 ; An- 
Tex. 98 ; Giddens v. Byers' Heirs, 12 id. drews v. Estes, 2 Pair!'. 267. The undis- 
75; Johnson v. Smith, 21 Conn. 627; closed principal, however, can never 
Rogers v. March, 33 Me. 106 ; Southern come in and take advantage of a written 
Ins. Co. v. Gray, 3 Flor. 262 ; Hicks v. contract entered into by his agent in a 
Hinde, 9 Barb. 528. But see Moss v. Liv- case where the latter has distinctly de- 
ingston, 4 Comst. 208 ; Lennard v. Rob- scribed himself in the writing as principal. 
inson, 5 El. & Bl. 125. In Pinckney Lucas v. De La Cour, 1 M. & Sel. 249; 
v. Hagadorn, 1 Duer, 89, an auctioneer 2 Greenl. Evid. § 281. In Humble v 
had signed his own name to a receipt for Hunter, 12 Q. B. 310, which was an ac- 
the deposit made upon the purchase of tlon of assumpsit on a charter-party exe- 
real estate sold to the plaintiff at auction ecuted, not by the plaintiff, but by a 
" for which a good and sufficient title is third person who in the contract de- 
to be given by J. H. and others ; " it was scribed himself as the " owner " of the 
held, that this was a sufficient signing by ship, it was held, that evidence was not 
J. H. within the Statute of Frauds, although admissible to show that such person was 
his signature did not appear in the the plaintiff's agent, 
subscription. (">) 8 Pick. 56 ; Northampton Bank v. 
(s) Bac Abr. Leases, I. 10; Clarke v. Pepoon, 11 Mass. 288, 292. 

print in the margin the signers as its general agents, drawn upon the company in 
payment of a claim, is the draft of the company and not of the agents although 
signed by them in their own names. Chipman v. Foster, 119 Mass. 189. We have 
this day sold to you, on account of M. & Co, 2,000 cases of oranges signed B ..& 
Co." without more, does not bind " H. & Co." personally. Gadd v Houghton, 1 Ex. 
D. 357. See Cutler v. Ashland, 121 Mass. 588. Lacy v. Dubuque Lumber Co. id la. 
510, held a principal bound, although the agent's name and designation appeared 

° ^ A y deed ^ianed "A. B. by C. D. his attorney in fact," is a sufficient execution 
without reciting the fact in the body of the deed. Tidd v. Rines, 26 Minn. 201. 

55 



56 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

We give in our note the cases on this subject, (x) l As be- 
: 56 tween an undischarged principal and a third * party, a letter 



(x) In favor of this rule may be cited 
Humble v. Hunter, 12 Q. B. 310 ; Hig- 
gins v. Senior, 8 M. & W. 834 ; Trueman 
v. Loder, 11 A. & E. 594.— In Beckham 
t>. Drake, 9 M. & W. 79, where it was de- 
cided that a partner might be held liable 
upon a written contract, signed by his 
copartners, but in which his name did 
not appear, Lord Abimjer, C. B., and 
Parke, B., took occasion to consider the 
case upon the principles of Agency. 
They admitted that in the case of a bill 
of exchange or promissory note, none but 
the parties named in the instrument by 
their name or firm, can be made liable 
to an action upon it, but were of opinion 
that all other written contracts, not un- 
der seal, stand upon the same 'footing 
with regard to the parties who may be 
sued upon them, as contracts not written. 
The weight of American authority is as 
yet opposed to the admission of parol 
evidence to charge an unnamed party. 
Many of the cases in which this broad 
doctrine was laid down by our courts, 
were cases of mercantile paper, yet the 
decisions evidently were not rested upon 
the peculiar character of this class of 
instruments. Whether American courts 
will be inclined hereafter to follow the 
English judges, and draw a line of dis- 
tinction which shall leave ordinary writ- 
ten contracts open to the admission of 
new parties, remains to be seen. It is 
certain, however, that considerations 
deserving great attention may be urged 
against the admissibility of parol evi- 
dence to charge with liability upon a 
written contract a party not referred to 
be in it. See Long e. Colburn, 11 Mass. 
97; Lerned v. Johns, 9 Allen, 419; 
Stackpole v. Arnold, 11 Mass. 27 ; Brad- 
lee o. Boston Glass Co. 16 Pick. 350 ; 
Savage v. Rix, 9 N. H. 263 ; Minard v. 
Mead, 7 Wend. 68 ; Spencer p. Field, 
10 Wend. 87 ; United States v. Parmele, 
Paine, C. C. 252 ; Fenly v. Stewart, 
5 Sandf. 101. In Finney v. Bedford Com- 
mercial Ins. Co. 8 Met. 348, it was held, 
that when a part-owner of a vessel or 



its outfits effects insurance thereon in 
his own name only, and nothing in the 
policy shows that the interest of any 
other person is secured thereby, an ac- 
tion on the policy cannot be maintained 
in the names of all the owners, upon pa- 
rol evidence that such part-owner was 
their agent for procuring insurance and 
that his agency and their ownership 
were known to the underwriters, and 
that the underwriters agreed to insure 
for them all, and that it was the inten- 
tion of all the parties, in making the 
policy, to cover the interest of all the 
owners. And with this recent case 
agrees the decision of the Supreme 
Court in Graves v. Boston Mar. Ins. 
Co. 2 Cranch, 419, 439. But in Hunt- 
ington c. Knox, 7 Cush. 371, which was 
an action by the plaintiff to recover the 
price of certain bark sold and delivered 
to the defendant under a contract in 
writing, by which one Geo. H. Hunting- 
ton acknowleged to have received of the 
defendant a partial payment of $25, and 
in consideration thereof, agreed to deliver 
to the defendant the bark in question, it 
was decided that the plaintiff, Mehitabel 
Huntington, might show by parol evi- 
dence that the contract was made by 
Geo. H. Huntington on her account, and 
that the bark delivered was her property, 
and that she was entitled to recover on 
the contract. Shaw, C. J., relies upon the 
case of Higgins v. Senior, and states 
the principle broadly thus : " Where a 
contract is made for the benefit of one 
not named, though in writing, the latter 
may sue on the contract jointly with 
others or alone, according to the interest. 
The rights and liabilities of a principal 
upon a written instrument executed by 
his agent do not depend upon the fact of 
the agency appearing on the instrument 
itself, but upon the facts, first, that the 
act is done in the exercise, and second, 
within the limits of the powers delegated ; 
and these are necessarily inquirable into 
by evidence." Considerable stress is 
however laid upon the fact that this 



1 Chandler ». Coe, 54 N. H. 561, decided that such evidence was admissible to 
charge an unknown but not a known principal, but inadmissible to discharge the 
agent, whether the principal was known or unknown. A principal may sue in his 
own name on a non-negotiable promissory note made in his behalf and for his bene- 
fit, although in terms payable to the agent. National Ins. Co. v. Allen, 116 Mass. 
398. Under an unsealed lease signed by an agent in his own name as " agent as 
landlord," the landlord may sue for rent in his own name. Nicoll v. Burke, 78 
N. Y. 680. 

56 



CH. III.] 



AGENTS. 



57 



of the agent informing the principal of his action with the reply 
of the latter approving thereof, will be evidence of the agent's 
authority ; even though the terms stated in the * letter be * 57 
not precisely those of the transaction, if the latter be not 
unreasonable nor unusual and in substance the same. (*/) 

The case of an attorney for a corporation executing a deed of 
their land, under his own name and seal, is considered in the 
chapter on Corporations, (yy) 

The case sometimes occurs where a person holding some office, 
signs his name, adding to it the name of his office, for the pur- 
pose of representing himself as an official agent, and preventing 
his personal liability. But this mere addition seldom has this 
effect, being usually regarded only as a word of description, (z) 



action was not brought upon the writ- 
ten contract itself, but for the price of 
goods sold by the agent, from which 
the promise to pay implied by law, al- 
though prima facie to the agent, might 
be controlled by parol evidence that the 
contract was for the sale of property 
belonging to the principal, and sold by 
her through her agent. Upon this dis- 
tinction this case may be reconciled with 
Finney v. Bedford Commercial Ins. Co., 
which was not, however, alluded to in 
the case. Newcomb v. Clark, 1 Denio, 
226, was an action by C. upon an agree- 
ment in writing with P., who, it was in 
proof, was C.'s agent. Held, that an ac- 
tion upon an express contract (not being 
a negotiable instrument), must be brought 
in the name of the party with whom it 
was made ; and it is not competent to 
show by parol that the promisee was the 
agent of another person for the purpose 
of enabling such person to maintain an 
action. And in Fenly v. Stewart, 5 
Sandf. 101, which was an action of as- 
sumpsit to charge the defendants as 
principals upon a contract with A. W. 
Otis & Co., to deliver 25,000 bushels of 
oats to the plaintiffs, and in which the 
Messrs. Otis were introduced and testi- 
fied that at the time they signed the 
written agreement for the sale and deliv- 
ery of the oats in their own name, they 
were the agents of the defendants ; it 
was decided that the plaintiffs could not 
recover, and the court denying the dictum 
of Baron Parke, in the case of Higgins v. 
Senior, that it is competent by parol 
proof to charge a party upon a contract 
in writing made by another person in his 
own name, stated the rule to be, " that 
where a contract is reduced to writing, 
whether in compliance with the requi- 



sitions of the Statute of Frauds or not, 
and it is necessary to sue upon the 
writing itself, there you cannot go out 
of the writing, or contradict or alter it 
by parol proof, and consequently can- 
not recover against a party not named 
in tiie writing ; but where the contract 
of sale has been executed so that an 
action may be maintained for the price 
of the goods irrespective of the writ- 
ing, there the party who has had the 
benefit of the sale may be held liable, 
unless the vendor, knowing who the 
principal is, has elected to consider the 
agent his debtor." The true principle 
upon which this seeming contrariety of 
opinion may be reconciled, would appear 
to be that laid down in the case of Fenly 
v. Stewart, and may be stated thus : 
where a contract is reduced to writing, 
and an action is brought upon the writ- 
ing itself, no other persons can be made 
parties than those named in the instru- 
ment, but when a right of action exists 
independent of the writing, which is 
merely offered as evidence tending among 
other things, to establish that right, then 
the party having the legal interest or li- 
ability, and for whom the contract was 
actually made, may sue or be sued, al- 
though not named in the writing. But 
Hubbert v. Borden, 6 Whart. 79 ; Violett 
v. Powell, 10 B. Mon. 347; Brooks v. 
Minturn, 1 Cal. 481 ; and Cothay v. Fen- 
nell, 10 B. & C. 671, are authorities to 
show that an unnamed principal may 
come in to take the benefit of a written 
contract with an agent, who acted in his 
own name. 

(y) Campbell o. Hicks, 4 H. & N. 
(Ex'ch.), 851. 

lyy) See post, p. * 140 and note. 

Mare v. Charles, 5 E. & B. 978. See 

57 



* 57 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

So if he adds only the word " trustee," or even " agent," it has 
been said that he is held personally ; but this is sometimes de- 
nied, (zz) 1 If the plaintiff knew that the agent acted only in the 
official capacity which he designates, and accepted the contract as 
such, the agent would not be held personally, (zd) A general 
rule may be drawn from the cases to this effect ; one signing as 
" agent," without giving the name of his principal, is himself 
bound. But if he gives the name of his principal, he is himself 
bound only as agent, (zb*) 

See further as to the form of the signature, chapter sixth, on 
Attorneys. 

post, p. *122. Venable & Co. v. Curd & 111. 238; Bingham v. Stewart, 13 Minn. 

White, 2 Ik>ad, 582. In this last case it 106 ; Pratt v. Beaupre, 13 Stewart, 187. 

was held that the acts of officers de facto Held, that he may sign the name of his 

are valid when they concern the public or principal first, and add his own as agent 

the rights of third persons who have an thus : " A, by B, agent," in Smith v. 

interest in the act done. But a different Morse, 9 Wall. 76. 
rule prevails where the act is for the (za) Randal v. Snyder, 1 Laws. 163. 

benefit of the officer, because he cannot (zb) See Williams v. Robbins, 16 Gray, 

be allowed to take advantage of his own 77, and compare Means v. Swomestedt, 

wrong. 32 Ind. 87, with Dutton v. Marsh, L. R. 6 

(=) Bickford v. First, &c. Bank, 42 Q. B. 361. 

1 An instrument in the form of a note beginning, " We as trustees but not indi- 
vidually promise to pay," and signed " A. B. and C., trustees," secured by a mort- 
gage given by A. B. and C. as trustees, does not bind them personally. Shoe & 
Leather Bank v. Dix, 123 Mass. 148. A mortgage assignment from a loan associa- 
tion, concluding, " In witness whereof the said association, by J. S., its president, 
duly authorized for this purpose, has hereunto set its seal, and the said J. S., 
president as aforesaid, has hereunto set his hand," signed "J. S., president of" 
(giving the association name), and sealed, is in form executed by the association. 
Murphy v. Welch, 128 Mass. 489. But a charter-party signed by A. & B. as " agents 
to merchants," binds them personally for failure, under a trade usage, to disclose 
their principal within a reasonable time. Hutchinson v. Tatham, L. R. 8 C. P. 482. 
See Fleet v. Murton, L. R. 7 Q. B. 126. A note signed by "A., agent," Bartlett v. 
Hawley, 120 Mass. 92; by "A., receiver," Towne v. Rice, 122 Mass. 67; by "A., 
treasurer," Mellen v. Moore, 68 Me. 390; by "A., administratrix," Harrison v. 
McClelland, 57 Ga. 531 ; by "A. & B., school trustees," Cahokia Trustees v. Rauten- 
berg, 88 111. 219 ; by " A. & B., trustees of the, &c. Church," Hayes v. Matthews, 63 
Ind. 412; or by "A., vestryman, Grace Church," Tilden v. Barnard, 43 Mich. 376, 
binds the signer personally. A person, who describes himself in the body of a con- 
tract "as agent," and signs his name without more, is liable personally. Paice v. 
Walker, L. R. 5 Ex. 173; but not if he there describes himself as contracting "on 
account of." Gadd v. Houghton, 1 Ex. D. 357. 

58 



CH. III.] AGENTS. * 58 

SECTION V. 

DURATION AND EXTENT OP AUTHORITY. 

