Volume 1 — Oregon Reports

<p> Error to Multuomah. </p> <p>Action—trespass quare clausum fregit. Plea—not guilty. Trial and verdict for defendant.</p> <p>After verdict and before judgment, the plaintiff moved for a new trial, and in arrest of judgment. The motion sets forth certain instructions, in the giving of some, and in the refusing of others of which,'plaintiff says there is error. Defendant insists that this allegation of error cannot be considered, because the proceedings, of which complaint is made, are not in any legal or sufficient manner before this court. No bill of exceptions was taken in this case; nor is there any order of the eourt below making plaintiff’s motion a part of the record; but such motion is subscribed as follows: 11 Allowed, Thomas Nelson, District Judge.”</p>

<p> Adjourned from Washington. Motion to set aside execution and sale. </p> <p>On the 4th of November, 1851, Stephens recovered a judgment for $765 against Norton and Dennison in the District Court of Washington County. Execution was issued on the 23d day of March, 1853, requiring the sheriff, among other things, to make due return of the writ; and on the 15th of September, 1853, the sheriff returned that he had levied upon lot No. (2) two, in block 79, in Portland, and that on the 16th of July, 1853, he sold the same according to law, to W. H. Barnhart and D. C. Coleman for the áum of $2,700.</p> <p>The sheriff was ruled to amend his return, which he did by showing that he had posted up the necessary advertisements; but instead of giving defendant, Norton, a notice in writing of the time and place of sale, he told him he had levied upon the said lot, and Norton replied, “ it was nothing to him, as he did not own the property.” The date of the levy does not appear. The sheriff has paid the full amount of the execution out of the purchase money to Stephens, and made a deed to Coleman and Barnhart for the lot. Due notice of this motion has been given to them. Authorities cited: Lee v. Chapman, 6 Humphrey, 281;. Wilson dc Wheeler v. Manee de Collins, 11 Humphrey, 189; ■Walter et al. v. Nelson et al. 1 Swan, 7/ Jackson v. Pratt, 16 Johnson, 386; Jackson v. Davis, 18 Johnson, 10 ; Jackson v. Page, 4 Wendell, 586; Jackson v. Streeter, 5 Cowen, 529; Woodcock v. Bennett, 1 Cowen, 737; 2 Tidd's Prac. 1032; 4 Bingham, 147.</p>

<p>Without a bill of exceptions, this court cannot notice errors in the proceedings of the court below, except such as are apparent upon the face of the record.</p>

<p> Adjourned from Clackamas. </p> <p>Tom, an Indian, was indicted, at the last term of the District Court for Clackamas County, for selling liquor to the Indians. A motion was made to quasb the indictment, on the ground that Oregon was not Indian country, and the United States law of 1831 inapplicable.</p>

jReserved from Washington. Assumpsit on a promissory note for five hundred and sixty dollars, made on the second day of October, 1845, and payable one year from date. Plea—Statute of Limitations. Demurrer by plaintiff.

Injunction.—Appeal.— JJmpgua County. In December, 1851, the Board of Commissioners of Ump-qua County granted to the defendant, Drew, the privilege of keeping a ferry over Umpqua Diver, at the crossing of the road from Winchester to Scottsburg, and fixed the first year’s tax at three dollars. There was no treasurer to whom the money eonld be paid until April, 1852, and it was not paid until September, 1853. Whether a bond was given, or a license issued, does not appear.

In Chancery. This cause was commenced in this court, and an injunction was issued in vacation restraining the defendant from keeping a ferry near the ferry of the plaintiff,'on the Clackamas River. The defendant has answered, and now moves to dissolve the injunction.

In July, 1851, plaintiff sued out of the Washington District Court a writ of summons in assumpsit, which was personally served on one of the defendants, the other not being found.

On the 8th day of May, 1852, Norton recovered a judgment against Winter and Lattimer, for the sum of $4,496 86.

The plaintiff offered as his evidence what purported to be a record from the Circuit Court of Knox County, in the State of Missouri; to which the defendant objected, on the ground that it was not properly authenticated. Objection sustained, and plaintiff nonsuited. The following is as much of the authentication as is necessary to show the questions in the decision of which it is said the court below erred.

Nimrod O’Kelly was indicted, tried, convicted of the crime of murder and sentenced to be hung, at a special term of the District Court in Benton County, holden on the 29th day of June, 1852. He sued out a writ of error and supersedeas; and now comes with the record in the case, alleging various errors in the proceedings and judgment of the court below.

