2. The grant of the United States to a tele- graph company, under Rev. St. U. S. § 5263, of the right to construct and operate lines along any military or post-roads of the United States, declared such by law, is not such a grant of a franchise as to exempt such a com- pany from taxes or excises imposed by a state in which its lines are thus constructed and operated. Western Union Tel. Co. v. Com- monwealth of Massachusetts, 961.
![[ocr errors]](https://books.google.se/books/content?id=OKam-X5xOEcC&hl=sv&output=html_text&pg=PA1460&img=1&zoom=3&q=editions:STANFORD36105060125247&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U0fVWclYSkf3bQpL3kY7dQs7veE3Q&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=206,317,22,5)
![[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]](https://books.google.se/books/content?id=OKam-X5xOEcC&hl=sv&output=html_text&pg=PA1460&img=1&zoom=3&q=editions:STANFORD36105060125247&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U0fVWclYSkf3bQpL3kY7dQs7veE3Q&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=518,151,409,189)
3. The amount of a tax or excise imposed by 2. The act of congress under which duties a state on a telegraph company was deter-on centrifugal and molasses sugars from San mined by ascertaining what proportion the Domingo are collected, authorized their exac- number of miles of its lines in the state bore tion, and was passed after the treaty with the to the whole number operated by the com- Dominican republic, and, if there be any con- pany, and taxing an equal portion of the as-flict between the stipulations of the treaty and sessable value of the company's stock. Held, the requirements of the law, the latter must that the principle itself not being unjust, and control.-Whitney v. Robertson, 456.
it not appearing that the company was injured by any principle or rule of law not equally applicable to other similar objects of taxa- tion, the tax would not be declared void on the ground that no deduction was made for the value of property of the company subject to local taxation in other states, the company owning no such property within the state im- posing the tax.-Id.
See, also, Appeal; Error, Writ of; Excep- tions, Bill of; Judgment; Jury; New Trial; Witness.
Waiver of objections.
1. Where, after the introduction of the plaintiff's testimony, the defendant's motion for a verdict was refused, the subsequent in- troduction of testimony by the defendant is a waiver of all objections to the refusal of the motion to direct a verdict.-Union Ins. Co. v.
4. Pub. St. Mass. c. 13, § 54, providing for collection of taxes from foreign corporations, and authorizing the court in certain cases to issue injunctions restraining such corpora- tions from transacting any business until de- linquent taxes are paid, is void as to the is-Smith, 534. suing of such injunction against a telegraph company whose lines in that state are mostly constructed and operated as United States pos- tal roads by virtue of Rev. St. U. S. § 5263, granting the right to build and operate lines on such roads.-Id.
5. Rev. St. U. S. §§ 5263-5269, allowing tele- graph companies that accept the obligations and restrictions required by law to construct and maintain their lines over and along any military or post road of the United States, do not exempt a telegraph company from state taxation when no part of its line in the state levying the tax is built over or along a mili- tary or post road.-Ratterman v. Western Union Tel. Co., 1127.
2. In an action in a United States court by an agent to recover commission for a sale, an expression of opinion by the judge in his charge as follows: "I do not see that this evi- dence proves a contract on behalf of defendant to purchase this property through plaintiff," is not reviewable upon writ of error, especially when immediately afterwards the charge recognizes the right of the jury to determine the issue.-Rucker v. Wheeler, 1142.
3. It is proper for the judge to aid the jury by explaining and commenting upon the testi- mony, and to even give them his opinion upon questions of fact, provided only he submit those questions to their determination.-Unit- ed States v. Philadelphia & R. R. Co., 77.
See Collision; Death by Wrongful Act; Neg- Objections to evidence. ligence.
1. Plaintiff imported centrifugal and mo- lasses sugars, the produce and manufacture of San Domingo, similar to sugars produced in Hawaii, which are by treaty admitted free of duty, and claimed that they should be ad- mitted free, under article 9 of the treaty with the Dominican republic, (15 St. 475,) which provides that "no higher or other duty shall be imposed on the importation into the United States of any article, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the Dominican republic, * * * than are on or shall be payable on the like articles, the growth, produce, or manu-
4. When evidence is not objected to when offered, an exception subsequently taken to it will not be entertained.-Teal v. Bilby, 239. Instructions.