Where there is an authority expressly given or implied by law, 
it is important to determine its extent, scope, and duration. 
Where a principal has held one out as his general agent, or 
authorized parties so to regard him by continued acquiescence 
and confirmation, we have said that the principal cannot limit or 
qualify his own liability by instructions, or limitations, given by 
him to his agent, and not made known in any way to parties act- 
ing with such agent, (a) And where an agent is employed to 
transact some specific business, and only that, yet he binds his 
principal by such subordinate acts as are necessary to, or are usu- 
ally and properly done in connection with the principal act, 
or to carry the same into effect. (6) * And he has a * rea- * 58 

(a) Pickering v. Busk, 15 East, 38; 461: Lord Elhnborouqh, Helyear v. 
Whitehead v. Tuckett, 16 East, 400; Hawke, 5 Esp. 75; Withington v. Her- 
Commercial Bank v. Kortright, 22 Wend, ring, 5 Bing. 442 ; Goodson v. Brooke, 4 
348 ; Munn v. Commission Co. 15 Johns. Camp. 163 ; Barnett v. Lambert, 15 M. & 
44 ; Hatch v. Taylor, 10 N. H. 538 ; Lob- W. 489 ; Denman v. Bloomer, 11 111. 177 ; 
dell v. Baker, 1 Met. 193 ; Nickson v. Eranklin v. Ezell, 1 Sneed, 497. So where 
Brohan, 10 Mod. 109 ; Runquist v. Ditch- the government is the principal and a 
ell, 3 Esp. 64 ; Precious v. Abel, 1 Esp. statute the letter of authority. United 
350; Howard v. Howard, 11 How.Pr. 80; States v. Wyngall, 5 Hill (N. Y.), 16.— 
Lloyd v. West Branch Bank, 15 Penn. If a party authorizes a broker to buy 
St. 172 ; Chouteaux v. Leach, 18 Penn. St. shares for him in a particular market, 
224. — E converso, it would seem that a where the usage is, that when a pur- 
third party dealing with an agent cannot chaser does not pay for his shares within 
have the benefit against the principal of a given time, the vendor, giving the pur- 
a private arrangement between the lat- chaser notice, may resell and charge him 
ter and the agent, of which such third with the difference; and the broker, 
party neither knew nor was entitled to acting under the authority, buys at such 
know. See Acey v. Fernie, 7 M. & W. market in his own name ; such broker, if 
j52 ' compelled to pay a difference on the 

(6) Tredwen o. Bourne, 6 M. & W. shares through neglect of his principal 

» Thus a mercantile firm is liable for the necessary horse-hire of an agent selling 
bv sample although the latter was furnished with money for that purpose and was 
forbidden to pledge the firm's credit, Bentley v. Doggett, 51 Wis. 224; a person 
held out as manager of a hotel binds the hotel-keeper by his purchases of necessary 
supplies on credit, Beecher v. Venn, 35 Mich., 466; an oral contrac of insurance 
made bv a local agent binds the company, Putnam v. Home Ins. Co 123 Mass. 324, 
a railroad agent, authorized to issue bills of lading, binds the railroad by issuing one 
on a forged warehouse receipt, no goods being in fact received, Armour v. Mich &c. 
R. Co. 65 N. Y. Ill ; and an agent for the sale of a horse for a fixed sum without 
further restriction binds the owner by a warranty, Tice v. Gallop, 5 Inomp. & C. 01. 
To the same effect see Newman v. British, &c. Co. 113 Mass. 362; Knight v. Luce, 
U6 Mass 586 ■ St Lo^is, &c. Co. .. Parker, 59 Ul. 23 ; Rice „. Groffmann, 56 Mo. 434. 

59 



*59 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



sonable discretion as to the execution of his authority. Thus, 
an agent employed by government to collect debts, may, in 
the exercise of this discretion, give the debtor reasonable in- 
dulgence as to the time of payment, (c) But no officer of the 
United States can enter into a submission to arbitration which 
shall bind them, unless authorized by an act of Congress. (<f) 
But an agent is not at liberty to exercise this discretion in the 
choice of a mode of performing the duty imposed upon him, if 
some one mode, and that only, is fixed either by usage or by the 
orders of his principal, if he is a general agent ; or if he is a par- 
ticular agent, by his principal's orders alone ; for then he must 
adopt that very mode and no other, (e) An authority to sell 
does not carry with it authority to sell on credit, unless such be 
the usage of the trade ; but if there be such usage, then the agent 
may sell on credit unless specially instructed and required to sell 
only for cash. (#) And if he sells for credit, having no authority 
to do so, he becomes personally responsible to his principal 
* 59 for the whole debt, (/i) So is he also if * he blends the 



to supply funds, may sue the principal 
for money paid to his use. Pollock v. 
Stables, 12 Q. B. 765 ; Bayliffe v. Butter- 
worth, 1 Exch. 425. See, on the limita- 
tion of general powers, Blum v. Robert- 
son, 24 Oal. 127. 

(c) United States v. Hudson, 3 Mc- 
Lean, 156. 

(d) United States v. Ames, 1 Woodb. 
& M. 76, 89. 

(e) Daniel v. Adams, Ambl. 495. And 
the incidental means the agent resorts to 
in carrying out his authority must be 
those which usually attend an agency of 
that kind : if an extraordinary exigence 
occur he has no right to have recourse 
to extraordinary means to meet it. Haw- 
tayne v. Bourne, 7 M. & W. 595. 

(<7) Holt, 0. J., Anon. 12 Mod. 514; 
Lord Ellenhorongh, Wiltshire v. Sims, 1 
Camp. 258; Van Allen v. Vanderpool, 
6 Johns. 60; Robertson v. Livingston, 6 
Cowen, 473; James v. McCredie, 1 liav, 
291 ; Uelafield v. Illinois, 26 Wend. 223 ; 
Stoddard v. Mcllwain, 7 Rich. L. 525; 
Mellen, J., in Greely v. Bartlett, 1 Greenl. 
172, 179, stated the rule of the law mer- 
chant to be that a factor may sell the 
goods of his principal on a reasonable 
credit unless restrained by instructions or 
a special usage. 

(h) Barksdale v. Brown, 1 Nott & 
McC. 517; Walker v. Smith, 4 Dallas, 
389. And the principal may also main- 

60 



tain trover against the vendee. Holt, 
C. J., Anon. 12 Mod. 514 ; and see Wilt- 
shire v. Sims, 1 Camp. 258. — An agent 
to sell has no power to barter, and if he 
undertake to do so, the principal may 
recover the goods, although the party 
receiving them was ignorant that the 
agent was not the owner. Guerreiro v. 
Peile, 3 B. & Aid. 616. — A simple au- 
thority to sell will not authorize a sale 
at auction. Towle i>. Leavitt, 3 Foster 
(N. H.), 360. — And it seems an au- 
thority to sell at auction will not support 
a private sale, although more is thus 
obtained than the agent was limited to 
in case of an auction sale. Daniel v. 
Adams, Ambl. 495. — At common law 
an agent cannot pledge the goods of his 
principal without special authority. Pat- 
erson v. Tash, 2 Stra. 1178 ; Daubigny v. 
Duval, 5 T. R. 604; De Bouchout o. 
Goldsmid, 5 Ves. 211 ; Rodriguez v. Heff- 
ernman, 5 Johns. Ch. 417 ; Bott v. McCoy, 
20 Ala. 578. This has been modified in 
England by various statutes (4 Geo. IV. 
c. 83 ; 6 Geo. III. c. 94 ; 5 & 6 Vict. c. 
39). See Navulshaw v. Brownrigg, 2 
De G., M. & G. 441. And in several 
States of this Union statutory enactments 
have been made providing that any con- 
signee, agent, or factor, having possession 
of merchandise with authority to sell 
the same, or having possession of any 
bill of lading, permit, certificate, or order 



CH. III.] AGENTS. 



59 



accounts of his principal with his own, or takes a note payable 
to himself, ({) If an agent to whom goods are intrusted for a 
particular purpose, sell the same to a person, or in a manner not 
within the scope of his authority, the principal may disaffirm the 
sale and recover the goods of the vendee, if he have not justified 
the vendee in believing that the agent had such authority. (7c) 
Even a general agent, appointed and authorized to transact busi- 
ness in the most general terms, cannot bind his principal in any 
matter which does not fairly fall within the business, (kit) x So 
an authority to buy a certain lot of land or other special thing, 
does not authorize the agent to sell or exchange it, (kl) 2 or buy 
more or less, (km) 

If the power of an agent be given by a written instrument, 
which instrument is known to the party contracting with him, 
such instrument must be followed strictly, and the power given 
by it cannot be varied or enlarged by evidence of usage ; (V) 8 

for the delivery of merchandise with the vided the pledgee make the advances 

like authority, shall be deemed the true in good faith believing that the agent 

owner thereof so as to give validity to had authority to enter into the contract, 

the sale, disposition, or pledge of such — If the merchandise was pledged to 

merchandise as security for any ad- secure antecedent advances, the pledgee 

vances, negotiable paper, or other obli- acquires no other right or interest in the 

gation given on faith thereof. Maine pledge than was possessed or could have 

R. S. (1841), ch. 43, sect. 2; Mass. been enforced by the agent or factor at 

Sup. to R. S. ch. 216, § 3, Pub. Laws the time of making the pledge. Me. R. 

of R. I. (1844), p. 280, sect. 2 ; N. Y. S. (1841), ch. 43, sect. 3; Mass. Sup. to 

R. S. (1846), vol. ii. part 2, ch. 4, tit. R. S. ch. 216, sect. 4; Pub. Laws of R. I. 

v. § 1-3; Laws of Penn. (1846), ch. (1844), p. 280, sect. 3; N. Y. R. S. (1846) 

ccccxvii. 3. — By the statutes of some vol. ii. part 2, ch. 4, tit. 5, §4; Laws of 

of the States the pledgee cannot retain Penn. (1846), ch. ccccxvii. 4. 
the merchandise if he had notice that (i) Symington v. McLin, 1 Dev. & B. 

the factor was not the true owner before 291. See post, p. *95, n. (w). 
he made the advances, for which the (k) Peters ». Ballistier, 3 Pick. 495; 

merchandise was pledged as security. Nash v. Drew, 5 Cush. 422. 
But the statute of Massachusetts pro- (kk) Weston v. Alley, 49 Maine, 94. 

vides that the pledgee shall hold good, But see State v. Atherton, 16 N. H. 203; 

" notwithstanding the person making Stevenson v. Hoy, 43 Penn. St. 191. 
such advances upon the faith of such (kl) Tod v. Benedict, 15 la., 591. 

deposit or pledge may have had notice (km) Olyphant v. McNair, 41 Barb, 

that the person with whom he made 446; Rice v. Tavernier, 8 Minn. 248. 
such contract was only an agent," pro- (/) Delafield v. Illinois, 26 Wend. 192. 

1 An agent authorized to give a note for borrowed money, cannot embody therein 
an agreement to pay an attorney's fee if not paid at maturity. Trenton Bank v. 
Gay, 63 Mo. 33. That a general agent to borrow money and purchase supplies may 
give the ordinary securities, see Hatch v. Coddington, 95 U. S. 48. 

2 So one employed to sell land, cannot exchange it, Lumpkin v. Wilson, 5 Heiskell, 
655; nor an agent to collect, release debts, Herring v. Hottendorf, 74 N. C. 688. bee 
also Silliman v. Fredericksburg, &c. R. Co. 27 Gratt. 119; Wanless v McCandless, 
38 la. 20 ; Baxter v. Lamont, 60 111. 237 ; Meade v. Brothers, 28 Wis. 689. 

3 Where a principal sends a written order capable of two interpretations, and the 
agent bona fide acts upon one of them, the principal cannot be released from his con- 
tract on the ground that he intended it to bear the other. Ireland v. Livingston, 
L. R. 5 H. L. 395. 

61 



* 60 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

because the effect of usage is properly limited to the manner in 
which the power is to be exercised ; and even in this respect it 
cannot control the language of the instrument, although it may 
aid in construing its words, or in supplying some that are needed. 
But an agent authorized to make a certain contract, may bind his 
principal by one which while it differs in its precise terms is of 
the same legal effect ; especially if it secures additional benefits 
to his principal. (11} 

An agent employed to answer particular questions, and with- 
holding some facts material to the contract, about which 

* 60 * no questions are asked, does not thereby vitiate the con- 

tract;^) it would be otherwise if such agent were em- 
ployed to make the contract, (n) A mere power to sell land 
gives the agent no power to convey, (nri) x 

It has been held that a power to sell carries with it a power to 
warrant ; (o) 2 but we think it the better rule, that an agent em- 
ployed to sell, without express power to warrant, cannot give a 
warranty which shall bind the principal, unless the sale is one 
which is usually attended with warranty, in which case he 
may ; (p ) 3 thus an auctioneer has, in general, no implied author- 

[II) Simonds v. Clapp, 16 N. H. 222. sell goods at wholesale is an authority to 

(m) Huckman v. Fernie, 3 M. & ff. sell by sample. Andrews u. Kneeland, 

505. 6 Cowen, 334. An agent to sell a horse 

(n) Everett v. Desborough, 5 Bing. may warrant his soundness. Alexander 

503 ; Fitzherbert v. Mather, 1 T. R. 12. v. Gibson, 2 Camp. 555 ; Bradford v. 

(nn) Force v. Dutcher, 3 Green, 401. Bush, 10 Ala. 386. See Brady v. Todd, 

(o) Nelson r. Cowing, 6 Hill (X. Y.), 9 C. B. (n. s.) 592. In Alabama, an 

336; Woodford u. McClenahan, 4 Gil- authority to sell a slave has been held to 

man, 85 ; Hunter v. Jameson, 6 Ired. L. imply an authority to warrant. Skinner 

252; Franklin !>. Ezell, 1 Sneed, 497; v. Gunn, 9 Port. (Ala.) 305; Gaines v. 

Schuchai-dt c. Aliens, l'Wall. 359. MeKinley, 1 Ala. 446. But an agent to 

(p) Gibson v. Colt, 7 Johns. 390; Hel- deliver has no authority to warrant. 

year .'. Hawke, 5 Esp. 72; Croom v. Woodin v. Burford, 2 Cr. & M. 291, 4 

Shaw, 1 Flor. 211; Smith i\ Tracy, 36 Tyr. 264. In -judicial sales there is no 

N. Y. 79. A sale by sample is a war- warranty express or implied. The Monte 

ranty that the bulk shall correspond with Allegre, 9 Wheat. 616. 

the sample ; and a general authority to 

i Lyon v. Pollock, 99 U. S. 668. 

2 See Randall v. Kehlor, 60 Me. 37, as to the authority of a commission merchant 
to warrant the condition of flour. 

3 A special agent to sell a horse is not thereby authorized to warrant its quality, 
Cooley v. Perrine, 12 Vroom, 322; s. c. 13 Vroom, 623. But a general agent for the 
sale of reapers may warrant them, Murray v. Brooks, 41 la. 45. See Pitsinowsky v. 
Beardsley, 37 la. 9. Where one adopts a sale made by another as his agent, he 
cannot repudiate a warranty which is an essential part of the contract. Churchill 
v. Palmer, 115 Mass. 310 ; Eadie v. Ashbaugh, 44 la. 619. See generally, Anderson 
v. Bruner, 112 Mass. 14; Boothbv v. Scales, 27 Wis. 626; Morris v. Bowen, 52 
N. H. 416; Palmer v. Hatch, 46 Mo. 585 ; Fay v. Richmond, 43 Vt. 25; Applegate 
«\ Moffitt, 60 Ind. 104 ; Baker v. Amot, 67 N. Y. 448 ; Harrison v. Shanks, 13 Bush, 
620. 

