SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.
There having been an Associate Justice of this Court appointed since the commencement of this term, It is ordered that the following allotment be made of the Chief Justice and Associate Justices of said Court among the Circuits, agreeably to the act of Congress in such case made and provided, and that such allotment be entered of record, viz. :
For the First Circuit, HORACE GRAY, Associate Justice.
For the Second Circuit, SAMUEL BLATCHFORD, Associate Justice.
For the Third Circuit, Joseph P. Bradley, Associate Justice.
For the Fourth Circuit, MORRISON R. WAITE, Chief Justice.
For the Fifth Circuit, LUCIUS Q. C. LAMAR, Associate Justice.
For the Sixth Circuit, STANLEY MATTHEWS, Associate Justice.
For the Seventh Circuit, JOHN M. HARLAN, Associate Justice.
For the Eighth Circuit, SAMUEL F. MILLER, Associate Justice.
For the Ninth Circuit, STEPHEN J. FIELD, Associate Justice.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.
It is ordered that the following allotment be made of the Associate Justices of this Court among the Circuits, agreeably to the act of Congress in such case made and provided, and that such allotment be entered of record, viz. :
For the First Circuit, HORACE GRAY, Associate Justice.
For the Second Circuit, SAMUEL BLATCHFORD, Associate Justice. For the Third Circuit, JOSEPH P. BRADLEY, Associate Justice. For the Fourth Circuit, JOHN M. HARLAN, Associate Justice. For the Fifth Circuit, Lucius Q. C. LAMAR, Associate Justice. For the Sixth Circuit, STANLEY MATTHEWS, Associate Justice. For the Seventh Circuit, JOHN M. HARLAN, Associate Justice. For the Eighth Circuit, SAMUEL F. MILLER, Associate Justice. For the Ninth Circuit, STEPHEN J. FIELD, Associate Justice.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF DEED.
See EVIDENCE, 1, 2.
See CORPORATION, 2;
EQUITY.
See CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, 2, 3.
See CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, 8, 9.
1. In this case it was held, on the facts, that the plaintiff in a suit in equity
had not established his right to a decree that he is entitled to the one
half of the attorney's fees in an award against Mexico by the joint
United States and Mexican commission, which fees had been collected
by the defendant. Porter v. White, 235.
2. The plaintiff failed to establish any equitable lien on the award, by
showing a distinct appropriation of a part of it in his favor, or any
agreement for his payment out of it. Ib.
BAIL BOND.
See INTEREST, 1;
JURISDICTION, B, 5.
An assignee in bankruptcy appeared in a suit of equity which had been
commenced by a bank against the bankrupt before his bankruptcy, to
obtain a decree for the sale of securities pledged to the bank as col
lateral, and defended upon the ground of usury and usurious payments
of interest. More than five years after the appointment of the assignee
the bank filed a supplemental bill, setting up a former adjudication
between the bankrupt and the bank made after the commencement of
the suit, but before the bankruptcy upon the matter so set up in de-
fence by the assignee. Held, that the supplemental bill set up no new
cause of action, but only matters operating as an estoppel which were
not subject to the limitation prescribed by Rev. Stat. § 5057. Jenkins
v. International Bank, 484.
CITATION.
See WRIT OF Error, 1.
CITIZENSHIP.
See JURISDICTION, B, 6, 7, 8.
CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.
1. In order to make a claim against the United States one arising out of a
treaty within the meaning of Rev. Stat. § 1066, excluding it from the
jurisdiction of the Court of Claims, the right itself, which the petition
makes to be the foundation of the claim, must derive its life and exist-
ence from some treaty stipulation. United States v. Weld, 51.
2. A claim against the United States made under the provisions of the act
of June 5, 1882, 22 Stat. 98, c. 195, "reëstablishing the Court of Com-
missioners of Alabama Claims and for the distribution of unappropri-
ated moneys of the Geneva Award," is not a claim growing out of the
treaty of Washington within the sense of the word "treaty," as used
in Rev. Stat. § 1066. Ib.
3. The payment of the expenses of the Geneva Arbitration has not been
charged by Congress upon the fund received under the award made
there. Ib.
4. A statute entitled "An act referring to the Court of Claims," etc., “for
examination and report," and enacting that "the claims" "be, and
the same are hereby, referred to the Court of Claims for adjudication
according to law, on the proofs heretofore presented, and such other
proofs as may be adduced, and report the same to Congress" confers
upon that court full jurisdiction to proceed to final judginent, as in the
exercise of its ordinary jurisdiction. United States v. Irwin, 125.
5. A statute conferring upon the Court of Claims power to consider and
render judgment for claims "for property claimed to have been taken
and impressed into the service of the United States in the year 1857
by orders of Colonel Albert Sidney Johnston in command of the Utah
expedition, as well as for property alleged to have been sold to the
government" does not authorize that court to consider and give judg-
ment for losses consequent upon the refusal of Colonel Johnston to
|