5. Where a general exception is taken to the refusal of the court to charge a series of propositions, such exception is bad if one of the series is objectionable.-Union Ins. Co. v. Smith, 534.
6. An instruction that evidence was intro- duced tending to show certain facts is not open to objection as a charge on the weight of evidence.-Williams v. Conger, 933.
a defect as to prevent entry of judgment upon | a suit about the purchase money, the land was it.-Hopkins v. Orr, 590.
described as "estimated to contain 1,000 acres. In a suit by the purchaser to recover for a deficiency in the land, the evidence 8. It is proper for the court to direct a ver- of the attorney who drew the compromise dict, when it would be its duty to set aside a agreement was that the seller refused, in the different one, if rendered. North Pennsyl-presence of the purchaser, to describe the vania R. Co. v. Commercial Nat. Bank, 266.
In favor of wife, see Husband and Wife, 8. Express trust.
1. An instrument expressly declaring that the parties executing it hold certain lands in trust for themselves and two others, is an ex- press trust, within the meaning of How. St. Mich. § 5578, which provides that persons for whose benefit an express trust is created shall take no estate or interest in the land, but may enforce the performance of the trust; and such instrument does not operate as a convey- ance of the land.-Culbertson v. H. Witbeck Co., 1136.
2. An executor who, at the foreclosure sale under a mortgage given by one of the devi- sees of her interest in the testator's estate, purchases the same for himself, there being no trace of fraud in the matter, does not hold the property in trust for her.-Allen v. Gil- lette, 1331.
UNITED STATES.
Settlement by treasurer.
Under act Cong. July 2, 1864, the collection of captured and abandoned property within the districts dominated by the seceding states in the civil war was given to the secretary of the treasury, and devolved upon him the exe- cution of the statute, through his appointed agents, and in the absence of fraud, positive violation of the statute, or contravention of public policy, a settlement made by the treas- urer with an agent will not be set aside on mere technicalities, especially after the agent's remedy is barred by lapse of time.- United States v. Johnston, 446.
United States Commissioners. Jurisdiction, see Extradition, 1.
VENDOR AND VENDEE. See, also, Deed; Fraudulent Conveyances; Judicial Sales; Specific Performance. Bona fide purchasers, see Public Lands,
Sale by order of court, see Executors and Ad- ministrators, 3.
land as 1,000 acres, and said he would not be bound by any particular number of acres. Held, the evidence not disclosing any fraud- ulent assurances, the transactions constituted a sale in gross, and the seller was not liable for any deficiency in the quantity.-Lawson v. Floyd, 409.
2. When an agreement for the sale of land " and a described it as "about 1,000 acres, "estimated to contain later agreement as 1,000 acres, " acquiescence for many years is sufficient to raise the presumption that the purchaser understood the sale was in gross.- id.
3. Where land is conveyed in exchange for other land, the liability of the vendor for a deficiency should not be enforced with the
same rule of strictness as where it is a sale for money.-Id.
Bequest to trustee.
1. It is not within the power of a testator to bequeath personal property directly to a trustee, without the intervention of an exec- utor, and thereby defeat the provisions and and the fact that the person named as ex- policy of the testamentary law of the state; ecutor, but who has failed to qualify, is also the trustee, does not render valid a disposi- tion of the legacy made by him "as executor.” -Wall v. Bissell, 979.
2. A record of the ancillary probate of a will, reciting the production of the copy, publication of the notice of hearing, that the probate was duly authenticated, and that, on full hearing and examination of the proofs and allegations, it appeared to be regular, is not open to the objection that it contains no proof that the probate court obtained jurisdic- tion, nor any record of authentication or pro- bate by any foreign court.-Culbertson v. H. Witbeck Co., 1136.
Construction-Precatory trust.
3. A testator owning a large estate and making his will, in view of impending disso- lution, bequeathed his entire estate to his wife, adding: "I recommend to her the care and protection of my mother and sister, and request her to make such gift and provision for them as in her judgment will be best." The mother and sister resided at a distance, and were in urgent need of such provision, the sister being wholly dependent on her mother, an invalid of advanced age, requiring 1. Certain lands sold by written agreement constant medical attendance, nursing, and were described as "about 1,000 acres." After-care, and having no income except the inter- wards, in a written agreement compromising est on $15,000, which had been loaned to the
of ward's realty, see Guardian and Ward.
Liability of vendor.
« FöregåendeFortsätt » |