Referred from Washington. Ttttr is a suit in chancery by the owner of property on Water-street, in Portland, to enjoin the proprietors of the town, and their vendees, from erecting buildings on the river bank, in front of the plaintiff’s premises.

<p> Supplementary Opinion. </p>

<p>1. The act of Congress of May 23d, 1844, relative to town, sites, was never in force, or applicable to the -land system in Oregon.</p> <p>2. Lands upon which there had been the requisite settlement and cultivation under the provisional government, though held as town sites when the act of 21th September, 1850, was passed, may be held as donations under that act.</p>

The parties emigrated to Oregon, in 1852. Ward lost two horses in the Indian country, and plaintiff in error found and recognised them as belonging to plaintiff. They took the horses to bring and deliver, as they said, to Ward, when he should pay them for their trouble, but used them on the road for driving cattle, hunting buffalo, &c. They also permitted another emigrant to use one of the horses two months.

—Assumpsit. Defendant in error is a physician, and brought suit against Cline for medicines and professional services. Verdict in favor of plaintiff for $38. Motion for a new trial. Motion overruled. Judgment on the verdict.

—Reserved from Olatsop. — Unlawful Detainer. Calvin Tibbetts died in 1819, possessed of a land claim in Clatsop County. The said claim was sold at an administrator’s sale, and, after passing through several hands, came to the possession of the defendant.

<p>1. In an action for violating a contract, where the contract furnishes the measure of damages, no other will be adopted.</p> <p>2. Witnesses, except upon questions of skill or science, are not allowed to give their opinions as evidence wberp they have no personal knowledge of the facts in the case.</p>

Ttttb suit was brought in the District Court of Columbia County, to recover damages for the violation of a contract. Tolmie, the defendant below, appeared at the proper time and demurred to the complaint. His demurrer was sustained. Otchin obtained leave to amend his complaint. Judgment was afterward rendered against Tolmie for a failure to answer the complaint so amended, and a jury assessed plaintiff’s damages at four thousand dollars.

Adjourned from Washington. Norton sued Winter and Latimer in the District Court of Washington County, and attached their goods and chattels, on the ground that they were non-residents of the territory. Defendants gave a bond to the attaching officer, conditioned that the property attached, or its appraised value in money, should be forthcoming to answer the judgment of the court.

<p>Judgment on an award made by referees, after the time of making such award has expired, is erroneous.</p>

Reserved from Clackamas. Cason obtained an injunction restraining Stone from running a ferry; wbicb being dissolved, Stone brought this suit on the injunctionbondfortheloss of ferriages. Cason answered that the ferry was on his land, and Stone had no license or other right to keep it, and that the ferriages would not more than have defrayed the expenses of running it.

Appeal in Admiralty, Washington. Holbrook, for the defendants, asked leave to introduce new evidence in tbis cause, which was opposed by Campbell, for the plaintiff.

<p>Compensation, fixed by statute for certain services, cannot be increased.</p>

<p>When the statute required the board of commissioners for erecting a penitentiary to have a secretary, without fixing his salary—Held, That he was entitled to a reasonable compensation for his services.</p>

Eickey settled on the public land, under the act of Congress granting lands to settlers in Oregon, upon condition of four years’ residence and cultivation, and marked out the boundaries of his claim. Afterwards, an older settler, whose boundary does not appear to have been previously defined, filed in the land-office a notification, covering a part of Eickey’s claim.

<p>Judgment by default against a corporation, when tbe record does not show that process was served upon “ the president, or other head, secretary, cashier, or managing agent thereof,” is erroneous.</p>

<p>Where there is a judgment by default, the officer’s return must show service of process as required by statute, without reference to plaintiffs’ complaint.</p>

In Chancery.—Adjourned from Washington. On the 20th day of March, 1850, Lownsdale, Coffin and Chapman, as proprietors of the town of Portland, conveyed a certain parcel of land therein situate to T. A. Hall, W. Hall and S. S. White. On the 13th day of August, 1853, W. Hall conveyed to Dennison. On the 3d day of January, 1851, S. S. White and T. A. Hall conveyed to F. M. Smith. On the 1st day of August, 1851, F. M. Smith conveyed to Flannery.

At the September term, A. D. 1854, of the court below, judgment by default was rendered against the plaintiff in error, for the sum of one thousand four hundred and ten dollars. The complaint alleged that the defendant in error had furnished lumber for the building of the steamer Gazelle; that said lumber was furnished in the months of November, A. D. 1853, and February, A. D. 1854. Suit in the court below was commenced on the 28th day of August, A. D. 1854.