62 



CH. III.] AGENTS. * 61 

ity to sell with warranty of the quality of what he sells, (q) 
But even where usage would permit a warranty, if the principal 
gives his agent express instructions not to warrant, and the agent 
does warrant, although it has been said that such warranty is not 
binding on the principal, on the general ground that no princi- 
pal is bound by the acts of his agent if such acts transcend his 
authority, (r) yet the better opinion is that the principal is bound 
by such warranty, where the buyer was justified by the nature of 
the case in believing that this authority was given, and had no 
means of knowing the limitation of the authority of the agent, (s) 

An agent for collection of negotiable paper is a holder for pur- 
poses of protest, and is held to the obligations of a holder. («s) x 

* The usage of the trade or business is of great import- * 61 
ance in determining all these questions ; but this important 
distinction seems to be taken between the case of a written 
authority and that of an oral authority, namely, — where the 
authority is oral and is known to the party dealing with the 
agent, usage may enlarge and affect the authority, or the con- 
tract ; but, as has been already stated, usage has not this power 
where the whole authority is in writing, and this is known to the 
party dealing with the agent. (£) 

If a principal sells goods by an agent, and the agent makes a 
material misrepresentation which he believes to be true, and his 
principal knows to be false, this is the falsehood of the principal 
and avoids the sale, (u) 2 

(q) Blood v. French, 9 Gray, 197 ; a stranger to a fair with express direc- 

Brady v. Todd, 9 C. B. (n. s.) 692. tions Dot to warrant the horse, and the 

(r) Lord Kem/on, Fenn v. Harrison, 3 latter acted contrary to the orders, the 

T. R. 760 ; Dodderidge, C. J., Seignior purchaser could only have recourse to 

and Wolmer's case, G'odb. 361. the person who actually sold the horse, 

(s) Ashhurst, J., Fenn v. Harrison, 3 and the owner would not be liable on the 
T. R. 760, who said : " I take the dis- warranty, because the servant was not 
tinction to be that if a person keeping acting within the scope of his employ- 
livery stables, and having a horse to sell, ment." So per Bayley, J., Pickering v. 
directed his servant not to warrant him, Busk, 15 East, 45. 

and the servant did nevertheless warrant (ss) State Bank u. Bank of the Cap- 

him, still the master would be liable on itol, 41 Barb. 343. 

the warranty, because the servant was (t) Attwood v. Munnings, 7 «._ & ex- 
acting within the general scope of his 278; s. c. 1 Man & R. 66; Schimniel- 
authority, and the public cannot be sup- penmch v. Bayard, 11 et. 2b4. 
posed to be cognizant of any private con- (u) Schneider v Heath 3. Camp. oUo. 
versation between the master and servant; And this is true although the represen. 
but if the owner of a horse were to send tations are of such a character that the 

i But an agent to collect a note, cannot sell it. Smith v. Johnson, 71 Mo. 382. 
2 The representation must be in a matter of fact, and not in point , oi law. 
Beattie v. Lord Ebury, L. R. 7 Ch. 777. See Upton v. Tnbikock, 91 U. S. 45, to the 



*62 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



*62 *An agent's acts in making or transferring negotiable 
paper (especially if by indorsement), are much restrained. 
It seems that they can be authorized only by express and direct au- 
thority, or by some express power which necessarily implies these 
acts, because the power cannot be executed without them, (v) l 
But, to this extent, the principal will be held. Thus, if a prin- 
cipal supply an agent with his acceptances in blank, as to date, 
amount, time, and place of payment, but payable to the order 



principal is not bound by them ; for, as 
was said by Lord Abinqer in Cornfoot v. 
Fowke, 6 M. & W. 386 : " It does not 
follow that because he is not bound by 
the representation of an agent without 
authority, he is therefore entitled to 
bind another man to a contract obtained 
by the false representation of that agent. 
It is one thing to say that he may avoid 
a contract if his agent, without his au- 
thority, has inserted a warranty in the 
contract ; and another to say that he 
may enforce a contract obtained by 
means of a false representation made 
by his agent, because the agent had no 
authority." Cornfoot v. Fowke, 6 M. & 
W. 358, was an assumpsit for the non- 
performance of an agreement to take a 
ready-furnished house. The plaintiff had 
employed C. to let the house in question, 
and the defendant being in treaty with 
C. for taking it, was informed by him 
that there was no objection to the house ; 
but after entering into the agreement, 
discovered that the adjoining house 
was a brothel, and on that account de- 
clined to fulfil the contract. It appeared 
that the plaintiff knew of the existence 
of the brothel before, but C, the agent, 
did not. The majority of the court held, 
contrary to the opinion of Lord Abingar, 
C. B., that these facts furnished no 
ground of defence to the action. This 
case has been very much questioned 
from the first, and was overruled in 
Fuller v. Wilson, 3 Q. B. f>R. The 
judgment in the latter case was indeed 
reversed in the Exchequer Chamber, 3 
Q. B. 03, but not on this point : Lord 
Abinger there saying, 3 Q. B. 76: "The 
judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench 
on the motion to enter a verdict was not 
given upon the facts now before us. We 
shall not reverse that if we give judg- 



ment now for the plaintiff in error." In 
this country, Cornfoot a. Fowke was 
denied to be law by the court in Fitz- 
simmons u. Joslin, 21 Vt. 129. And in 
Crump v. U. S. Mining Co. 7 Gratt. 362, 
where the plaintiffs authorized their 
agent to procure subscriptions to a pro- 
spectus in the form of a subscription 
paper for the sale of stock in their gold 
mining company upon the terms pre- 
scribed in such prospectus, representing 
the mines to be in full and successful oper- 
ation, with several particulars of descrip- 
tion and recommendation, and referring 
to the last report of the directors of the 
company for a full description of the 
mines, buildings, and machinery, which 
paper was signed by the defendants ; it 
was held that they might, in an action 
upon the contract, prove that the agent 
at the time of procuring their subscrip- 
tions, made representations in addition 
to those contained in the prospectus and 
reports of the company, upon the faith 
of which the defendants became subscrib- 
ers, but which representations were false 
and fraudulent ; although it was insisted 
by the plaintiffs that the authority of 
their agent was limited and defined by 
the prospectus and report. 

(v) Paige v. Stone, 10 Met. 160; Ros- 
siter v. Rossiter, 8 Wend. 494. An assur- 
ance by an agent that bills will be 
accepted by his principal, though acted 
upon by the party assured, is not as 
between the latter and the principal to be 
treated as equivalent to an acceptance of 
the bills, so as to vest in the principal 
legal rights from the time such assurance 
is given. Hoare v. Dresser, 7 H. L. Cas. 
290; Harrow v. Fisher, 10 C. B. n. s. 196. 
But see Layet n. Gano, 17 Ohio, 466; 
Forsyth'v. Day, 46 Maine, 176. 



effect that one, induced to subscribe for stock by an agent's fraudulent misrepre- 
sentations, must repudiate the transaction seasonably. 

1 The treasurer of a savings bank has no authority to indorse its name on a 
promissory note ; and a vote of the corporation to sell notes held by it does not con- 
fer such authority. Bradlee v. Warren Savings Bank, 127 Mass. 107. 

64 



CH - m AGENTS. * 62 

of that correspondent, though part of these acceptances may 
bear upon their face that they are the second of exchange, yet 
if the correspondent fraudulently negotiate those marked second, 
the acceptor will be liable to an innocent holder for value for the 
amount which they represent. (») i An express power to indorse 
does not imply a power to receive notice of dishonor, (x) It may 
be stated as a general rule that retaining money procured by an 
indorsement will be regarded as a ratification of the authority to 
indorse, (xx) 



SECTION VI. 

THE RIGHT OP ACTION UNDER A CONTRACT MADE BY AN AGENT. 

In contracts by deed no party can have a right of action under 
them but the party whose name is to them ; (#) but in the case of 
a simple contract an undisclosed principal may show that the 
apparent party was his agent, and may put himself in the place 
of his agent, (z) 2 but not so as to affect injuriously the rights of 

(m>) Bank of Pittsburg v. Neal, 22 The Duke of Norfolk v. Worthy, 1 Camp. 

How. 96. 337 ; Garrett v. Handley, 4 B."& C. 664 ; 

(x) Bank of Mobile v. King, 9 Ala. Davis v. Boardman, 12 Mass. 80; Rutland 

279. Railroad v. Cole, 24 Vt. 33 ; Higgins 

(xx) National Bank v. Fassett, 42 Vt. v. Senior, 8 M. & W. 834 ; Whitmore i>. 

432. Gilmour, 12 M. & W. 808, where a bank- 

(y) Green v. Home, 1 Salk. 197 ; rupt, under the circumstances of the 

Frontin v. Small, 2 Ld. Raym. 1418. case, was considered agent for his as- 

(z) Skinner v. Stocks, 4 B. & Aid. signees. See Oelricks v. Ford, 20 Md. 

437; Cothay v. Fennell, 10 B. & 0. 671; 489. 

1 See Coburn v. Webb, 56 Ind. 96. 

2 As in the case of a claim against a decedent's estate, although proved by his 
agent in his own name and attached after collection as the latter's property, Gage v. 
Stimson, 26 Minn. 64. A principal may sue on a non-negotiable note made for his 
benefit but payable to his agent, National Ins. Co. v. Allen, 116 Mass. 398; but not 
on a negotiable instrument, Chandler v. Coe, 54 N. H. 561. One, not mentioned in 
an insurance policy procured for him by a broker in his own name, may bring suit 
upon it, Browning v. Provincial Ins. Co. L. R. 5 P. C. 263; as well as the agent, 
Provincial Ins. Co. v. Leduc, L. R. 6 P. C. 224. A wife is liable as undisclosed prin- 
cipal for goods bought for her by her husband, although his note was taken in pay- 
ment. Lovell v. Williams, 125 Mass. 439. See Armstrong v. Stokes, L. R. 7 Q. B. 
698; Irvine v. Watson, 5 Q. B. D. 102. But an undisclosed principal is not liable 
for breach of an agreement under seal to purchase real estate, Briggs v. Partridge, 
64 N. Y. 357 ; nor on the stipulations of an instrument under seal made by an agent 
in his own name without mention of the principal, although the other party knew of 
the latter's interest and had received part payment from him. Pickering's Claim, 
L. R. 6 Ch. 525. Where, however, a lease is signed by agents of a corporation, but 

vol. i. 5 (35 



* 63 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

the other party, (a) Thus a purchaser for an unknown principal, 
whom he does not disclose, is himself liable for the price, (aa) 
Nor can the unknown principal adopt a contract as made by his 
agent, in part only and for so much as benefits him ; he must 

adopt it as a whole if at all. (ab) How far this rule 
*63 *is affected by the Statute of Frauds will be considered 

hereafter. (5) By parity of reasoning, an undisclosed prin- 
cipal, subsequently discovered, may be made liable on such con- 
tract ; (c) x but in general, subject to the qualification that the 
state of the account between the principal and agent is not 
altered to the detriment of the principal, (d) 2 It might be sup- 
posed that the party dealing with an agent whose agency is 
concealed, does not lose his election to have recourse either to 
the agent, or to his discovered principal, if the principal has pre- 
maturely settled with his agent, even without fraud ; as where the 
agent bought on one month's credit and the principal paid him 

(a) George v. Clagett, 7 T. R. 359; La. 64; Hyde v. Wolf, 4 La. 234 ; Bacon 
Sims v. Bond, 5 B. & Ad. 389; Warner v. v. Sondley, 3 Strob. L. 542; Bownelt v. 
McKay, 1 M. & W. 591 ; Huntington v. Briggs, 45 Barb. 470. — The party deal- 
Knox, 7 Cush. 371 ; Violett v. Powell, ing with the agent may, when he discov- 
10 B. Mon. 349. And see Harrison v. ers the principal, charge either at his 
Roscoe 15 M. & W. 231 ; Woodruff u. election. Thompson v. Davenport, 9 B. 
M'Uehee, 30 Ga. 158. & C. 78 ; Wilson v. Hart, 7 Taunt. 295 ; 

(aa) Fierce v. Johnson, 34 Conn. 274. Kailton v. Hodgson, 4 Taunt. 576, n. (n) ; 

(nb) Elwell v. Chamberlin, 31 N. Y. Kobinson c. Gleadow, 2 Bing. N. C. 161; 

671. Sue ante, p. * 52. Patterson t;. Gandasequi, 15 East, 62; Hig- 

(b) And see p. * 54, note (r), supra. See gins v. Senior, 8 M. & W. 834. But where 
also Bank of United States v. Lyman, 20 a vendor takes the note of the agent, 
Vt. 666, 673, 674, where the doctrine of which shows him to rely upon the agent, 
Lord Aliini/er and Baron Parke in Beck- he cannot afterwards sue the principal, 
ham v. Drake, 9 M. & W. 79, was recog- Patterson v. Gandasequi, 15 East, 62 ; 
nized by Prentiss, J. Hyde v. Paige, 9 Barb. 150 ; Bate v. Burr, 

(c) Thompson v. Davenport, 9B. & C. 4 Ilarring. 130. 

78; Cothay v. Fennell, 10 B. & C. 071 ; (d) Thompson v. Davenport, 9 B. & C. 

Thomas o. Edwards, 2 M. & W. 216 ; 78 ; Lord Ellenborough, Kymer v. Suwer- 

Beebe v. Robert, 12 Wend. 413; Upton cropp, 1 Camp. 109; Smethurst v. Mitch- 

v. Gray, 2 Greenl. 373 ; Nelson v. P.. well, ell, 1 E. & E. 622. 
3 Doug. 410; Hopkins v. Lacouture, 4 

with nothing in the lease to show that fact, and the corporation enters under it and 
occupies the premises, it is bound by the lease. Carroll v. St. John's Society, 125 
Mass. 605. As to charter-parties, see Christoffersen v. Hansen, L. R. 7 Q. B. 509; 
Pederson v. Lotinga, 28 L. T. 267. 

1 See preceding note. The mere filing of a proof of claim against the estate of 
an insolvent agent of an undisclosed principal, after the latter's discovery, is not a 
conclusive election to treat the agent as the debtor. Curtis v. Williamson, L. R. 10 
Q. B. 57. But taking the agent's note in payment, intending to give him exclusive 
credit, is such election. Perkins v. Cady, 111 Mass. 318. The agent or principal, 
however, cannot compel an election. Beymer u. Bonsall, 79 Penn. St. 298. See 
Calder v. Dobell, L. R. 6 C. P. 486. 

2 Thomas v. Atkinson, 38 Ind. 248, 258, follows and cites the text with ap- 
proval. 

66 



CH - In -] AGENTS. * 64 

before the credit had expired. <» i But it may be open to ques- 
tion whether such settlement by the principal, although prema- 
ture, if perfectly bond fide, in the course of business, and free 
from all suspicion that it had been hastened for the purpose of 
interfering with the seller, would not discharge the principal 
We think it would. 

Where the name of the principal is disclosed at the time the 
contract is made by the agent, the former is the proper party to 
sue upon the contract. This is so whether he be a citizen of 
another State than that where his agent resided and made the 
contract or not. This doctrine is contrary to the rule laid down 
in Story's Agency as to contracts made for residents in a foreign 
State, and which was supposed to be the doctrine of the 
English cases at that time. But the doctrine has more * re- * 64 
cently been explained by the English courts, and Judge 
Story's rule rejected. The doctrine never was generally received 
in this country, and in a recent case in the Supreme Court of the 
United States it was directly disavowed. (#) 



SECTION VII. 

LIABILITY OF AN AGENT. 

An agent is not personally liable, unless he transcends his 
agency, or departs from its provisions, (K) 2 or unless he expressly 

(e) Kymer u. Suwercropp, 1 Camp. Johnson v. Ogilby, 3 P. Wms. 279 ; Jones 

109; Waring v. Favenek, 1 Camp. 85; K.Downman, 4 Q. B. 235, n. (a). The de- 

Healdc. Ken worthy, 10 Exch. 739. cision of the Queen's Bench in this case 

(g) Oelricks v. Ford, 23 How. 49. See was afterwards reversed in the Exchequer 
also 2 Kent Com. 630, 631, n. ; Allen v. Chamber on a special ground, but the 
Merchants Bank of N. Y., 22 Wend. 224 ; doctrine of law does not seem to be inl- 
and Green v. Cope. pugned. — But the departure from au- 

(h) Feeter v. Heath, 11 Wend. 477; thority, to charge the agent, must not be 

1 Where an agent in buying goods discloses that he has a principal but does not 
give his name, the seller may resort to the principal though he has bond fide paid 
the agent, unless the seller's conduct is such, as by delay, &c, to justify the conclu- 
sion that he looks only to the agent, Irvine v. Watson, 5 Q. B. D. 102, 414 ; but not 
if the principal has bond fide paid the agent at a time when the seller still gave credit 
to the agent and knew of no one else as principal. Armstrong v. Stokes, L. R. 7 
Q. B. 598; see Hutton v. Bulloch, L. R. 8 Q. B. 331 ; affirmed in L. R. 9 Q. B. 572. 

2 An agent will be liable unless the party dealing with him understood, or as a 
reasonable man ought to have understood, that he was dealing with him as agent. 
Worthington v. Cowles, 112 Mass. 30. 

