the act of Congress approved March 3, 1875, and note the difference between that act and the first paragraph of section 629 of the Revised Statutes, with regard to promissory notes, negotiable by the law-merchant, and bills of exchange. But the petition or cross-bill in this case alleges in substance that the party plaintiff has been collusively made for the purpose of bringing the case within the jurisdiction of this court, and this presents an issue or showing under the sixth section of the act of 1875, to which the plaintiff ought to reply. The demurrers herein filed will be sustained, except so far as the issue just referred to is concerned, and that will leave the petition or cross-bill substantially a plea to the jurisdiction, on the ground that the plaintiff Marvin has been collusively made a party, in order to give the court jurisdiction. Costs of the demurrer to be paid by the defendant.
SIOUX CITY ST. PAUL
(Oircuit Oourt, D. Minnesota.
OF CONGRESS-WHEN TO TAKE EFFECT.
Title to swamp land was not vested by the act of congress of September 28, 1850, until the admission of a territory into the Union. Hence, the statc of Minnesotanot having been admitted into the Union at the date of the passage of the act granting lands to the territory or future state of Minnesota for the construction of railroads, approved March 3, 1857, a grantee of the state, by virtue of the acts of the legislature March 8, 1861, and March 4, 1864, has a good title as against one whose title depends upon the proper construction of the acts of congress approved September 28, 1850, and March 12, 1860.
E. C. Palmer, for complainant. John B. <t W. H. Sanborn, for defendant. NELSON, D. J. This suit is instituted to establish the superior right of the complainants to the land in controversy. The equitable title is claimed to be in the complainant and the legal title in the defendant. The defendant's title is derived from the state of Minnesota by conveyance under the authority of an act of its legislature, the land being described as swamp, and certified to the state as swamp lands belonging to it by virtue of the acts of congress approved September 28, 1850, and March 12, 1860. The complainant's title is claimed to be vested under the act of congress passed March 3,1857,
UNITED STATES V. FRENCH.
granting lands to the territory or future state of Minnesota to aid in the construction of railroads, and subsequent acts, disposing of those lands for that purpose, passed by the legislature of the state March 8, 1861, and March 4, 1864.
UNITED STATES 'lJ. FBENCH.O
(Oircuit Oourt, E. D. Pennsylvania. October 7, 1881.) 1.
DlsCJIABOB Oll' BEAMEN-WHEN NOT REQ,UIItED TO BE IN PRESENCE Oll' SHIP. PING CoMMISSIONER-REVISED STATUTES.
Bection 4549, Rev. St., which requires that the discharge of seamen should, in certain cases, be made in the presence of a shipping commissioner, is qual. ified by the language of section 4504, and does not apply to a vessel which has been engaged in a voyage to the West India islands. .
This was an action against the master of a vessel to recover the penalty prescribed by section 4549, Rev. St., for the discharge of a seaman without going before a shipping commissioner. On the trial (booore Bradley and McKennan, JJ.) plaintiff proved that the defendant was the master of the American schooner Dora M. French; that>
""Reported by Frank P. Prichard, Esq., of the Philadelphia bar.