Error from Clatsop. At the August term, A. D. 1854, of the court below, the plaintiffs in error were indicted and found guilty of keeping open a house on Sunday for the sale of spirituous liquors. Hart and Blissett then moved for a new trial, on the ground of irregularity in drawing the trial jury. The motion for a new trial was overruled, and a bill of exceptions signed.

— Error to Douglas. Dat and Kent were candidates for the sheriffalty of Douglas County, at the June election, 1851. Held: &c., (giving place and date,) the following named persons received the number of votes annexed to their respective names, for the following described offices, to wit: A. B. had-votes for delegate to Congress. C. D. had -- votes, &c., (and in like manner for any other person voted for.) Certified by us, G-.

At the October Term, A. D. 1854, of the court below, Latshaw and one Crisman were enjointly accused by the grand jury of the crime of extortion, by means of malicious threats, against the person of the prosecuting witness.

<p>Newly discovered evidence to impeach a witness upon a former trial, is not ground for a new trial.</p>

<p>In a suit upon a note, an allegation in the complaint that “ defendant made hia promissory note in writing, and thereby promised to pay plaintiff,” is sufficient to show that plaintiff is the owner of the note.</p>

Action at law for usurping the office of Sheriff of Jackson County.—Reserved from Jackson. This cause was reserved for the decision of this court, upon an agreed state of facts, in the place of a special verdict.

—Chancery Injunction. In the District Court of Marion County, at the November term, an injunction in this cause, previously granted by the chief-justice, on a hearing at chambers, was rendered perpetual, enjoining the defendant from further use and occupation of the plaintiff’s land claim. Defendant appealed from the decision of the District Court, and, upon hearing in the Supreme Court, the decree in the court below was affirmed.

Action of Right.—Adjourned into Supreme Court from the District Court of Linn. This suit is brought to recover possession of a certain tract of land in Linn County.

<p>Error to Yamhill, and Petition for New Trial.</p>

<p> Action to recover possession of real estate.—Adfournedfrom Polk Co. . </p>

<p> Error to Clackamas. </p>

<p> Error to Clackamas. </p>

<p> Error to Yamhill. </p>

<p>1. Assumpsit is an action upon the case.</p> <p>2. When the statute of limitations has become a perfect bar to a cause of action, the repeal of the statute does not destroy the bar.</p> <p>3. Laws of the provisional government were in force prior to August 14, 1848.</p>

<p>Motion to set aside Executions in Lake ei al. v. Willamette Falls Go.—Clackamas.</p>

<p> Error to Clackamas County.—Action to enforce a Mechanics1 Lien. </p>

<p> Error to Clackamas. </p>

<p> Error to Claclcamas. </p>

<p>An absolute bill of sale, unaccompanied with delivery of the property, is void as against the creditors of the vendor at common law.</p>

Reserved from Lane. The indictment in this case was found under the act of the Legislative Assembly, passed January 23d, 1854, entitled “An act to prevent the sale of ardent spirits to Indians.” Defendant denies the validity of this law, on the ground that the act of Congress, passed June 30th, 1834, entitled “An act to regulate trade and intercourse with the Indians,” is applicable to and in force in this territory; and that the sale of liquor to Indians is prohibited by…

Arthur sold a horse to Moss for 150 dollars. Moss afterward sold the same horse to Souchu for 200 dollars. Replevin by Rossi against Souchu, in whieh it was determined that the horse belonged to Rossi. Moss refunded to Souchu the 200 dollars, and then brought this suit against Arthur, and claimed to recover that amount. Judgment in the District Court in favor of Moss, for the 200 dollars, with his expenses and costs.

Carothers made application to the board of county commissioners in Clackamas County, for a license to keep a ferry across the Willamette Kiver at Portland. Wheeler, at the time of such application, appeared before said board, claiming that he was the owner of the land where Carothers wished to establish his ferry; and insisted, that if a ferry' at such place was adjudged necessary, the license therefor should issue to him instead of Carothers.

Chancery.—Appeal from TJmpqua. This is a case in chancery; and the question submitted is, whether Drew, who keeps what is called the Trenton Ferry, on the TJmpqua Fiver, is entitled to an injunction to restrain Gant from keeping one at the same place. The bill shows that Ferguson and Woodward, in May, 1851, occupied the land—the one on the north, the other on the south side of the river—where said ferry is situated.