67 



*65 



THE LAW OP CONTEACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



pledges his own liability, (z) J in which case he is liable although 
he describes himself as agent, (&) or unless he conceals his char- 
acter of agent, (7) 2 or unless he so conducts as to render 
* 65 * his principal inaccessible or irresponsible, (m) or unless 
he acts in bad faith. If a sealed instrument is executed by 
an agent, and it contain covenants which expressly purport to be 
those of the principal, and the agent in executing it calls himself 



known to the other contracting party. 
Story on Agency, § 265, recognized by 
Lord Lhnman, in Jones v. Downman, 4 
Q. B. 239. 

(i) If an agent, executing a contract in 
writing, use language whose legal effect 
is to charge him personally, it is not com- 
petent for him to exonerate himself by 
showing that he acted for a principal, and 
that the other contracting party knew 
this fact at the time when the agreement 
was made and signed. Magee v. Atkin- 
son, 2 M. & W. 440; Jones v, Littledale, 
B A. & E. 486 ; Higgins v. Senior, 8 M. & 
V: 834; Appleton v. Binks, 5 East, 148, 
which was the case of a contract under 
seal; Chadwick v. Maddon, 12 E. L. & E. 
180; Tanner v. Christian, 4 E. & B. 591 ; 
Hancock v. Fairfield, 30 Me. 299. See 
also Duvnll r. Craig, 2 Wheat 56 ; Tip- 
pets u. Walker, 4 Mass. 595; Forster r. 
Fuller, 6 Mass. 58 ; White v. Skinner, 13 
Johns. 307 ; Stone v. Wood, 7 Cowen, 
453; Andrew v. Allen, 4 Harring. 45'J; 
Potts a. Henderson, 2 Cart. (Ind.) 327; 
Fash v. Ross, 2 Hill (S. C), 294. 

(fc) Seaver v. Col.urn, 10 Cush. 324; 
Tanner v. Christian, 4 E. & B. 591 ; Len- 
nard v. Robinson, 5 E. & B. 125 ; Taylor 
v. Shelton, 30 Conn. 122. 

(I) Franklyn i\ Lamond, 4 C. B. 637, 
where it was held that the fact of selling 
as auctioneers was not such an indication 
of agency as to absolve the defendants 
from personal responsibility. — In an ac- 
tion for use and occupation of lands by 
the sufferance and permission of the 
plaintiffs, it appeared that the lands were 
let by auction by the plaintiffs, E. & T., 
who were auctioneers, to the defendant, 
under conditions which stated the letting 
to be " By E. & T., auctioneers." One of 



the conditions was, " The rent is to be 
paid into the hands of E. or T., auction- 
eers, or to their order, at two payments," 
&c. At the foot of the document was 
written, " approved by me, David Jones." 
Jones was the tenant at the time of the 
sale. Nothing else appeared in the con- 
ditions to show on whose behalf the let- 
ting was. The plaintiffs gave evidence 
to show that Jones, being indebted to 
them, had authorized them to let the 
lands as above, pay the rent due to 
Jones's landlord, and retain any surplus 
in satisfaction of their own debt. Evi- 
dence to a contrary effect was given by 
the defendant. The judge in summing 
up left it to the jury whether the plain- 
tiffs had let the lands on their own behalf 
and as creditors of Jones, or merely as 
his agents. The jury found a letting by 
the plaintiffs on their own behalf. Held, 
that the conditions imported a letting by 
Jones, E. and T. acting as his agents ; and 
that the document ought to have been so 
explained to the jury. And a new trial 
was granted. Evans v. Evans, 3 A. & E. 
132. — The agent is, perhaps, in like 
maimer liable (at the option of the party 
contracting with him) if he do not state 
the name of the principal, and notwith- 
standing the other contracting party have 
the means of knowing the principal. 
Thompson v. Davenport, 9 B. & C. 78; 
Owen v. Gooch, 2 Esp. 507 ; Raymond v. 
Proprietors of Crown and Eagle Mills, 
2 Met. 319; Winsor r. Griggs, 5 Cush. 
210 ; Taintor v. Prendergast, 3 Hill (N. 
Y.). 72 

(m) Ashhurst, J., Fenn v. Harrison, 3 
T. R. 761 ; Ravage v. Rix, 9 N. H. 263; 
Syilnor v. Hurd, 8 Tex. 98; Keener v. 
Harrod, 2 Md. 63. 



1 Thus an agent, as party to a charter-party, is liable for delay in loading, where 
he stipulated that his liability was to "cease" as soon as he had shipped" a cargo, 
Christoffersen i\ Hansen, L. R. 7 Q. B. 509; or a real estate agent, by contracting 
to sell land and signing a receipt in his own name for a deposit, and the owner after- 
wards declines to complete the purchase. Long „. Millar, 4 C. P. D. 450. See 
Guernsey v. Cook, 117 Mass. 548. 

2 An agent must disclose his agency, to render his principal liable. Nixon v. 
Downey, 49 la. 166. It is not enough that the party with whom he deals has the 
means of ascertaining the principal. Cobb v. Knapp, 71 N. Y. 621. 

68 



CH. III.] AGENTS. 



65 



an agent, he is not liable on those covenants ; (ri) but if they are 
not expressly the principal's covenants, the agent is liable on 
them. 0) 1 If a person dealing with an agent, knows his agency, 
his rights and obligations will be the same as if the agent disclosed 
it, Qp) unless the agent purposely represents himself as a principal 
and assumes the responsibility of one. And if the agent's act be 
open to two constructions, one of which binds him, and the other 
binds the principal, it is said that the law prefers the latter, (q) 

If a party dealing with an agent as agent, and knowing that 
the principal is bound, takes the agent's note, it is held that the 
principal is discharged, (f) 

If one describes himself as agent for some unnamed princi- 
pal, he is of course liable if proved to be the real principal, (s) 
So he is if he signs as agent of a company which has no ex- 
istence, or has no power to make the contract, (ss) 2 And one 
acting as agent is liable personally, if it be shown that he 
acts without authority. (£) 3 But it seems to be law, that an 

(n) Hopkins v. Mehaffy, 11 S. & R. B to be agent for C in the matter, enter 

126. with him into a contract which is illegal 

(o) Hancock v. Hodgson, 4 Bing. 269 ; if the contract of C, but is not illegal if 

Stone v. Wood, 7 Cowen, 453; Spencer B's personal contract, and it turn out 

o. Field, 10 Wend. 87. that B acted without authority, the ille- 

(p) Chase v. Debolt, 2 Gilman, 371. gality of the supposed contract is no bar 

(q) Dyer v. Burnham, 25 Me. 13. to an action by A against B ; for the 

(r) Paige v. Stone, 10 Met. 160; Wil- contract actually made contained no ille- 

kins v. Reed, 6 Greenl. 220; Green v. gality. Parke, B., Thomas v. Edwards, 

Tanner, 8 Met. 411. 2 M. & W. 217. — It is perhaps doubtful 

(s) Schmalz v. Avery, 16 Q. B. 655 ; whether or not a party contracting, with- 

Carr v. Jackson, 7 Exch. 382. out authority, as agent for another, and 

(ss) Woodbury v. Blair, 18 la. 572. giving the name of the principal, can 

(t) Dusenberry v. Ellis, 3 Johns. Cas. afterwards himself enforce the contract 

70; Byars v. Doores, 20 Mo. 284; Bayley, as principal. Strictly, it would seem, he 

B., Thomas v. Hewes, 2 Cr. & M. 530, n. cannot. Even admitting that the agent 

(a) ; Collen v. Wright, 7 E. & B. 301, af- thus acting without authority, might be 

firmed in 8 E. & B. 647. And a sub- held liable upon the contract as principal, 

sequent ratification it seems will not because he acted in his own wrong, yet 

(always at least) excuse him. Rossiter it does not follow that he himself should 

v. Rossiter, 8 Wend. 494; Palmer v. Ste- be allowed to take advantage of the 

phens, 1 Denio, 471. — If A, supposing wrong. And this appears to have been 

1 Where one, purporting to act for an academy, makes a deed containing per- 
sonal covenants of warranty, in which he is so described as grantor, but signs and 
seals in his own name, it is his deed, Snow v. Orleans, 126 Mass. 453; so where 
agents contracted for a company under their own names and seals. Quigley v. lie 
Haas, 82 Penn. St. 267. , „ T , , „, . . 

2 Or is irresponsible, as " Captain of Co. I. 49th Reg't Mo. Vols. Blakely v. 
Bennecke, 59 Mo. 193. .... 

3 " Persons who induce others to act on the supposition that they have autnority 
to enter into a binding contract on behalf of third persons, on it turning out that 
they have no such authority, may be sued for damages for the breach of an ™Pliea 
warranty of authority." Cockburn, C. J., in Richardson v. Williamson, L. K. b y. a. 
276. See also Weeks v. Propert, L. R. 8 C. P. 427. 

69 



* 66 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

* 66 * agent is not responsible to third parties for mere neglect 

or omission in the discharge of his duty, for they must 
look to the principal, (w) 

Whether an agent makes himself liable who transcends his 
authority, or acts without authority, but believes in good faith 
that he has such authority, may not be absolutely settled. It 
must depend upon the question whether he is regarded as always 
impliedly warranting his possession of authority. Where an 
agent fraudulently misrepresents his authority, with the purpose of 
deception, there it is as clear that he is liable legally as it is that 
he is liable morally. But where he verily believes himself to 
possess the authority under which he acts, but is mistaken on this 
point, then a deciding test of his liability may perhaps be found 
in his means of knowledge. . If he could have known the truth, 
and did not through his own fault, then he is ignorant by his 
own wrong. And if an injury is to result from this ignorance, 
either to a third party or to him, and the third party is wholly 
innocent, it ought to fall on him who so represented himself as 
agent, because he was not therein wholly innocent. He was not 

guilty of intentional deception, but he was guilty of decep- 

* 67 tion in fact, and if this was caused * by his want of care or 

want of diligence, or by his negligence in any way, he 
must bear the burden of it. And this is what we should infer 
from some of the cases in which it is said that an agent who 
states that which he does not know to be true, places himself 
under the same liability as one who states what he knows to be 
not true. We think this principle just, only if it be meant that 



the view of Lord EUenbormigh, C. J., and himself principal in the transaction, and 
Altlmit, J., in Bickerton v. Burrell, 5 M. & not agent for J. & T.) brought an action 
Sel. SiSJ ; though the decision in that in his own name against the buyers for 
case'was put on the narrower, and some- refusing to accept the remainder. At 
what unsatisfactory ground, that the nisi priiis the jury were instructed that if 
plaintiff had not notified the defendant, the defendants received the first portion 
previous to bringing the action, of his of goods, with knowledge that the plain- 
claim to the character of principal. — If tiff was the real seller, and all parties 
the other party, after knowledge of the then treated the contract as one made 
true state of the matter, elect to act un- with the plaintiff as principal in the 
dor the contract, it is clear that he has transaction, the plaintiff was entitled to 
waived his right to object that it was recover, and upon this instruction a ver- 
not made originally with the plaintiff as diet having been rendered for the plain- 
principal. In Rayner o. Grote, 15 M. & tiff, the court held that the case was 
VV. 359, the plaintiff made a written con- properly left to the jury, and refused to 
tract for the sale of goods, in which he disturb the verdict. 

described himself as the agent of J. & T. ; («) Colvin v. Holbrook, 2 Comst. 126; 

the buyers accepted part of the goods, Denny v. Manhattan Co. 2 Denio, 118. 
and the plaintiff (who in reality was 

70 



CH. III.] 



AGENTS. 



67 



he is thus liable, who states what he does not know to be true, 
and by proper diligence and care might have known to be not 
true. But the question still remains, whether the agent is liable 
where he himself has been deceived wholly without his fault,— 
as by a forged letter which he could not detect. The case must 
be very rare in fact, where one acting as an agent is wholly 
without the means of ascertaining his own agency. But we 
incline to the opinion, as resting on the better reason, that he 
would still be held. If he and the third party with whom he 
deals, are both perfectly innocent, and a loss occurs, and a loss 
results from his want of authority, this loss must fall somewhere ; 
and it seems just that it should rest on him who has assumed, 
innocently but yet falsely, that he possessed this authority. («) 
But a party cannot hold him liable, if the agent acted in good 
faith, and the contract and all the facts were known to that 
party. (yv~) 



(v) In Polhill v. Walter, 3 B. & Ad. 
114, the right of action is held to be 
grounded on an affirmation of authority 
which the affirmer knew to be false; and 
if he acted under an authority which was 
forged, but which he believed genuine, 
he would not be responsible. Story 
(Agency, § 263, n. 2), says, " the distinc- 
tion of Lord Tenterden (in the above 
case) is entirely overthrown by Smout v. 
Ilbery, 10 M. & W. 7." We do not so 
understand this case. There the family 
of Mr. Ilbery was supplied with provi- 
sions by Smout. Ilbery was lost in a 
voyage to India, in October, 1839; the 
provisions were supplied both before and 
after his death ; and the action was 
brought against the widow. A principal 
question was, whether she was liable for 
the provisions supplied after the death of 
Ilbery, and before it was known. Alder- 
son, B., in giving the opinion of the court, 
says, "There is no ground for saying, 
that in representing her authority as con- 
tinuing, she did any wrong whatever. 
There was no mala fides on her part — 
no want of due diligence in acquiring 
knowledge of the revocation — no omis- 
sion to state any fact within her knowl- 
edge relating to it, and the revocation 
itself was by the act of God." On this 
ground she was held not liable. But he 
says previously, "that where a party 
making the contract as agent, bond fide 
believes that such authority is vested in 
him, but has in fact no such authority, 
he is still personally liable. In these 
cases, it is true, the agent is not actuated 



by any fraudulent motives, nor has he 
made any statement which he knows to 
be untrue. But still his liability depends 
on the same principles as before. It is a 
wrong differing only in degree, but not 
in its essence, from the former case, to 
state as true what the individual making 
such statement does not know to be true, 
even though he does not know it to be 
false, but believes without sufficient 
grounds, that the statement will ulti- 
mately turn out to be correct." It can- 
not be doubted, however, that the court 
intend to confine the liability of the sup- 
posed agent to the case where he not 
only had no authority, but might have 
known that lie had none. This may not 
only be inferred from the decision, but 
the court say afterwards, " If, then, the 
true principle derivable from the cases 
is, that there must be some wrong or 
omission of right on the part of the 
agent, in order to make him personally 
liable on a contract made in the name of 
his principal, it will follow that the agent 
is not responsible in such a case as the 
present. And to this conclusion we have 
come." We doubt, however, the law of 
this case, and prefer the view stated in 
the text; the widow had received the 
provisions, and when she paid for them 
there would be no loss anywhere. See 
Taylor v. Ashton, 11 M. & W. 401 ; Col- 
lins v. Evans, 5 Q. B. 820 ; Lewis i\ Nich- 
olson, 18 Q. B. 503; Carr v. Jackson, 
7 Exch. 382. 

(vv) Aspinwall v. Torrance, 1 Lansing, 
381. 

