Volume 30 — Connecticut Reports

Assumpsit, brought by the plaintiffs, partners under the name of Noyes & Eddy, to recover an amount claimed to be due them under a contract for the construction of a portion of the road of the defendants.

Bill for a foreclosure. The petitioner held two mortgages of the same land, one to secure anote of $500, and the other, of later date, to secure a note of $1,000. Wiley, Newhall & Co., who were made respondents, had levied an execution on the equity of redemption of the mortgagor in the land, and had had the same set off to them, subject only to the incumbrance of the prior mortgage of $500, claiming that the later mortgage was fraudulent and void.

Assumpsit, to recover the amount of a tax paid by the plaintiffs to the defendants, submitted to the superior court upon an agreed statement of facts, and reserved for the advice of this court. The case will be sufficiently understood from the ^pinion.

Assumpsit, to recover for services rendered in examining the bark Laurens, and in making an inventory of her cargo and supplies at the request of the defendant. The defendant was marshall of the district of Connecticut and had seized the vessel in the harbor of New London as a suspected slaver by order of the district court, and after the seizure had employed the plaintiff and two others to make the examination of the vessel and her cargo and outfit.

<p>A verdict was rendered for $66 damages, and the defendant moved for a new trial on the ground that the damages were excessive. Motion denied on the ground that the suni was too trivial to warrant a renewal of the controversy.</p>

Bill in equity, to obtain the benefit of certain real estate security held by the principal respondents. The facts, which were found by the court, were as follows :— Prior to 1854 Albert Puller & Go., of St. Paul, in the territory of Minnesota, were indebted to Samuel P. Morse, of Boston, for money advanced, in the sum of $5,000, and as security therefor conveyed to him by an absolute deed the land described in the petition.

Petition for the laying out of a highway witbin the town of Norwich. The summons accompanying the petition was as follows :—“ To the sheriff, (fee. By authority of the state of Connecticut, you are hereby commanded to summon anc[ notify Newell 0.

Amicable submission upon the following agreed facts:— The plaintiff was tlie lessee of a general ferry, between tbe towns of New London and Groton, across New London harbor. The ferry was an ancient one, and belonged to the town of New London, by which it was leased to the plaintiff.

Bill in equity, for an injunction against the prosecution of an action at law. The facts were found by a committee. The respondents were administrators, with the will annexed, of the estate of Samuel Hurlbut, who died on the 22d day of October, 1857.

Bill for an injunction against the sale on an execution of certain bank stock levied on. The respondent, in a suit against Nathaniel B. Stevens and others, had attached fifty shares of the stock of the Norfolk Bank belonging to Stevens, being the only property attached.

Grandjuror’s complaint against Josiah J. Wadsworth and Robert B. Yining, for selling liquor in violation of the “ Act for the Suppression of Intemperance.” Wadsworth was tried alone in the superior court and convicted, and moved for a new trial, and in arrest of judgment for the insufficiency of the complaint. The latter motion was reserved with the former for the advice of this court. The case will be sufficiently understood from the opinion.

Bill in. equity. The petitioner and respondents, on the 7th day of November, 1854, were stockholders, and the petitioner the financial manager, of the Torrington Manufacturing Company, a joint stock corporation, located at Torrington in this state. The company was organized in 1852, with a capital of $11,500, divided into four hundred and sixty shares of $25 each.

Bill in equity for an injunction against the further prosecution of an action at law. On the 10th of April, 1855, the respondent lent $2,000 to a . copartnership by the name of the American Hoe Company, composed of Lewis R. Boyd and James Humphrey, Jr., and the firm by their firm name gave their note for the amount payable on demand, which note was guarantied by James Humphrey, Sen., by the following indorsement upon it: “I hereby guarantee the within till paid.

Writ of error from a judgment of the superior court in an action of slander, brought by the defendant in the action, assigning as error the insufficiency of the declaration.