Reserved from, Benton. Moore seeks, in this case, to foreclose certain mortgages, executed to Mm by Thomas and wife, and dated in May and June of 1858, with the exception of one, wMch bears date the 25th of May, 1854.

Adjourned from Yamhill. Pleasant M. Armstrong died in 1853, leaving a large amount of personal property, a widow, and no children. A. N. Armstrong and others, brothers and sisters of the deceased, claimed equal shares with the widow in said property; but the Probate Court of Yamhill County, upon the final settlement of the estate, awarded all that remained, after the payment of debts and expenses, to the widow, Jane Armstrong. .

<p>The act of Assembly, suspending payment of the claim in question, held valid.</p>

Reserved from Multnomah. Crane, Bogers & Co. drew their bill on Adams & Co., of San Francisco, in favor of Cole, for $1,089T%V In the margin of the bill the sum was stated in figures, $1,989TW” Cole endorsed upon the bill a request upon Adams & Co., of Portland, to pay to Barnhart the amount stated in the margin.

Adjourned from Washington. The special verdict finds that the commissioners of Washington County, after the proper preliminary steps, passed an order, establishing a county road from “ Hillsborough to Forest Grove, upon the base line of the government, land surveys; thence by a street to a given point, and thence to Smith’s lanewhich road was not surveyed, platted and recorded as required by the act of 1854; the plaintiff, as supervisor, notified the defendant to appear, at…

Adjourned from Multnomah—Action to recover penalty for Violation of City Ordinance. Holmes, city marshal, complained of defendant as follows: “ that said O’Neill is engaged in the business of money brokerage, or sale of bills of exchange, within the limits of said city, and has failed to take out a license therefor,” &c. Defendant was found guilty by the recorder of the city under this charge, and fined $100.

<p> Bill to Foreclose Mortgage.—Adjourned from Clackamas. </p> <p>On the 1st day of December, A. D. 1852, Moore conveyed to Ferguson certain real estate in Linn City, in said county, for 50,000 dollars; and at the same time took a mortgage for 45.000 dollars of the purchase money, payable in ten years, with interest at the rate of six per cent, per annum, payable annually. On the 19th day of March, A. D. 1853, Ferguson conveyed the same premises to the “ Willamette Falls Canal, Milling and Transportation Company,” by deed containing the following recital: “ It is expressly understood, however, that the said premises are encumbered with a'mortgage, made by said Ferguson, to secure the said Moore the sum of 45.000 dollars, which mortgage bears date on or about the 1st day of December, 1852, and is at the rate of six per cent, per annum, and the said company hereby assumes the payment,” &c. The deed from Moore to Ferguson was filed for record on the 9th day of May, 1853 ; and the deed from Ferguson to the “Falls Co.” was filed for record upon the 24th day of March, 1854. The said mortgage was filed for record on the 14th day of April, 1854.</p>

Washington Co. Wood was indicted for selling liquor without license. Section six of the act relating to the granting of licenses to sell spirituous liquor, provides, that “if any person or persons shall barter, sell, or dispose of, in any manner, any spirituous liquor, without first having obtained a license, &c., shall be fined,” &c. Exception is taken to the instructions of the court below.

The bill of exceptions, in this case, sets out the testimony of one Seymour, a witness for plaintiffs, from which it appears, that the parties to this suit had an interview in reference to certain debts, due from defendants to plaintiffs, one book account, one to witness, one to McConnell, and that an arrangement was made by which plaintiffs assumed the debts due witness and McConnell, and that certain papers were executed, among which was a bill of sale from defendants to…

This suit was commenced before a justice of the peace, and judgment taken by default.

Tms suit is brought upon the following instrument in writing: “_$á25. Milton, Nov. 28, 1850. On or before the first day of February next, I promise to pay L. Gr. Whipple, or bearer, the sum of four hundred and twenty-five dollars, in round or hewed timber, as he may choose, and such size and length as he may direct; said timber to be delivered at Milton, at the usual place for vessels to take in the same,, for value received; timber to be at the highest market price.

Plaintiffs claim the land described in the complaint, as heirs of Joseph and Margaret Pin, deceased, under the fourth sectionhf the donation act.

Knighton took judgment by default against Williams in the District Court, upon a complaint which states, “ that he has a cause of action against the defendant, and expects to recover judgment for five hundred dollars, with interest, &c., as per a certain promissory note, which he holds against him, for five hundred dollars, bearing interest, &e., dated February 25th, 1855.”