71 



68 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



* 68 * The question then occurs, whether in such a case the 

agent can be held on the contract, and in some cases it has 

* 69 been so decided, (w) * But we think it the better opinion 



{w) This question has been very re- 
cently discussed in the Queen's Bench, 
in the case of Jenkins v. Hutchinson, 13 
Q. B. 744. That was an action of as- 
sumpsit on a charter-party, which pur- 
ported to be made between the plaintiff 
on the one part, and one T. A. Barnes of 
the other part, and was signed " Ralph 
Hutchinson, for T. A. Barnes." It ap- 
peared that Hutchinson had no author- 
ity to enter into the charter-party for 
Barnes, and it was therefore contended 
that he was personally liable as principal 
in this action, but the court held other- 
wise. Lord JJeuman said : "It is not pre- 
tended that the defendant had any 
interest as principal ; he signed as agent, 
intending to bind a principal, and in no 
other character. That he may be liable 
to the plaintiff in another form of action, 
forany damage sustained by his represent- 
ing himself to be agent, when he was not, 
is very possible ; but the question is here, 
whether he can be sued on the charter- 
party itself, as a party to it. No reported 
case has decided that a party so circum- 
stanced can be sued on the instrument 
itself. Mr. Justice Sloii/, in his book on 
the Law of Agency, states, that the deci- 
sions in the American courts are conflict- 
ing on this point, and that ' in England it 
is held, that the suit must be by a special 
action on the case ; ' citing Polhill v. 
Walter, 3 B. & Ad. 114. That case does 
not, perhaps, establish the broad proposi- 
tion ; for the contract was a bill of ex- 
change — an instrument differing in many 
respects from ordinary contracts. In the 
absence of any direct authority, we think 
that a party who executes an instrument 
in the name of another, whose name he 
puts to the instrument, and adds his own 
name only as agent for that other, can- 
not be treated as a party to that instru- 
ment, and be sued upon it, unless it be 
shown that he was the real principal." 
See also Lewis v. Nicholson, 18 Q. B. 
603. — The law is so held in Massachu- 
setts. Long v. Colburn, 11 Mass. 97; 
Ballou p. Talbot, 10 Mass. 461 ; Jefts v. 
York, 4 Cush. 371. And in Abbey v. 
Chase, 6 Cush. 56, the view taken in the 
text is confirmed. The court say : " It 
does not necessarily follow that a con- 
tract made by an authorized agent, 
which does not bind the principal, be- 
comes the agent's contract, and makes 
him answerable if it is not performed. 
This depends upon the legal effect of the 

72 



terms of the contract. If the agent em- 
ploys such terms as legally import an 
undertaking by the principal only, the 
contract is the principal's, and he alone 
is bound by it. But if the terms of the 
contract legally import a personal under- 
taking of the agent, and not of the prin- 
cipal, then it is the contract of the agent, 
and he alone is answerable for a breach 
of it. So when one who has no authority 
to act as another's agent, assumes so to 
act, and makes either a deed or a simple 
contract in the name of the other, he is 
not personally liable on the covenants in 
the deed, or on the promise in the simple 
contract, unless it contain apt words to 
bind him personally. The only remedy 
against him in this commonwealth, is an 
action on the case for falsely assuming 
authority to act as agent." In Maine, 
Harper v. Little, 2 Greenl. 14 ; Stetson 
v. Patton, id. 358. In Connecticut, Ogden 
v. Raymond, 22 Conn. 385. In Indiana, 
McHenry r. Duffield, 7 Blackf. 41. And 
in Pennsylvania, Hopkins v. Mehaffy, 11 
S. & R. 126. In this case, Gibson, J., 
says : " No decision can be found in sup- 
port of the position, that what appears 
on the face of the deed to be the proper 
covenant of the principal, but entered 
into through the agency of an attorney, 
shall be taken to be the proper covenant 
of the attorney, whenever he had no 
authority to execute the deed. How 
could he be declared against ? If in the 
usual and proper manner of pleading it 
were alleged that the agent had cove- 
nanted, it would appear by the produc- 
tion of the instrument that he had not, 
but that his principal had covenanted 
through his means; which, on non est 
factum being pleaded, would be fatal." 
But in New York the courts have held 
the agent personally liable on the eon- 
tract in such cases. Dusenburv v. Ellis, 
3 Johns. Cas. 70 ; White v. Skinner, 13 
Johns. 307 ; Randall v Van Vechten, 19 
id. 60; Meech v. Smith, 7 Wend. 315; 
Palmer r. Stephens, 1 Demo, 471. But 
see Walker v. Bank of the State of New 
York, 13 Barb. 639, contra. The agent 
is held liable on the contract in New 
Jersey; Bay v. Cook, 2 N. J. 343. In 
New Hampshire the court seem to have 
taken a middle course. It is there held 
that if a person, having no authority to 
act as agent, undertakes so to act in 
making a contract, and the contract 
which he makes, rejecting what he was 



CH - In AGENTS. * 70 

that the contract is wholly void. It is not the contract of the 
principal because he gave no authority to the supposed agent 
It is not the contract of the agent, for he professed to act for the 
principal. So, if one forges a signature to a note, and obtains 
money on that note, he cannot be held on it as on his promise to 
pay. But m all such cases the supposed agent may be reached in 
assumpsit if money be paid to him or work and labor done for 
him under such supposed contract, or in trespass for special dam- 
ages for so undertaking to act for another without authority, 
or in some other appropriate action; but not on the contract 
itself. 

An agent who exceeds his authority renders himself liable to 
the whole extent of the contract, although a part of it was within 
his authority, (x) It may, however, be said, that where an agent 
exceeds his authority, what he does within it is valid, if that part 
be distinctly severable from the remainder. 



SECTION VIII. 

REVOCATION OP AUTHORITY. 

It is a general principle, that an authority is always revocable ; 
the principal may at any time put an end to the relation between 
himself and his agent by withdrawing the authority, unless 
the authority is coupled with an interest, or given for a * val- * 70 
uable consideration. (#) 1 Notice of revocation is not neces- 

not authorized to put to it, contains apt blank note exceed his authority, and the 
words to charge himself, he is personally third party receive the note with knowl- 
liable. Woodes v. Dennett, 9 N. H. 55 ; edge that the authority has been trans- 
Savage v. Rix, id. 263; Moor v. Wilson, cended, the note will not be void in toto, 
6 Foster (N. H.), 332. but only for the excess beyond the sum 

(x) Feeter v. Heath, 11 "Wend. 477. which was authorized. 
— But in Johnson v. Blasdale, 1 Sm. & (y) It is to be noticed, that many 

M. 1, the Court of Appeals of Missis- cases which in England might be under- 

sippi held that if an agent in filling up a stood as examples of an authority irrevo- 

1 Thus the agency of one, intrusted, without consideration, with money to settle 
a lawsuit, can be revoked at any time before the settlement is completed. Phillips v. 
Howell, 60 Ga. 411. One intrusting money to another to be paid to a creditor, may 
revoke before the creditor assents ; and such assent may be presumed from the lat- 
ter's knowledge. Simonton v. Minneapolis Bank, 24 Minn. 216. The authority of 
a person to procure donations for a railroad extension, a portion of which was to be 
allowed him for his services, is revocable at pleasure. Smith v. Cedar Falls, &c. R. 
Co. 30 la. 244. 

73 



♦71 



THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



sary, where the agent had only a special authority to do a special 
act, and this authority is exhausted, (yy) But where third parties 
have dealt with an agent clothed with general powers, whose acts 
have therefore bound his principal, and the principal revokes the 
authority he gave his agent, such principal will continue 
* 71 to be * bound by the further acts of his agent, unless the 



cable at the pleasure of the principal, 
because coupled with an interest, would 
not in this country be classed under that 
head, owing to the general adoption here 
of the definition of a " power coupled 
with an interest," given in Hunt v. Rous- 
manier, 8 Wheat. 201 [see post, note 
(d )]. All such cases, it seems, can be 
considered instances where the authority 
cannot be revoked because of the valuable 
consideration moving from the agent ; as 
where the agent had begun to act under 
the authority, and would be damnified by 
its recall, or where the authority is part 
of a security. Walsh v. Whitcomb, 2 
Esp. 505 ; Gaussen v. Morton, 10 B. & C. 
731 ; Hodgson v. Anderson, 3 B. & C. 
842; Broomley v. Holland, 7 Ves. 28; 
Marryat u. Broderick, 2 M. & W. 371; 
Eltliam v. Kingsman, 1 B. & Aid. 684 ; 
Yates v. Hoppe, 9 C. B. 541 ; Ware, J., 
United States v. Jarvis, 2 Ware, 278. 
And see Brown v. McGran, 14 Pet. 479, 
495 ; Story on Agency, §§ 466, 467, 468, 
where the opinions of the civilians are 
cited ; but compare 2 Kent Com. 644. 
Eabens v. The Mercantile Bank, 23 Pick. 
330, seems to be the ease of a power ir- 
revocable by the principal, both because 
given for consideration and because 
coupled with an interest in the- sense 
of Chief Justice Marshall. Whether 
after advances made by a factor, his 
authority to sell the goods of the prin- 
cipal to the extent of those advances, is 
revocable at the pleasure of the principal, 
is a question upon which the authorities 
are not agreed. In Brown v. McGran, 
14 Pet. 479, it was held that the authority 
to sell is not revocable in such a case. 
The decisions in the State courts, so far 
as they go, appear to be in substantial 
agreement with Brown v. McGran. If 
the original authority, on consideration 
of which the advances were made, was 
an authority to sell at a limited price, it 
seems plain that the fact of the advances 
does not alter that authority. It continues 
an authority to sell on certain terms, and 
as such, on the doctrine of the Supreme 
Court, may be held irrevocable to the 
extent of the consideration given for it, 
that is, to the amount of the advances. 
Some of the State courts have gone a 

74 



step further in this direction, and held 
that an authority to sell at a limited 
price may be converted into a general 
authority to sell, by the fact of advances 
in conjunction with the fact of the ne- 
glect of the consignor, after reasonable 
notice, to repay the advances. Parker v. 
Brancker, 22 Pick. 40; Frothingham v. 
Ever ton, 12 N. H. 239. See also Blot 
v. Boiceau, 3 Comst. 78. This subject 
has recently come before the Court of 
Common Bench in England in Smart v. 
Sandars, 5 C. B. 895, where it was de- 
cided that a factor's authority to sell is 
revocable at the will of the consignor, 
notwithstanding advances to the full 
value, and a request of repayment un- 
complied with. Brown v. McGran had 
been cited in the argument ; Wilde, C. 
J., delivering the judgment of the court, 
said (p. 918) : " In the present case the 
goods are consigned to a factor for sale. 
That confers an implied authority to sell. 
Afterwards the factor makes advances. 
This is not an authority coupled with an 
interest but an independent authority, 
and an interest subsequently arising. 
The making of such an advance may 
be a good consideration for an agreement 
that the authority to sell shall be no 
longer revocable ; but such an effect will 
not, we think, arise independently of 
agreement. There is no authority or 
principle, in our law, that we are aware 
of, which leads us to think it will. If 
such be the law, where is it to be found ? 
It was said in argument, that it was the 
common practice of factors to sell, in 
order to repay advances. If it be true 
that there is a well-understood practice 
witli factors to sell, that practice might 
furnish a ground for inferring that the 
advances were made upon the footing of 
an agreement that the factor should have 
an irrevocable authority to sell, in case 
the principal made default. Such an in- 
ference might be a very reasonable and 
proper one ; but it would be an infer- 
ence of fact, and not a conclusion of 
law." See also Raleigh v. Atkinson, 6 
M. & W. 670 ; Hutchins v. Hebbard, 34 
N. Y. 24. 

(yy) Watts v. Kavanagh, 35 Vt. 34. 



CH. III.] AGENTS. * 71 

third parties have knowledge of tho revocation, or unless he does 
what he can to make the revocation as notorious and generally 
known to the world as was the fact of the agency. (2) 1 This is 
usually done by advertising, and usage will have great effect in 
determining whether such principal did all that was incumbent on 
him to make his revocation notorious. And third parties who 
never dealt with such agent before such revocation, if they, as a 
part of the community were justified in believing such agency to 
have existed, and had no knowledge and no sufficient means of 
knowledge of the revocation, may hold the principal liable for the 
acts of the agent after revocation ; (a) as in the case of a partner- 
ship, where the dissolution or change of parties was not properly 
made known. (J) 

A revocation of authority may be • made either expressly or by 
any action in relation to the subject-matter, vhich is manifestly 
irreconcilable with a continuance of the authority, (bb) 2 And it 

(z) Hazard v. Treadwell, Stra. 506 ; thority implied from cohabitation, joined 

„. Harrison, 12 Mod. 346 ; Buller, with the previous sanction of acts of 

J Saite v. Field, 6 T. E. 215 ; Spencer agency performed by the person held 
v. Wilson, 4 Munf. 130 ; Morgan v. Stell, forth as wife. That the tradesman fur- 
5 Binn. 305. — Where an agency consti- nishing the goods in such a case has 
tuted by writing is revoked, but the writ- knowledge that the woman is only a 
ten authority is left in the hands of the mistress, does not affect his right to 
agent and he subsequently exhibits it to notice of separation. Ryan v. Sams, 12 
a third person who deals witli him as Q. B. 460, where Munro v. De Chemant, 
ao-ent on the faith of it without any no- 4 Camp. 215, was commented on. lier 
tice of the revocation, the act of the agent, v. Lampson, 35 Vt. 179. 
within the scope of the authority, will (a) See last note, 
bind the principal. Beard o. Kirk, 11 (6 Graham v. Hone 1 Peake, 154; 
NH 397 This necessity for actual Parkin v. Carruthers, 3 Esp. 248 ; Ward- 
notice of revocation, or a general noto- well v. Haight, 2 Barb. 549. 
rkty equivalent to notice, has been held (bb) Potter u. Merchants Bank, 28 
to exist in full force in the case of an au- N. X. o41. 

i Pavment to an agent before such notice releases the debt. Packer v. Hinckley 
Works 7 122 Mass ?84 g ; Ins. Co. „. McCain, 96 TJ S. 84; Meyer v Hehner 96 HI 
400 Ulrich v. McCorrnick, 66 Ind. 243; Braswell o. Am. Ins. Co 75 N C. 8. bo a 
businei^gent continues to *^ *££*?££%$?££* S£rf£ 

Sffik A^gh, SVffi lU^d^tt: M Barkley , 

*rtX't V rt^\^% «* *W* SS%^to m thrdet a ry,Tan 
before the agent has acted Gilbert v. Holmes 64 ^1 L 54 !. So .the del. y, y 



72 



THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



has been held that a principal revoking an authority may compel 
the former agent to deliver up the paper conferring authority, (be) 
A mere appointment of another agent to do the same thing is not 
of itself a revocation of the first appointment, (bd) 

The death of the principal operates per se, as a revocation of 

the agency, (c) 1 But not if the agency is coupled with an 

*72 * interest vested in the agent, (d) Then it survives, and 



(be) Spear v. Gardner, 16 La. An. 383. 

(bd) Darrol v. Quimby, 11 Allen, 208. 