<p>Appeal from a decree of a probate court appointing a conservator over tbe .appellant.</p> <p>The appointment was made by the probate court upon the application of the selectmen of the town within which the appellant resided, alleging that the appellant by reason of intemperate and debauched habits had become incapable of taking care of herself and of managing her affairs, and that she had estate both real and personal within the town.* Upon the trial of the case in the superior court, upon the appeal, before Waldo, J., the appellees offered evidence to prove that the appellant was the widow of Benjamin Wickwire, who died in the year 1854, leaving four children of said Benjamin and the appellant surviving him, one son, aged four years, and three daughters, aged respectively six, two and one years ; that ever since his death the appellant had lived in the dwelling house belonging to his estate with the children; and that for the last four years a man named William Green, who had a lawful wife and children of his own still living, which he had deserted, had with the appellant’s consent lived in the dwelling house with her and her children, both by night and day, and so continued to live with her up to the time of the trial; that no person had during that time lived in the house with them except her infant children ; that during this period and while Green was living with her she had given birth to two illegitimate children ; that Green with her consent had taken possession of a large amount and nearly all of her personal property, and was using for his benefit her real estate, and that of her legitimate children, as his own, and had already committed waste thereon, and had the control, direction and management of all her affairs, and that she was in danger of being reduced to penury. To the admission of evidence to prove that she had given birth to such illegitimate children, and that Green had been so living with her and that during the time he had been so living with her, the illegitimate children were born, the appellant objected, but the court admitted the same. No evidence of intemperance in the use of intoxicating liquors was offered.</p> <p>The superior court affirmed» the decree of the probate court, and the appellant moved for a new trial for error in the admission- of the evidence objected to.</p>

Book Debt. The defendant filed the following plea in abatement.

Assumpsit, to recover the amount of an account originally due from the defendant to the Cornwall Iron Company. The Cornwall Iron Company, a corporation, had made an assignment in insolvency to Hart, the nominal plaintiff, and the account sued upon was one of the assets which came into his hands.

Ejectment, for the recovery of certain land lying in the town of Norfolk, tried in the superior court, before Park, J, on the general issue closed to the court. The land in question originally belonged to Dennis Whalley, who mortgaged it to Michael F. Mills on the 20th of July, 1841. The deed was absolute on its face and was recorded as such, Mills giving to Whalley a separate defeasance which was not recorded with the deed.

Debt on a judgment against the defendant as executor of Phineas Clark, tried in the superior court before Park, J., upon the general issue with notice, closed to the court.

<p>The plaintiff’s minor son agreed with the defendant to work for him for the season, at certain monthly wages, to be paid to the minor. The plaintiff, who lived near by, knew of the agreement, and that his son was working for the defendant, but made no objection and gave the defendant no notice that he should demand his wages. After the work had been done and the defendant had paid the son, the plaintiff demanded his wages. Held, that he was estopped from claiming them.</p> <p>The defendant made a similar agreement with the minor in the following year, but the plaintiff notified the defendant that he objected to his son’s working for him on any terms and that he should demand his wages. Held, that the plaintiff was not precluded from recovering the wages, either by the fact that the work was done by the son against his express dissent, or by the fact that the defendant had notified him to come and take his son away, and he had neglected to do so.</p>

Homer Treat died in 1855, leaving a will, the important part of which was as follows:— “ I give, devise and bequeath to [sundry persons named] and to their successors forever, (who shall as a board of Trustees add to and perpetuate their number, so long as in their opinion the objects of this bequest shall require the existence of the same,) all my estate as aforesaid, to be held? by them in trust for the promotion of education and science among the Indian and African…

Case, for an injury caused by the defective condition of a sidewalk within the limits of the city; tried to the jury in the superior court, on the general issue, before Me Owrdy, J. On the trial the plaintiff offered evidence to prove that on the evening of the 28th of May, 1856, he fell and received the injury alleged in his declaration, on the north sidewalk of a street called “ Albany Avenue,” within the city; and that his fall and injury were caused by a defect in the…

Assumpsit, brought upon a promissory note by the payee, with indebitatus counts for goods sold and upon an account stated. The note was in the following form:— “ $676TVtr. Sixty days after date, value received, I promise to pay, at the Metropolitan Bank in New York, to the order of Richard Taylor, six hundred and seventy-six and 74-100 dollars. East Windsor, Ct., July 21,1857.

Action on the case for injuries received, through the negligence of the defendants, from the unsafe condition of a highway. The case was tried in the superior court on the general issue closed to the court. On the trial the highway in question was proved to have been properly constructed and in good repair, except so far as the contrary appears from the following facts.

Debt on a judgment of the city court of the city of Hartford, against Joseph S. Curtis, Ralph Callender and John C. Pratt. The judgment was rendered in the month of May, 1856.