<p> Error to Clackamas. </p>

At the September term, A. D. 1859, of the Circuit Court for the county of Marion, Pleasant Howell was tried and convicted, upon an indictment for larceny, for having feloniously taken and carried away sixty-one dollars, to wit: three twenty-dollar pieces of gold coin, and two half-dollar pieces of silver coin, lawful money of the United States, the personal property of Daniel Brock.” The verdict of the j ury was as follows, to wit: “ State ok Oregon v. Pleasant Howell.

Before the June term, 1859, of the Circuit Court for Washington County, Sharff and Hill instituted suit against Jackson, defendant, for the recovery of damages on breach of a wheat and flour contract. : The complaint alleges that the contract was entered into, “ heretofore, to wit, about and previous to the first day of October, A. D. 1857.” The defendant denies the contract as stated by the plaintiffs, and alleged a different one; he also denied all indebtedness to thém,…

At the November term of the Circuit Court for Polk County, 1859, the plaintiff in error was convicted of selling spirituous liquors in quantity less than one quart, without license, to wit, one gill of whiskey, &c.

This action was brought in the court below to oust the defendant in error from the office of clerk of Columbia County, held, as he claims, by virtue of an election to Said office on… Held: as he claims, by virtue of an election to Said office on the-day of June, A. D. 1859. The plaintiff claims tinder the election of June, 1858 ; and at the time of the alleged usurpation of the defendant, his term of office had not expired. There was a trial, and verdict for the defendant.

Defendant in error, the plaintiff below, brought suit on the following note: “ Eor value received, I promise to pay to William Hodges the sum of six hundred and thirty dollars, twelve months from date. (Signed,) O. D. Hoxie, October 25th, 1856. Geo. W. Hoxie.” G. W. Hoxie made no defence, and judgment was rendered against him by default. O. D. Hoxie answered, and in substance alleged that he did not sign the note at the time of its execution and delivery by Gr.

In vacation, before the May term, A. D. 1858, of the late District Court for the county of Multnomah, Bichard White and wife filed in said court a petition, duly verified, of which the following is a copy, to wit: “ To the Judge of the Second Judicial District: “ Tour petitioners, Bichard White and Elizabeth White, show unto your honor, that about the year 1852, Orange S. Hall, late of Washington County, Oregon, departed this life, leaving petitioner his widow—who has since…

Jhrror to Josephine. Judgment was rendered in the court below in favor of James A. Abbott, against William McMullan, upon a promissory note, of which the following is a copy, to wit: ' “ On or before the 25th day of January, A. D. 1859, I promise to ‘pay A. Delany the sum of one hundred and seventy-five dollars, for value received. William McMullan.”

Larkin McDaniel, on the 25th day of August, 1858, brought suit in the late District Court, for the county of Jackson, to recover the possession of about two acres of land, upon which is situated a flouring-mill and blacksmith’s shop.

'Error to Benton. Suit was brought in the court below, by the board of the county commissioners of Benton County, against Sheldon B. Fargo, sheriff, and his sureties on sheriff’s bond, to recover damages for an alleged breach of the penalty of said bond, in not returning the certified tax-list and warrant to said board, on or before the first day of April, A. D. 1858.

P.laintirr in error, at the November term of the Circuit Court for Polk County, 1859, was indicted for suffering a gambling device to be set up and used, in a certain house then occupied by him, for the purpose of gaming. There was a trial, and conviction for the offence as charged.

This was a prosecution for malicious threatening, with intent to extort money, under the 3áth section of the third chapter of the statute defining crimes and regulating criminal proceedings. A verdict of guilty was rendered in the court below, and the prisoner sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for one year.

<p>1. The introduction of a receipt, purporting to extinguish a claim of sixty-five dollars, as evidence in support of an allegation in an indictment for forging a receipt, extinguishing a claim of sixty dollars, is a fatal variance.</p> <p>2. Allegations of sums, names, dates, and the like, must he proven as alleged.</p>

An indictment, alleging that on a day certain a mortal wound was inflicted, which did not allege the death upon a particular day, when found and presented, within one year from the time of giving such wound, is sufficiently correct under the statute. George M. Bowen was convicted of murder in the first degree, at the Circuit Court of Josephine County.