(c) Co. Litt. § 66 ; Hunt v. Rousma- 
nier, 8 Wheat. 201 ; Watson v. King, 4 
Camp. 272 ; Lepard i\ Vernon, 2 Ves. 
& B. 51 ; Smout ». Ilbery, 10 M. & W. 1 ; 
Buxton v. Jones, 1 Man. & G. 84 ; Cam- 
panari v. Woodburn, 15 C. B. 4; Rigs v. 
Cage, 2 Humph. (Tenn.) 350; Ferris v. 
Irving, 28 Cal. 645. In Cassiday v. Mc- 
Kenzie, 4 W. & S. 282, it was held, in 
opposition to the current of authority, 
that a payment made by an agent, after 
the death of his principal, he being ig- 
norant thereof, was valid as an act of 
agency. Lunacy of the principal revokes, 
but the better opinion (according to Ch. 
Kent, 2 Com. 645) is, that the fact of the 
existence of lunacy must have been pre- 
viously established by inquisition before 
it could control the operation of the pow- 
er; and see Bell, Com. on the Laws of 
Scotland, § 413. — In Davis v. Lane, 10 
N. II. 156, it was held, that the authority 
of an agent, where the agency is revo- 
cable, ceases, or is suspended, by the in- 
sanity of the principal, or his incapacity 
to exercise any volition upon the subject- 
matter of the agency, in consequence of 
an entire loss of mental power ; but that 
if the principal has enabled the agent to 
hold himself out as having authority, by 
a written letter of attorney, or by a pre- 
vious employment, and the incapacity of 
the principal is not known to those who 
deal with the agent within the scope of 
the authority he appears to possess, the 
principal and those who claim under 



him, may be precluded from setting up 
the insanity as a revocation. The court 
in this case also held, that the principle, 
that insanity operates as a revocation, 
cannot apply where the power is coupled 
with an interest, so that it can be exer- 
cised in the name of the agent. Whether 
it is applicable to the case of a power 
which is part of a security, or executed 
for a valuable consideration, was left 
undecided. See Jones v. Noy, 2 Mvl. & 
K. 125 ; Waters o. Taylor, 2 Ves. & B. 
301 ; Huddlestone's case, 2 Ves. Sen. 34, 
1 Swanst. 614, n.; Sayer v. Bennett, 1 
Cox'a Cas. 107. — Bankruptcy of the prin- 
cipal revokes the authority. Parker v. 
Smith, 16 East, 382; Minett v. Forres- 
ter, 4 Taunt. 541. Defendant being in 
the employment of J. in his trade, sold, 
bond fide, some goods belonging to J., 
after J. had committed an act of bank- 
ruptcy, of which defendant was ignorant. 
The sale was more than two months be- 
fore the commission issued. Defendant 
acted under a general authority. The 
assignee brought trover. Held, on a plea 
of not guilty, that defendant, having sold 
under a general authority only, had been 
guilty of a conversion. Pearson r. Gra- 
ham, 6 A. & E. 809. — Marrimjt of feme 
sole principal revokes. White v. Gifford, 
1 Rol. Abr. Authoritie E. pi. 4; Charnley 
v. Winstanley, 5 East, 266. 

(d) See ante, p. *70, a. (y). Hunt 
v. Rousmanier, 8 Wheat. 201 ; Bergen 
v. Bennett, 1 Caines' Cas 1 ; Smvth i>. 
Craig, 3 W. & S 14 ; Cassiday v. McKen- 
zie, 4 W. & S. 282 ; Knapp v. Alvord, 10 



737, contra, Lewis o. Atlas Ins. Co. 61 Mo. 534 ; unless there is an agreement to pay 
the agent a certain sum if he lost his place, Ex parte Logan, L. R. 9 Eq. 149. Nor is 
a broker who was to find a purchaser of land within a month, and whose agency is 
revoked before the end of the month, entitled to his commission, though he found the 
purchaser within the month. Brown v. Pforr, 38 Cal. 550. 

1 As an agency to occupy land, Lincoln v. Emerson, 108 Mass. 87; to receive a 
deposit of money, Davis r. Windsor Bank, 46 Vt. 728 ; and to measure and deliver 
corn, Cleveland v. Williams, 29 Tex. 204. A person who lias given his wife authority 
to deal with a tradesman and to pledge his credit, is liable to the tradesman for 
goods supplied to the wife during his subsequent insanity, the tradesman having no 
knowledge of his insanity. Drew r. Nunn, 4 Q. B. D. 661. Per Brett and Bramwell, 
L. JJ., that insanity revokes an agent's authority, ib. 

76 



CH. III.] AGENTS. 



73 



the agent may do all that is necessary to realize his interest and 
make it beneficial to himself. Such an agency is not revocable 
at the pleasure of the principal in his lifetime, (e) and if the 
agent dies the agency passes over to his representatives. (/) To 
determine whether the agency be thus irrevocable, it is an impor- 
tant if not a decisive question, whether the act authorized could 
be performed by the agent in his own name, or only by him as an 
agent, and in the name of the principal. In the first case, if an 
interest were coupled with the agency, the authority would sur- 
vive the death of the principal, and the agent might perform 
* the act in the same manner after the death as before. In * 73 
the latter case, as he could no longer use the name of the 
principal, for the obvious reason that one who is dead can no 
longer act, it would seem that his right must be limited to that of 
requiring the representatives of the deceased to perform the act 
necessary for his protection. 

Unless the authority is thus coupled with an interest, it would 
seem the word " irrevocable " does not take away the power of 
revocation. Qf ) 

The revocation is not prevented by any interest in the money 
to come from the exercise of the authority ; 1 but the inter- 
Paige, 205. The important question is of Lord Ellmboroucjh , in Watson v. King, 
what constitutes an authority coupled with 4 Camp. 272, that death revokes even a 
an interest ; and here there is some di- power coupled with an interest. See 
versity in judicial definition. In Hunt ante, note (y). A warrant of attorney to 
r. Eousmanier, 8 Wheat. 201, it was held confess judgment is not revocable ; and 
(Marshall, C. J., giving the opinion of though determinable by death, yet, at 
the court), that the interest which can common law, as a judgment entered up 
protect a power, after the death of the during any term, or the subsequent va- 
person who creates it, must be an inter- cation, related to the first day of such 
est in the thing itself on which the power term, a warrant of attorney might be 
is to be exercised, and not an interest in made available after the death of the 
that which is produced by the exercise principal, by entering up judgment with- 
of the power. — In Smart v. Sandars, 5 in the term and vacation in which the 
C. B. 895, 917, Wilde, C. J., said that, death occurred. Lord Holt, Oades v. 
" Where an agreement is entered into on Woodward, 1 Salk. 87 ; Fuller c. Joce- 
a sufficient consideration, whereby an lyn, 2 Stra. 882 ; Heapy v. Parris, 6 T. R. 
authority is given for the purpose of 368. 

securing some benefit to the donee of the (e) Gaussen v. Morton, 10 B. & C. 

authority, such an authority is irrevoca- 731 ; Walsh v. Whitcomb, 2 Esp. 565 ; 
ble. This is what is usually meant by Allen v. Davis, 8 Eng. (Ark.) 2y. See 
an authority coupled with an interest:" also Marfield v. Goodhue, 3 Comst. 02; 
— that is, irrevocable except by the death Houghtaling v. Marvin, 7 Barb. 412; Wil- 
of the principal ; for the dictum, as the son v. Edmonds, 4 Foster (N. H.), 517. 
whole case shows, is to be taken in con- (f) 2 Kent Com. 643. 

nection with the doctrine, understood still (ff) McGregor v. Gardner, 14 la. 326. 

to prevail in England, on the authority 

1 As by way of a commission, in the surplus proceeds of land to be sold. Haw- 
ley v. Smith, 45 Ind. 183. 

77 



*73 



THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK 



est must be in the property on which the power is to be ex- 
ercised. (fg~) 

The authority is revoked by the death of the agent. 1 Hence, if 
a firm be the agent, and one of them dies, his estate cannot be 
charged for the subsequent misuse of the authority by the sur- 
viving partner. (fh~) 



SECTION IX. 

HOW THE PRINCIPAL IS AFFECTED BY THE MISCONDUCT OF HIS 

AGENT. 



A principal is liable for the fraud or misconduct of his agent, so 
far, that, on the one hand, he cannot take any benefit from any 
misrepresentation fraudulently made by his agent, although the 
principal was ignorant and innocent of the fraud ; (#) and on 
the other hand, if the party dealing with the agent suffer from 
such fraud, the principal is bound to make him compensation 



(fa) Hartley's Appeal, 63 Perm. St. 
202'; Barr v. Schroeder, 32 Cal. 600; 
Blackstone v. Buttermore, 63 Perm. St. 
286. 

(/A) Johnson v. Wilcox, 25 Ind. 182. 

(<j) Attorney-General v. Ansted, 12 
M. & W. 520; Fitzherbert v. Mather, 1 
T. R. 12 ; Seaman v. Fonereau, 2 Stra. 
1183 ; Fitzsimmons v. Joslin, 21 Vt. 129. 
"I have no doubt that if an agent of a 
party, say of Mr. Attwood in this case, 
without his knowledge, made a wilfully 
false representation to the British Iron 
Company, upon which representation 
they acted, ' adhihentes Jidem' and on 
that confidence bad formed n contract ; 
— I have no hesitation whatever in say- 
ing, that against that contract, equity 
would relieve just as much as if there 
was the scienter of the principal proved ; 



because it is not a question of criminal 
responsibility which is here raised by the 
facts. The agent could not commit the 
principal to any criminal purpose, if the 
principal did not know it, and had not 
either given him an authority or adopted 
his act when he did know it. But as to 
the civil effect of vitiating the contract 
made upon that false representation, I 
have no doubt whatever that it would 
vacate it just as much, with the igno- 
rance of the principal, as if he were 
charged with knowing it, and as if the 
agent had been an agent for this pur- 
pose." Lord Brougham in Attwood c. 
Small, 6 CI. & F. 448. See also Tay- 
lor v. Green, 8 C. & P. 316 ; Olmsted v. 
Hotailing, 1 Hill (N. Y.), 317; Veazie 
v. Williams, 8 How. 134, s. c. 3 Story, 
611 ; Smith v. Tracy, 36 N. Y. 79. 



1 The death of an agent with the power of substitution, revokes the authority of 
a substitute, whose presentation of the principal's certificates of loan thereafter will 
not justify a corporation in making a transfer. Lehigh Coal Co. v. Mohr, 83 Penn. 
St. 228. See Jackson Ins. Co. v. Partee, 9 Heiskell, 296. That war revokes an 
agency, see Howell v. Gordon, 40 Ga. 302 ; Blackwell t'. Willard, 65 N. C. 555 ; contra, 
Jones v. Harris, 10 Heiskell, 98; Darling v. Lewis, 11 Heiskell, 125; Maloney v. 
Stephens, 11 Heiskell, 738. That the tender of an insurance premium during the 
rebellion to a former agent resident in Virginia does not bind an insurance company, 
see Ins. Co. v. Davis, 95 U. S. 425; contra, Sands v. N. Y. Ins. Co. 50 X Y. 626 ; Man- 
hattan Ins. Co. u. Warwick, 20 Gratt. 614. See Fretz v. Stover, 22 Wall. 198. 

78 



CH. III.] 



AGENTS. 



*74 



for the injury so sustained ; (T) 1 and this although the 
* principal be innocent, (i) 2 provided the agent acted in * 74 
the matter as his agent, and distinctly within the line of the 
business intrusted to him. (&) 3 And though there be no actual 
fraud on the part of the agent, yet if he makes a false representa- 
tion as to matter peculiarly within his own knowledge or that of 
his principal, and thereby gets a better bargain for his principal, 



(h) Holt, C. J., in Hern v. Nichols, 1 
Salk. 289, and Ellenborough, C. J., in 
Crockford v. Winter, 1 Camp. 124, lay 
down the broad doctrine that a principal 
is answerable civiliter, though not crimi- 
naliter, for the fraud of his agent. Jef- 
frey v. Bigelow, 13 Wend. 618, illustrates 
the general doctrine. There the defend- 
ants had been in partnership with one 
Hunt, for speculation in sheep, they con- 
tributing funds, and he time and services. 
Hunt purchased some sheep diseased 
with the scab, knowing the fact, and 
mixed them with a larger number be- 
longing to the partnership. Subsequently 
Hunt assigned his interest to defendants, 
who employed S. to sell the sheep. The 
flock was purchased from S. by the 
plaintiff, and mixed with the sheep he 
before owned. The scab broke out 
among them and destroyed many sheep, 
of his old stock as well as of those pur- 
chased from S. ; and considerable ex- 
pense was incurred in the attempt to 
arrest the disease. S. was aware of the 
infected condition of the flock, but no 
actual knowledge was proved upon the 
defendants. Held, that the plaintiff was 
entitled to maintain his action, and could 
recover damages for the loss both of the 
sheep purchased and of the other sheep 
receiving the infection, and all other 
damages necessarily and naturally flow- 
ing from the act of the defendants' 
agent. Semble, the liability of the de- 
fendants would have been the same if 
S. had been ignorant of the state of the 

1 If insurance agent cheats the insured into signing the preliminary papers and 
paying the premium, and the policy is issued on the agent's false statements, the 
company is bound. Eilenberger v. Protective Ins. Co. 89 Penn. St. 464. But if an 
insurance agent fraudulently settles a loss by fire with a member of a firm the firm 
must restore, or offer so to do, the amount received before bringing suit on the policy. 
Brown v. Hartford Ins. Co. 117 Mass. 479. . 

2 Where a husband as his wife's agent fraudulently procured insurance on her 
life, the company can recover the money paid to her administrator, although she was 
innocent of the fraud. National Ins. Co. v. Minch, 5 Thomp. & C. 545. 

a A principal is bound by the representations of an agent, made, while so acting, 
as true of his own knowledge, but which prove to be false although not known by 
him to be so, and although the principal neither authorized or knew that he was to 
make them. Jewett v. Carter, 132 Mass. 335. See McGowan v. Dyer, L. K. 8 «. a. 

79 



flock ; the knowledge of Hunt when he 
bought the diseased sheep being con- 
structively the knowledge of his partners, 
and his assignment of his interests to the 
defendants, before the sale to the plain- 
tiff, making no difference, as to their re- 
sponsibility. See also Johnston v. South- 
Western Railroad Bank, 3 Strob. Eq. 
263 ; Mitchell e. Mims, 8 Tex. 6 ; TJdell 
v. Atherton, 7 H. & N. 172 ; Sweetland 
v. 111. &e. Tel. Co. 27 la. 433 ; Fawcett v. 
Bigley, 59 Penn. St. 411. 

(i) Irving v. Motley, 7 Bing. 543; Doe 
v. Martin, 4 T. R. 39, 66; Edwards v. 
Pootner, 1 Camp. 530. Where an attor- 
ney's clerk had simulated the court seal 
upon a writ, by taking an impression 
from the seal upon another writ, the 
writ and all proceedings thereon were 
set aside, and the attorney, although per- 
sonally blameless, was compelled to pay 
the costs. Dunkley v. Fan-is, 11 C. B. 
457, 285 ; Hunter v. Hudson River, &c. 
Co. 20 Barb. 493. 

(k) Peto v. Hague, 5 Esp. 135 ; Huck- 
man v. Femie, 3 M. & W. 605. — In 
Woodin v. Burford, 2 Cr. & M. 392, 
Baylei), B., said : " What is said by a 
servant is not. evidence against the mas- 
ter, unless he has some authority given him to 
make the representation." It is not meant, 
as the case shows, that there must be an 
express authority to make that particu- 
lar representation ; but the authority may 
be implied as incident to a general author- 
ity. Sharp v. New York, 40 Barb. 256. 



* 75 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

such principal, although innocent, cannot take the benefit of the 
transaction. But the third party may rescind the contract, and 
recover back any money he may have paid the principal, by reason 
of his confidence in such misrepresentation. (7) And it has been 
held, that if an agent, permitted by his principal to hold himself 
out as owner of land, sells it for the agent's own interest, the sale 
binds the principal. (IT) The declarations of an agent are not 
admitted as evidence against his principal, unless they are a part 
of the res gestae. (Im) 



SECTION X. 

OP NOTICE TO AN AGENT. 

A principal is affected by notice to his agent, respecting any 
matter distinctly within the scope of his agency, when the notice 

is given before the transaction begins, or before it is so 
* 75 far * completed as to render the notice nugatory, (m) 1 

The notice to the agent may be implied as well as express. 

(I) Willes v. Glover, 4 B. & P. 14 ; lands to himself and wife, of a prior un- 

Ashhurst, J., Fitzherbert v. Mather, 1 T. registered mortgage, it was held not to 

E. 16 ; Franklin v. Ezell, 1 Sneed, 497 ; operate as notice to the wife, so as to 

National Exchange Co. e. Brew, 2 Macq. give the mortgage a preference in respect 

1 1 103 ; Carpenter r. Amer. Ins. Co. 1 Story, to her title ; especially as she had paid 

57. And it seems the purchaser, without the consideration for the conveyance out 

rescinding the contract, may maintain of her separate estate. Snyder r\ Spon- 

case for deceit against the principal, able, 1 Hill (N. Y.), 567; s. c. affirmed in 

Fuller v. Wilson, 3 Q. B. 58. error, 7 Hill, 427. It seems a principal 

(//) Calais Co. v. Van Pelt, 2 Black, is chargeable with notice of what is 

372. known to a sub-agevt, how many degrees 

(Im) Green v. Gonzales, 2 Daly, 412. soever removed, such sub-agent being 

(m) Bank of U. S. r. Davis, 2 Hill appointed by his authority. See Boyd 

(N. Y.), 451. Notice to one of several v. Vanderkemp, 1 Barb. Ch. 287. As to 

joint purchasers, whatever be the nat- the time when notice may be given, see 

ure of the estate they take, is not in Tourville v. Naish, 3 P. Wms. 307 ; Story 

general notice to the rest, unless he who ;•. Lord Windsor, 2 Atk. 630; More v. 

receives the notice be their agent; and Mayhew, 1 Chanc. Cas. 34; Wigg u. 

where notice was given to a husband, Wigg, 1 Atk. 384. 

at the time of taking a conveyance of 

1 Thus notice to an agent for that purpose of the day chosen to fix the price of 
wheat sold to his principal, Owens v. Poberts, 36 Wis. 258 ; or to a buyer's agent 
of the non-payment of a check for the price of land, Farmer v. Willard, 7-1 N. C. 284 ; 
but not notice to an auctioneer of an action against his principal respecting the prop- 
erty for sale, Hinton v. Citizens' Ins. Co. 63 Ala. 488. See Sooy v. State, 12 Vroom, 
394 ; Houseman v. Girard Ass. 81 Penn. St. 256 ; Day <>. Wamsley, 33 Ind. 145 ; 
Chouteau v. Allen, 70 Mo. 290. 

80 



CH. III.] AGENTS. * 76 

Knowledge obtained by the agent in the course of that very trans- 
action is notice ; 1 and it has been said, that knowledge obtained 
in another transaction, but so short a time -previous that the 
agent must be presumed to recollect it, is also notice affecting 
the principal ; (n) but this is questionable, (o) This matter has 
been most discussed in cases where, in consequence of the em- 
ployment of solicitors or counsel in the purchase of real estate, 
the question has arisen how far the clients are affected with 
notice of incumbrances, or defects of title, which, by a more or 
less strong presumption, must be taken to have come to the 
knowledge of their agents. Two propositions seem to be well 
settled : the first, that the notice to the solicitor, to bind the 
client, must be notice in the same transaction in which the client 
employs him, or at least, during the time of the solicitor's 
employment in that transaction ; (p) the other, that where 
a * purchaser employs the same solicitor as the vendor, he * 76 
is affected with notice of whatever that solicitor had notice 
of, in his capacity of solicitor for either vendor or purchaser, in 
the transaction in which he is so employed. (§■) The first, it is 

(n) Lord Langdale, M. R., Hargreaves a subsequent purchaser in an indepen- 

v. Rothwell, 1 Keen, 159. And see Mount- dent and unconnected transaction, his 

ford v. Scott, 3 Madd. 34. previous knowledge is not notice to such 

(o) N. Y. Cent. Ins. Co. v. National other person for whom he acts. " The 

Ins. Co. 20 Barb. 468. reason is [per Sergeant, J., delivering the 

(p) Wigram, V. C, Fuller v. Bennett, opinion of the court], that no man can 

2 Hare, 402, 403. And Lord Hardwicke, be supposed always to carry in his mind 

in declaring the same doctrine, in Wors- the recollection of former occurrences ; 

ley v. Scarborough, 3 Atk. 392, said it and moreover, in the case of the attor- 

would be very mischievous if it were ney or counsel, it might be contrary to 

otherwise, for the man of most practice his duty to reveal the confidential com- 

and greatest eminence would then be munieations of his client. To visit the 

the most dangerous to employ. And see principal with constructive notice, it is 

Warrick v. Warrick, 3 Atk. 294. In necessary that the knowledge of the 

Hood v. Fahnestoek, 8 Watts, 489, it was agent or attorney should be gained, in 

held that if one in the course of his busi- the course of the same transaction in 

ness as agent, attorney, or counsel for which he is employed by his client." s. 

another, obtain knowledge from which P. Bracken v. Miller, 4 W. & S. 102. 

a trust would arise, and afterwards be- (?) Wigram, V. C., Fuller v. Bennett, 

comes the agent, attorney, or counsel of 2 Hare, 402. 

1 Knowledge of a managing tenant in common affects his co-tenants, Ward v. 
Warren, 82 N. Y. 265 ; and of an attorney of the intention of an insolvent to com- 
mit a fraud under the bankrupt law is imputable to his client, Rogers v. Palmer, 102 
U. S. 263 ; but a wife is not affected by her husband's knowledge of incumbrances on 
land purchased by her, Pringle v. Dunn, 37 Wis. 449. So a buyer's intention, known 
to a seller's agent, to evade a liquor law, affects the seller, Suit v. Woodhall, 113 Mass. 
391 ; but contra, Stanley v. Chamberlin, 10 Vroom, 565, affirmed in 11 Vroom, 379, 
to the effect that a principal, without actual knowledge of the proposed illegal use 
of property could disown the agent's act and recover for such use. See further, 
Hoover v. Wise, 91 U. S. 308 ; Greentree v. Rosenstock, 61 N. Y. 583 ; Farrington v. 
Woodward, 82 Penn. St. 259; Tagg v. Tennessee Bank, 9 Heiskell, 479. 

VOL. I. 6 81 



* 77 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

evident, is so far qualified by the second, that where the circum- 
stance of the solicitor's being employed for two parties is in the 
case, a purchaser, in the language of Sir J. Wigram, may be 
affected with notice of what the solicitor knew as solicitor for 
the vendor, although as solicitor for the vendor he may have 
acquired his knowledge before he was retained by the purchaser 
— whatever the solicitor, during the time of his retainer, knows 
as solicitor for either party, may possibly in some cases affect 
both, without reference to the time when his knowledge was first 
acquired. Any other qualification of the principal limiting the 
client's liability to notice acquired in the same transaction, the 
distinguished judge referred to does not acknowledge, (r) If, 
however, one assume to act as agent of another, and cause an act 
to be done for him of which the latter afterwards takes the 
benefit, he must take it charged with notice of such matters as 
appear to have been at the time within the knowledge and recol- 
lection of the agent, (s) 

Notice to a servant of the principal, or one employed by the 
principal, affects the principal, only when given about the very 
thing that servant is employed to do. 1 Thus, notice to a general 
clerk in a mercantile house, not to furnish goods, does not bind 
the house. (£) 2 

On the other hand, knowledge possessed by a principal affects 
a transaction, although the transaction took place through an 
agent to whom the knowledge was not communicated. It cer- 
tainly has this effect if the knowledge of the principal could have 
been and should have been communicated to the agent. But it 
may not be certain that the knowledge of the principal is the 
knowledge of the agent the moment the principal acquires it, 
without any reference to the duty or the possibility of the 
principal's imparting that knowledge to the agent, in 

* 77 season * for him to be influenced by it. (u) In some cases 

(r) See Fuller v. Bennett, 2 Hare, 402, (I) Grant v. Cole, 8 Ala. 519. 

where the cases are reviewed and much (u) In Willis v. Bank of England, 4 

discussed. A. & E. 21, 39, the doctrine of notice was 

(s) Hovey v. Blanchard, 13 N. H. 145. thus stated by Lord Denman: " The gen- 

1 Thus a servant's knowledge of the disposition of a vicious dog in his charge is 
acknowledge of the master. Baldwin v. Casella, L. R. 7 Ex. 325. 

2 Nor is the knowledge by a janitor of a city school-house of a defect in the high- 
way in front of the same, notice to the city. Foster v. Boston, 127 Mass. 290; nor 
is notice to a station agent, notice to a railroad company of the assignment of a chose 
in action. Lambreth v. Clarke, 10 Heiskell, 32. 

82 



CH. III.] AGENTS. 



77 



the rights of the principal are certainly to be determined by his 
own knowledge only ; as, if a principal knew of defences to a 
promissory note available only against a purchaser with knowl- 
edge, and this principal bought the note by an agent, who had no 
knowledge of these defences, they might still be enforced against 
the principal. 

Much question has arisen as to the effect on a corporation, of 
notice to one who is a member or officer of it. By some it is held 
that the notice must be made formally to the corporation, 0) and 
it has been contended on the other hand, that the notice is 
enough if given to any director, or any member of a board which 
manages the affairs of the corporation, (w) We consider these 
views extreme and inaccurate ; and should state as the rule of 
law that a notice to a corporation binds it, only when made to an 
officer, whether president, director, trustee, committee-man, or 
otherwise, whose situation and relation to the corporation imply 
that he has authority to act for the corporation in the particular 
matter in regard to which the notice is given, (x) 1 

eral rule of law is that notice to the rule. Certainly, Mayhew v. Eames, 3 B. 

principal is notice to all his agents. & C. 601, cited by the learned chief jus- 

Mayhew v. Eames ; at any rate if there tice, is very far from establishing the 

be reasonable time, as there was here, for naked doctrine that notice to the prinei- 

the principal to communicate that notice to pal is notice eo instanti to the agent. 
his agents, before the event which raises the (v) Louisiana Bank v. Senecal, 13 La. 

question happens. . . We have been 525. 

pressed with the inconvenience of requir- (»■) Bank of U. S. v. Davis, 2 Hill 

ing every trading company to communi- (N. Y.), 451 ; North Eiver Bank v. Ay- 

cate to their agents everywhere whatever mar, 3 Hill (N. Y.), 262. 
notices they may receive ; hut the ar- (x) See Bowles v. Bage, 3 C. B. 16 ; 

gument ab inconvenienti is seldom enti- Borter v. Bank of Rutland, 19 Vt. 410, 

tied to much weight in deciding legal 425; Fulton Bank v. N. Y. &c. Co. 4 

questions ; and, if it were, other incon- Baige, 127 ; National Bank v. Norton, 1 

veniences of a more serious nature would Hill (N. Y.),575; New Hope, &e. Co. v. 

obviously grow out of a different deci- The Phoenix Bank, 3 Comst. 156, 166; 

sion." It may be considered worth in- Banks v. Martin, 1 Met. 308 ; Story on 

quiry whether the clause we have put Agency, §§ 140 a, 140 d. 
in italics is not an essential part of the 

1 Thus if a director of a. bank, who acts for the bank in discounting a note, 
knows that the note was procured by fraud, the bank is affected with his knowledge, 
Security Bank v. Cushman, 121 Mass. 490 ; but a director who offers a note, which 
he owns, to his bank for sale or discount, if he does not act with the board in 
making the discount, is regarded as a stranger in so doing, and does not affect the 
hank with his knowledge of a defect in its consideration. Hightstown Bank t>. 
Christopher, 11 Vroom, 435; Atlantic Bank v. Savery, 82 N. Y. 291. See Smith v. 
Ayer, 101 U. S. 320 ; West Boston Sav. Bank w. Thompson, 124 Mass. 506; Barnes 
v. Trenton Gas Co. 12 C. E. Green, 33. The knowledge of an insurance agent who 
issues the policy, of incumbrances on the property omitted from the application, 
will not prevent a recovery. Harriman i: Queen Ins. Co. 49 Wis. 71. Likewise an 
insurance agent's failure to state the nature of an applicant's interest. Miaghan v. 
Hartford Ins. Co. 24 Hun, 59. See further as to corporation agents, Slater v. Irwin, 
38 la. 261. 

83 



78 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 



SECTION XI. 

OP SHIPMASTERS. 

A master of a ship has, by the policy of the law-merchant, some 
authority not usually implied in other cases of general 
* 78 * agency, (jf) Thus, he may borrow money, if the exigen- 
cies and necessities of his position require it, and make his 
owner liable, and pledge the ship (by bottomry for the most part) 
for the repayment. (2) But this authority does not usually 
extend to cases where the principal can personally act, as in the 
home port, (a) or in a port where the owner has a specific agent 
for this purpose, (5) 1 and by parity of reason not in a port so 
near the owner's home that he may be consulted, without incon- 
venience and injurious delay, (c) So, too, under such circum- 
stances, he may, without any special authority, sell the property 
intrusted- to him, in a case of extreme necessity, and in the 
exercise of a sound discretion. Nor need this necessity be actual, 
in order to justify the master and make the sale valid. If the 
ship was in a peril, which, as estimated from all the facts then 
within his means of knowledge, was imminent, and made it the 
only prudent course to sell the ship as she was, without further 
endeavors to get her out of her dangerous position, this is enough, 
and the sale is justified and valid, although the purchasers 
succeed in saving her, and events prove that this might have been 
done by the master. But it must be a case where a sudden and 

(y) Whether an action maybe main- (a) Lister v. Baxter, Stra. 695; Pat- 

tained against an owner, which is ton v. The Randolph, Gilp. 457 ; Ship 

grounded on the exercise of this pecu- Lavinia v. Barclay, 1 Wash. C. C. 49 ; 

liar and extraordinary authority by one Lord Abinijn; Arthur u. Barton, 6 M. & 

who was not the master on the register, W. 138. 

but by appointment of the owner had (b) Pritchard v. Schooner Lady Hora- 

virtually acted as master, qumn: see tia, Bee, Ad. 167. 

Stonehouse u. Gent, 2 Q. B. 431, u. ; (c) Johns v. Simons, 2 Q. B. 425; 

Smith v. Davenport, 34 Me. 520. Arthur v. Barton, 6 M. & W. 138 ; Mac- 

(z) Barnard p. Bridgeman, Moore, 918; kintosh i\ Mitcheson, 4 Exch. 175; Bel- 

Weston v. Wright, 7 M. & W. 396 ; Ar- don v. Campbell, 6 Exch. 886, where 

thur v. Barton, 6 M. & W. 138; The Robinson v. Lyall, 7 Price, 592, was ques- 

Gratitudine, 3 Rob. Ad. 240 ; Stainhank tioned. 
v. Fenning, 11 C. B. 51 ; 13 C. B. n. s. 
418 ; The Fortitude, 3 Sumner, 228. 

1 Gunn v. Roberts, L. R. 9 C. P. 331. 

84 



CH. III.] AGENTS. 



79 



entire change of wind or weather, or some other favorable cir- 
cumstance which no one at the time could have rationally 
expected, became the means of her safety ; for although the 
powers and duty of the master should not depend on mat- 
ters which are alike beyond control and foresight, (d) * it * 79 
is still certain that the sale of a ship by the master can be ' 
justified and made valid only by a strict necessity. 

The general rights and duties of ship-masters are more fully 
considered in our chapter on the Law of Shipping 



SECTION XII. 

OP AN ACTION AGAINST AN AGENT TO DETERMINE THE RIGHT OF 

A PRINCIPAL. 