<p>1. This court will, where au officer is known and recognised as having authority, presume that the act was done within his jurisdiction.</p> <p>2. A deputy, or agent, must transact business in the name of his principal.</p> <p>3. Service of notice by deputy sheriff, in his own name, insufficient.</p>

<p>1. Where the material allegations in a pleading are within the personal knowledge of an agent, he may verify the pleading, without showing whether the real party is within the county or not.</p> <p>2. To take advantage of the statutes of limitation, it must be pleaded, and cannot otherwise be taken advantage of upon error.</p>

This was an action for damages, for the non-performance of a contract, by which Knighton agreed to purchase of Smith and wife a tract of land situate in Columbia County.

<p> Error to Multnomah. </p> <p>This is a prosecution for betting on a game of cards. The indictment was found at the November term, A. D. 1859, of the Circuit Court for Multnomah County, and plaintiff in error did not deny the betting, as charged, but pleaded guilty, and was fined by the court below. It is now claimed by the plaintiff in error that there is no such offence as that charged in the indictment, which is based upon the third section of the statute, passed February 1st, A. D. 1858 ; being an act to amend chapter ten of the Oregon Statutes, entitled gaming.</p>

This action was originally brought before a justice of the peace of Multnomah County, to recover illegal ferriage, demanded and received by plaintiffs in error of Powell, at their ferry, in Multnomah County; and, also, to recover the penalty for demanding and receiving such illegal rates of ferriage; which penalty is provided for in section fifty of the act of the legislature, relating to roads and ferries.

Tms action is to recover the possession of a town or building lot situate in the city of Portland, and county of Multnomah. The cause was tried at the March term, 1860, of the Circuit Court of Multnomah County.

Suit was brought in the late District Court for Douglas County, in April, 1858, by John B. McClane, against Andrew Thomas, upon a negotiable promissory note, executed by Thomas to McClane, January 31st, 1853, payable one day after date.' The defendant alleged, by way of defence, that the note was given in payment for two town lots in North Salem, of which the plaintiff claimed to be the owner under an act of Congress, approved September 27th, 1850, making donations to…

Chandler Jennings was indicted at the May term of the Circuit Court, 1859, for Marion County, for larceny, in stealing divers articles of personal property of the value of more than thirty-five dollars. Upon trial, he was found guilty, as charged in the indictment, and sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for the term of five years. The other facts in the ease sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.

In the year 1845, the defendant, McGinness, being a married man, settled upon a certain section of land in Yam-hill County, as a claimant under the act of Congress of September 27th, 1850, known as the donation act. His entire residence was upon the east half of the claim; and his wife ¡died in 1846, without issue.

Chancery.—Appeal from Multnomah. This is an appeal from an order or decree of Wait, C. J., dissolving an injunction granted by Mm at chambers, upon the filing of the complainants’ bill, February 23d, 1860.

The city of Portlíid brought suit under the statute “ for the recovery of the possession of real property,” against the plaintiffs in error.

Polk County. The defendant in error filed his complaint, in the Circuit Court of Polk County, for divorce, on the 23d day of March, 1860, and, at the April term thereafter, obtained a decree against the plaintiff in error by default. Service was had upon plaintiff in error, in the county of Linn, on the 30th day of March, which was more than ten, and less than thirty days, before the first day of the term atwhich the decree was entered.

Benton. Suit was brought in Benton County, by the State against William Gird, upon a recognizance entered into under the late territorial government, before a justice of tbe peace of Benton County, on tbe 6th day of June, A. D. 1858, by said Gird and Moses E. Milner, for tbe appearance of said Milner at tbe District Court of Benton County, on tbe first day of tbe next term thereof, and answer a charge of an assault with an intent to murder.

Matthew Keith brought suit, in the Recorder’s Court of the city of Portland, against the plaintiff in error, for the sum of 97t6/-o dollars. Upon the calling of the cause, the defendant below, James Strang, did not appear, and Keith had judgment by default. This judgment was entered on the 3d of April, 1860. On the 21st of April, as appears by a notice which is said to have been filed with the justice on- that day, the defendant notified the court of his intentions to appeal.

This cause, in the court below, was commenced in Jackson County, and removed to Marion County; and was brought upon a written undertaking, executed by the defendants to the plaintiff, as sheriff of Jackson County, for the re-delivery of thirty-four pack mules' and one horse, levied upon by virtue of a writ of attachment against the defendant, Thomas.

The complainant exhibited his bill against the respondent in April, 1854, with a prayer for an injunction to stay waste, and also to compel the respondent to compensate the complainant for certain valuable timber removed from the premises of the complainant.

The plaintiff in error brought suit against Chambers, administrator of the estate of A. L. Zachary, to recover the sum of 696 dollars, for wheat and oats, sold and delivered to A. L. Zachary, in his lifetime. The action was originally brought in the County Court of Washington County, and trial and verdict for the plaintiff. Defendant appealed to the Circuit Court, where the issue was submitted to the judge under the statute, and a finding for the defendant.

Meek, in the court below, filed his bill to foreclose a mortgage, dated March 23d, 1859, executed by Graham and wife, to secure the payment of a promissory note, for the sum of four hundred and thirty-one dollars. The land is described in the mortgage as follows, to wit: “ Situated in Lane County, Oregon, in T. 15 S., It. 4 W., Toeing the donation land claim of us, the said Thomas Graham and Sarah Graham,” and then bounded generally on adjoining proprietors.

This case was originally commenced in the County Court of Columbia County, and was there dismissed on motion of defendants, and a judgment for costs rendered against the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs then removed the case to the Circuit Court of said county by appeal. In the Circuit Court, plaintiffs moved to amend their verification to the complaint, which motion was overruled by the court; and the case dismissed on the motion of defendants.

This action in the court below was brought by Daniel Garland against Jesse Roberts, to recover damages for the breach of a contract to manufacture and deliver flour. The plaintiff, in his original complaint, asked damages in the sum of four hundred dollars, and interest; and in his amended complaint, claimed damages in the sum, of eight hundred and five dollars.

<p> Error to Clackamas. </p> <p>Goodall was indicted, and convicted in tbe Circuit Court, for tbe murder of one Potts; and tbe case is brought into this court, and stands on errors assigned on bill of exceptions.</p> <p>It appears from tbe evidence reported, that Potts (the deceased) went to tbe bouse of one Aldrich, where Goodall resided. Goodall was absent when Potts arrived. When Goodall came home, be first saw Potts at tbe door of tbe bouse, and at tbe door of Goodall’s private room. Goodall was at a short distance from tbe bouse. Potts was shot with a pistol in two places, tbe balls striking near tbe door. He bad a pistol which was not discharged, and as to whether it was drawn or not, tbe evidence is conflicting. One witness states that Potts drew bis pistol before be left tbe bouse, immediately before be was shot. There was evidence tending to show that Potts had threatened violence to Goodall, and that Goodall was informed of these threats. Tbe dying declarations of tbe deceased were admitted in evidence. And there was considerable other evidence, which is reported; but this statement is sufficient to show the pertinency of the matters passed on by this court.</p>

This cause was appealed from the County Court of Clackamas County to the Circuit Court of the same county. The plaintiffs in error were sureties on that appeal, and judgment was rendered against the principal and them in the Circuit Court; and these sureties bring the case here, and claim that judgment was improperly entered against them as sureties.

This cause comes here from the Circuit Court of Jackson County, where it was originally brought.

<p> Appeal.—Lane County. </p> <p>This is a proceeding in chancery, and the bill states, substantially, the following facts: First, that in June, 1859, Snyder, having a promissory note on Yannoy, payable to his (Snyder’s) order, for about nineteen hundred dollars, on which there was due a balance of about one thousand dollars, delivered said note to Hyland, without being endorsed, to present to Yannoy for payment, Hyland having at the same time a note of his own on Yannoy. Hyland brought suit in his own name on both notes; that is, his own note and Snyder’s note, which was not endorsed, as stated above, including both notes in the same action against Yannoy.</p> <p>Hyland then settled this suit with Yannoy, giving him a receipt in full discharge of both notes. Soon afterward, Hyland returned to Snyder his note on Yannoy, with two hundred and ten dollars endorsed on it, which amount he told Snyder he had collected on the note, and he accounted to Snyder for the same; at the same time telling Snyder that the balance was yet unpaid. Snyder then brought suit on the note against Yannoy in the Circuit Court of Josephine County.</p> <p>■ Yannoy answered, that he had fully paid said note to Hyland, (the agent of Snyder,) and set up some other payments; and issue was taken on this answer, and the case tried in the Circuit Court of said county, and a verdict found for the defendant, Yannoy, and judgment entered thereon.</p> <p>And now it is claimed, that this judgment should be set aside by this court, and Snyder have a decree against Yannoy and Hyland for the amount of said note.</p> <p>The bill declares there was fraud in obtaining said judgment, in this, that the receipt, (mentioned above,) given by Hyland to Yannoy in settling the first suit mentioned, (to wit, the suit of Hyland v. Vannoy,) was permitted to be given in evidence to the jury.</p> <p>The bill further charges collusion between Hyland and Yannoy; but there are other specific charges of fraud.</p> <p>Defendant, Yannoy, demurred to plaintiff’s bill, which demurrer was sustained by the court below, and the eause comes here on demurrer.</p>