It is a rule of law in respect to all agencies, that where money 
is paid to one as agent, to which another as principal has color of 
right, the right of the principal cannot be tried in an action 
brought by the party paying the money against the agent as for 
money had and received to the use of such party ; but such 
action should be brought against the principal, (e) * * For * 80 

(d) The Brig Sarah Ann, 2 Sumner, the principal, or done something equiva- 
206 ; Hunter v. Parker, 7 M. & W. 322. lent to it ; and the mere entering the 

(e) Bamford v. Shuttleworth, 11 A. amount to the credit of the principal, 
& E. 926 ; Sadler v. Evans, 4 Burr. 1984 ; or making a rest, is not equivalent 
Horsfall v. Handley, 8 Taunt. 136 ; Cos- to payment over. Buller v. Harrison, 
tigan v. Newland, 12 Barb. 456. Yet if Cowp. 565 ; Cox v. Prentice, 3 M. & Sel. 
notice not to pay over has been given, 344. But upon these cases Mr. Smith 
then the agent may be sued. Lord comments as follows : " It will be ob- 
Mansfield, Sadler v. Evans, 4 Burr. 1986 ; served that in neither of these cases 
Edwards v. Hodding, 5 Taunt. 815 ; could the principal himself ever by pos- 
Hearsey v. Pruyn, 7 Johns. 179 ; Elliott sibility have claimed to retain the money 
v. Swartwout, 10 Pet. 137 ; Bend v. Hoyt, for a single instant, had it reached his 
13 id. 263; La Earge v. Kneeland, 7 hands, the payment having been made 
Cowen, 456. See, however, as to the by the plaintiff under pure mistake of 
liability of collectors of the customs, facts, and being void ab initio, as soon as 
Cary v. Curtis, 3 How. 236. — And in that mistake was discovered, so that the 
some cases it has been held that even agent would not have been estopped 
without notice, the agent may be held from denying his principal's title to the 
liable for money had and received, if he money, any more than the factor of J. 
have not actually paid over the money to S. of Jamaica, who has received money 

1 But Shipherd v. Underwood, 55 HI. 475, decided that if a seller of real estate 
intended to palm off a defective title on a purchaser, the latter might sue the seller's 
agent to recover back the deposit money before it was paid over to the seller, 
although the purchaser knew the agent's capacity. 

85 



80 



THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. 



[BOOK I. 



a party who deals with an agent (acting as such, and within 
the scope of his authority) has, in general, no right to separate 
him from his principal, and hold him liable in his personal capa- 
city. The agent owes an account of his actions to his principal, 
and that he may be able to render that account, the law, except 
under special circumstances, refuses to impose upon him a duty 
to any third party. 

We here close all that was proposed to be said of agents as 
parties to contracts entered into by them in their representative 
capacity. The relation between agent and principal constitutes 
itself a distinct contract, and the considerations growing out of it 
might, in a strictly accurate division, find a place in that part of 
this work which treats of the Subject-Matter of contracts. But it 
has been deemed expedient in this instance, as in some others, to 



paid to him under the supposition of his 
employer being J. S. of Trinidad, would 
be estopped from retaining that money 
against his employer, in order to return 
it to the person who paid it to him. Be- 
sides which, in Buller v. Harrison, had 
the agent paid the money he received 
from the underwriter in discharge of the 
foul loss, over to his principal, he would 
have rendered himself an instrument of 
fraud, which no agent can be obliged to 
do. Except in such cases as these, the 
maxim, respondeat superior, has been ap- 
plied, and the agent held responsible to 
no one but his principal." Merc Law, 
B. 1, c. 5, § 7. In Snowdon v. Davis, 1 
Taunt. 359, a sheriff had issued a warrant 
on mesne process, to distrain the goods 
of A ; the bailiff levied the debt upon 
the goods of B, and paid it over. Held, 
that money had and received would lie 
against the bailiff. Mnnsjield, C. J., 
said : " The bailiff pays the money over 
to the sheriff, and the sheriff to the ex- 
chequer, and it is objected, that as it has 
been paid over, the action for money had 
and received does not lie against the 
bailiff; and this is compared to the case 
of an agent, and the authorities are cited 
of Sadler v. Evans ; Campbell v. Hall, 1 
Cowp. 204 ; Buller v. Harrison, 2 id. 565, 
and several others. In the case of Sad- 
ler y. Evans, the money was paid to the 
agent of Lady Windsor, for Lady Wind- 
sor's use ; in that of Buller v. Harrison, 
the money was paid to the broker, ex- 
pressly for the benefit of the assured. In 
Pond !\ Underwood, the money was paid 
for the use of the administrator. Can it 
in this case be said with any propriety, 
that the money was paid to the bailiff for 

86 



the purpose of paying it to the sheriff, or 
to the intent that the sheriff might pay it 
into the exchequer ? The plaintiff pays 
it under the terror of process, to redeem 
his goods, not with an intent that it 
should be delivered over to any one in 
particular." But this case has been re- 
garded by high authority as establishing 
a stronger doctrine than that on which 
Sir James Mansfield appears to have 
placed it. In Smith v. Sleap, 12 M. & 
W. 588, Parke, B., referring to Snowdon 
v. Davis, said : " It was there held that 
a party who had received money wrong- 
fully could not set up as a defence that 
he had received it for, and paid it over 
to, a third person." In the same case 
a dictum of the Court of Exchequer is 
reported, to the effect that a payment to 
A, expressly as the agent of B, for the 
purpose of redeeming goods wrongfully 
detained by B, and a receipt by A ex- 
pressly for B, would make a case upon 
which an action against A for money 
had and received, could be maintained. 
And in the case of Parker i>. Bristol and 
Exeter Railway, 6 Exch. 702, where the 
defendants had refused to deliver the 
plaintiff's goods until he paid an excess 
over the proper amount due for freight 
money, it was held that he might main- 
tain an action to recover this excess from 
the defendants, although they received a 
portion of it only as agents for the Great 
Western Railway Company ; the princi- 
ple being " that an action for money had 
and received lies to recover back money 
which has been obtained through compul- 
sion even although it has been received 
by an agent who acted for the princi- 
pal." 



CH - IIL ] AGENTS. 



•81 



sacrifice logical order to the convenience of the reader ; and such 
observations as seem to be required by the contract of Agency, 
properly so called, are subjoined in the following section. 



SECTION XIII. 

THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF PRINCIPAL AND AGENT AS TO 

EACH OTHER. 

An agent with instructions is bound to regard them in every 
point ; nor can he depart from them, without making him- 
self * responsible for the consequences. (#) 1 If he have no * 81 
instructions, or indistinct or partial instructions, his duty 
will depend upon the intention and understanding of the parties. 
This may be gathered from the circumstances of the case, and es- 
pecially, from the general custom and usage in relation to that 
kind of business. (K) But he cannot defend himself by showing 
a conformity to usage, if he has disobeyed positive instructions. 

(g) Leverick v. Meigs, 1 Cowen, 645 ; a severe application of the general rule, 

Marshall, C. J., Manella v. Barry, 3 see Hays v. Stone, 7 Hill (N. Y.), 128. 

Cranch, 415, 439; Kingston v. Kincaid, (h) Marzetti v. Williams, 1 B. & Ad. 

1 AVnsh. C. C. 454; Rundle v. Moore, 415; Sutton v. Tatham, 10 A. & E. 27; 

3 Johns. Cas. 30 ; Loraine v. Cartwright, Sykes v. Giles, 5 M. & W. 645 ; Kingston 

3 Wash. C. C. 151 ; Ferguson v. Porter, 3 v. Wilson, 4 Wash. C. C. 315. — And if 

Fla. 27. — "And no motive connected the agent is employed to act in some 

with the interest of the principal, how- particular business or trade he may bind 

ever honestly entertained, or however his principal by following the usages of 

wisely adopted, can excuse a breach of that trade, whether the principal is 

the instructions." Washington, J., in aware of them or not. Pollock v. Sta- 

Courcier v. Ritter, 4 Wash.' C. C. 549, bles, 12 Q. B. 765 ; Bayliffe v. Butter- 

551 ; but compare Forrestier v. Board- worth, 1 Exch. 425 ; there Parke, B., 

man, 1 Story, 43. — If in obedience to distinguishing the case of Bartlett v. 

the instructions, the agent do an act Pentland, 10 B. & C. 760, said : " That 

which is illegal in fact, though not however is a different question from the 

clearly in itself a breach of law, nor present, which is one of contract. In 

known by the agent to be so, he is enti- the case of a contract which a person or- 

tled to be indemnified by the principal ders another to make for him, he is bound 

for the consequences. Betts v. Gibbins, by that contract if it is made in the usual 

2 A. & E. 57 ; Adamson v. Jarvis. 4 Bing. way." 

66, 72 ; Ives v. Jones, 3 Ired. L. 538. For 

1 Thus where the security of payment was to be " unquestionably good," and the 
purchaser's notes were worthless, Robinson Machine Works v. Vorse, 52 la. 207 ; 
Clark v. Roberts, 26 Mich. 506 ; or the agent takes insufficient or worthless security, 
Owensboro' Bank v. Western Bank, 13 Bush, 526. See Nicolai v. Lyon, 8 Oreg 56. 
— On the other hand, a principal must make good an agent's losses in fulfilling his 
instructions, as by a sale of worthless bonds. Maitland v. Martin, 86 Penn. St. 120; 
or where the agent was obliged to allow for the defective packing of cotton, Beach 
v. Branch, 57 Ga. 362. 

87 



* 82 THE LAW OF CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

If loss ensue from his disregard to his instructions, he must 
sustain it ; if profit, he cannot retain it, but it belongs to his 
principal, (i) 

A principal discharges his agent from responsibility for devia- 
tion from his instructions, when he accepts the benefit of his 
act. (yfc) l He may reject the transaction altogether ; (I) and 

* 82 * if he advanced money on goods which his agent purchased 

in violation of his authority, he is not bound to return the 
goods to the agent when he repudiates the sale, but has his lien on 
them, and may hold them as the property of the agent, (m) But 
he must reject the transaction at once, and decisively, as soon as 
fully acquainted with it. For if he delays doing this, that he may 
have his chance of making a profit, or if he performs acts of own- 
ership over the property, he accepts it, and confirms the doings of 
the agent, (w) 

The question has arisen, whether a principal is bound by the 
act of an agent, who executes his commission in part only ; as if 
being directed and authorized to buy two houses, he buys one 
only ; or to buy fifty shares of stock, he buys twenty-five ; or to 
buy one hundred bales of cotton, he buys fifty. It has been said 
that the principal is bound by the partial execution of the agent's 
authority, (o) But it is plain that cases which present this ques- 
tion may differ essentially. If one is made agent to purchase a 
lot of woodland and a saw-mill, and purchases either alone, it 
would be a hardship upon the principal to be compelled to take 
that, when it might be nearly valueless to him without the other. 
But if the authority which he gave his agent to buy both, was in 
such a form that the seller of one, after due inquiry, was perfectly 

(i) Catlin i>. Bell, 4 Camp. 184 ; Park- Arabl. 740; Vanada v. Hopkins, 1 J. 

ist v. Alexander, Uohns. Ch. 394; Segar J. Marsh. 285, 294; Sugden on Powers, 

v. Edwards, 11 Leigh, 213. ch. 9, § 8. — And in some cases it has 

(k) Clarke v. Perrier, 2 Freem. 48 ; been held at law that an agent transcend- 

Prince v. Clark, 1 B. & C. 186. ing his authority in part, binds his prin- 

(/) Roe v. Prideaux, 10 East, 158. — cipal for the part which was performed 

If, however, an agent has done more than in accordance with the authority. Gor- 

he was authorized to do, the execution, don ;;. Buchanan, 5 Yerg. 71 ; Johnson v. 

though void as to the excess, may be Blasdale, 1 Sm. & M. 17. — See Wintle v. 

held good for the rest, at least in equity. Crowther, 1 Cr. & J. 316. 
But it is necessary in such a case that [m) Lord Hardwicke, Cornwall v. Wil- 

the boundaries between the excess and son, 1 Ves. Sen. 510 ; Lord Eldon, Kemp 

the execution of the power should be v. Pryor, 7 Ves. 240, 247. 
clearly distinguishable. Sir Thomas (n) Prince v. Clark, 1 B. & C. 186; 

Clarke, V. C, Alexander v. Alexander, Cornwall v. Wilson, 1 Ves. Sen. 509. 
2 Ves. Sen. 644 ; Campbell v. Leach, (o) Gordon v. Buchanan, 5 Yerg. 81. 

1 Or ratifies the same, Bray v. Gunn, 53 Ga. 144. 



CH. III.J AGENTS. * 83 

justified in believing the agent authorized to buy either separately, 
the principal should bo held. Wo should say, that the principal 
might generally be held ; but would not be, where he could show 
that the things embraced within the authority he gave were united 
in that authority, and in his intention, and that it would be a detri- 
ment to him to take a part only. 

Some conflict appears to exist as to the right of an agent to 
delegate his authority. On the one hand, the general principle, 
that delegatus non potest delegare, is certain, (j?) An agent 
can * do for his principal only that which his principal au- * 83 
thorizes ; and if the principal appoint an agent to act for him 
as his representative in any particular business, this agent has not 
thereby a right to make another person the representative of his 
principal. The employment and trust are personal ; they may 
rest on some ground of personal preference and confidence, and 
on the knowledge which the principal has of his agent's ability, 
and the belief he has of his integrity. But if the agent, merely 
by virtue of his agency, may substitute one person in his stead, he 
may another, or any other, and thus compel the principal to be 
represented by one whom he does not know, or be bound by obli- 
gations cast upon him by one he does know, and because he knows 
him would refuse to employ. But, on the other hand, the princi- 
pal may, if he chooses, give this very power to his agent, (q) In 

(p) Combe's Case, 9 Rep. 75 b, 76 a. — Ess v. Truscott, 2 M. & W. 385. — A bro- 
Tbis maxim has frequent application ker cannot delegate his authority. Ben- 
in cases of powers. Ingram v. Ingram, derson v. Barnewall, 1 Y. & J. 387 ; 
2 Atk. 88 ; Alexander v. Alexander, 2 Cockran v. Warn, 2 M. & Sel. 301, n. — 
Ves. Sen. 643 ; Hamilton v. Royse, 2 Nor can a factor. Solly v. Rathbone, 2 
Seh. & L. 330. A notice to quit given by M. & Sel. 298 ; Catlin v. Bell, 4 Camp. 
an agent of an agent, is not sufficient 183. — A distinction, however, is to be 
without a recognition by the principal, taken between the employment of a ser- 
Doe v. Robinson, 3 Bing. N. C. 677. — vant and the delegation of the authority. 
An attachment for non-payment of costs An agent, like another person, may act 
cannot be supported by a demand of the by the hand of a servant as well as by 
costs by a third person, authorized by his own hand, in cases where the act is 
the attorney to receive them. Clark v. merely physical, or where mind enters 
Dignum, 3 M. & W. 319. — In an action into it so little that it would be absurd to 
on an agreement for the sale of goods, at say that the difference between one mind 
a valuation to be made by A, the issue and another could be of any moment. 
was, whether a valuation was made by Lord Ellenbarough, Mason v. Joseph, 1 
A. It appeared that the goods were in Smith, 406. See also Powell v. Tuttle, 3 
fact valued by B, A's clerk. Held, that Comst. 396 ; Moor v. Wilson, 6 Foster 
the defendant was not bound by it, unless (N. H.), 332; Comm. Bank of Penn. v. 
it were shown that it was agreed between Union Bank of N. Y., 1 Kern. 203. See 
the parties that B's valuation should be also Williams v. Woods, 16 Md. 220. 
taken as A's; and that the fact of the (q) Palliser v. Ord, Bunb. 166. — A. 
defendant's seeing B valuing, and making power coupled with an interest, given to A 
no objection until B told him the amount, and his assigns, passes with the interest to 
was not evidence of such agreement. A's devisee, to the executor of that de- 

89 



* 84 THE LAW OP CONTRACTS. [BOOK I. 

the common printed forms of letters of attorney, we usually find 
the phrase, " with power of substitution," and after this a promise 
to ratify whatever the attorney, " or his substitute," may lawfully 
do in the premises. That the agent has this power, when it is 
given to him in this way, cannot be doubted. But it must