<p>1. A board of county commissioners is a tribunal of limited jurisdiction.</p> <p>2. Such board bas no authority to require a sheriff to execute a new bond when a prior one shall become insufficient, and to declare the office vacant in case of a failure to file such new bond.</p>

This was a case of forcible entry and detainer, appealed from a Justices’ Court to the Circuit Court of Clackamas County, where it was tried, and judgment rendered for Moore, the plaintiff, in the court below; and that judgment is brought here by writ of error.

In this case, a decree, pro forma, was entered, for the defendant, before Chief-Justice Wait, at the Multnomah Circuit, and the case is brought here by appeal. The bill states— First.

This cause came up from Yamhill County. The complaint in the court below charges, in substance, that the plaintiff, Bailey, has an interest in, and is entitled to the possession of <■ certain horses, of the value of. $2,000 ; that the defendant, Warren, as sheriff, by virtue of an execution, or attachment, ..against the property of E. G. Dorris, seized and took away •said horses; and that the -defendant wrongfully detains said -property, to the damage of the plaintiff in…

The State brought this suit against the board of commismissioners of Multnomah County, to recover the sum of $252 47, balance due on tbe State revenue of 1859, apportioned to the said county. Tbe county claims to withhold it as tbe four per cent, compensation, allowed by law, for tbe collection and disbursement of $5,509 18, tbe amount assessed against tbe county for that year. Tbe complaint and answer disclose these facts.

John Harden, defendant in error, brought suit against plaintiff in error, in the County Court of Washington County, and the defendant below was defaulted.

The case presents but one question. Tbe complaint and notice were served on tbe 20th day of May, 1861, and the complaint was not filed until tbe 30th day of tbe same month. Tbe defendant below was defaulted. Tbe error alleged is, tbat there was no legal service, tbe complaint not having been filed at tbe time tbe pretended service was made.

The plaintiff brought suit against the defendant, a nurseryman, to recover the value of 2,880 grape roots, which the plaintiff alleged the defendant withheld from him.

<p> U. S. District Court for the District of Oregon—In Equity —Bill for Injunction—Amendment—'Exceptions to Second Amendment—Answer. </p>

<p> United States District Gourtfor the District of Oregon.—In Equity.—Bill for Injunction. </p>

<p> In Admiralty.—Cause of Contract, Civil and Maritime. </p>

<p>1. In a suit between third persons, the validity of a branch warrant to act as pilot cannot be inquired into, where the same appears upon its face to have been regularly issued,</p> <p>2. The possession and exhibition of the warrant authorize the master of a ship to treat the holder as a regularly constituted pilot, and, between third persons, is conclusive evidence that the conditions which the law attached to the appointment have been complied with.</p> <p>3. The territory of Washington has power to pass pilot laws, pilotage being “ a rightful subject of legislation.”</p> <p>4. The act of Congress, August 7th, 1789,[is not a grant of power to the States to pass pilot laws, but merely a legislative recognition that the power is concurrent in the States and the United States.</p> <p>5. Does the act of Congress, March 2d, 1837, include a territory ? Quere l</p> <p>6. Whenever Congress exercises the power of passing pilot laws, so far the power becomes exclusive in Congress. All prior laws of the States, within the purview of such enactments, are abrogated, and cease to have effect.</p> <p>7. The act of Congress, August 30th, 1852, provides for the employment of pilots on vessels, propelled in whole or in part by steam, engaged in carrying passengers in any of the bays, lakes, rivers, or other navigable waters of the United States.</p> <p>8. This act, as to such vessels and to that extent, supersedes all State laws as to the employment of pilots.</p> <p>9. In the construction of the law of Congress, its operation is not to be restrained because of the existence of State laws regulating the employment of pilots on such bays, lakes or rivers. There is no presumption that Congress did not intend to abrogate the State law. On the contrary, the power being primarily in Congress, and only exercised by the States by the sufferance of the former in case of conflict, the presumption is rather the other way.</p>

<p>United States District Court for the District of Oregon.— Cause, Civil and Maritime, for the Subtraction of Wages.</p>