Rebt upon a replevin bond. The declaration alleged that, the plaintiff attached certain goods as the property of one Balsius ; that the defendant Watrous sued out a writ of replevin, and under it took the goods; and that on suing out the writ the defendants entered into a recognisance, conditioned that Watrous “ should prosecute the writ of replevin before Freeman M. Brown Esq., justice of the peace fbr said county, at his office in Windsor Locks aforesaid, on the 22d day of…

Assumpsit by the plaintiffs, as trustees in insolvency of the Hartford County Savings Association, against the defendant, as one of the makers of the following note. “ $10,000, Hartford, April 20th, 1852.

Amicable submission to the superior court upon an agreed statement of facts, with regard to the liability of certain real estate of the defendant to-taxation. The land in question, from the year 1765 down to the 21st day of June, 1858, was owned by the parish of Trinity Church in New Haven, at which latter date it was,- by a vote of the. parish, sold and conveyed in fee to the defendant, who had ever since owned it.

Assumpsit, against the defendant as indorser of two promissory notes ojf $500 each, made by one George Roberts. The defense was usury. The notes were dated and payable in the city of New York.

Action on tbe case, for the diversion of a stream of water, tried in the superior court on the general issue, closed to the. court, before Seymour, J. On the trial it appeared that the plaintiff owned the premises described as his in the declaration, and that the defendant owned an adjoining close, and that on the defendant’s premises was a spring, the waters of which, before the diversion complained of, had, from time immemorial, found their way to the premises of the…

Action on the case, brought by the plaintiff as administrator of the estate of John Murphy, for an injury to the intestate, causing his death.

Scire facias, against the defendants as debtors of one Calvin Durand, described in the original writ and judgment as of the town of Milford in this state.

The case was tried to the jury in the superior court, upon the general issue, with notice of the above defense, before Me Curdy, J. On the trial the plaintiff offered evidence to prove, and claimed to have proved, that about the middle of April, 1859, the said Eli E. Lake, who was his nephew, came to Brookfield, where the plaintiff lived, on a visit to his father; that he brought with him the horses in question, which were his own property, and for want of accommodation at…

Booth, as executor of the will of Oliver Peck. The appellant was a legatee and one of the heirs at law, and in the latter capacity was interested in the residue of the estate, which by the failure of a bequest of it fell to the heirs at law.

Trover, brought by the plaintiff as trustee in insolvency of the Bridgeport Eire Insurance Company, for certain railroad and other bonds in the possession of the defendant and claimed to be a part of the assets of the insurance company.

Action oh the case, for the refusal of the defendants to allow a transfer of ninety shares of the stock of the defendants to be made to the plaintiffs on the transfer book of the defendants, claiming as damages the value of the stock. The case was tried in the superior court on the general issue, with notice, closed to the court, and the following facts were specially found.

Book debt ; referred in the superior court to an auditor, the material part of whose report was as follows :— The defendant Lockwood, who had received an injury by the falling of a scaffolding on which he was working, for which he conceived that one Hotchkiss was liable to pay him damages, went to Litchfield for the purpose of consulting the plaintiff, who was an attorney at law residing there, in .reference to the matter, and employing him to bring a suit for him if he…

Bill of interpleader. Benjamin Bronson, in 1846, conveyed certain property to one Clark in .trust, to pay tbe income beyond what was necegsary for Ms own support, to his wife Minerva, and his daughters Mary, Alvira and Alzora. The deed provided that whenever his wife and daughters, or the survivors, should request, Clark should convey the property to such person as they might appoint.

Petition for the laying out of a highway. Held: the town, upon a report of the selectmen discontinuing a portion of the road, (the part now prayed for,) voted to accept their report and to discontinue that part of the road ; that that part of the road was thereupon fenced up by the selectmen and no longer kept open or in repair; and that it was required by public convenience and…

Debt, to recover taxes claimed to be due to the state from the defendants, under the 24th section of the statute of 1851, with regard to taxation, which provides that every railroad company shall pay an annual tax to the state of one third of one per cent on the market value of its stock. The case was tried in the superior court, on the general issue closed to the court.

Bill in equity, brought to the superior court by the petitioner as trustee tinder the will of Jabez W. Huntington, praying for the advice of the court as to the construction of the will.

Trespass, for injury to the plaintiff’s land by fire set by the defendant on his own land, brought under the 277th section of the statute with regard to civil actions, which provides “ that every person who shall set fire on any land that shall run upon the land of any other person, shall pay to the owner all the damages done by such fire, to be recovered in an action of trespass.” The case was tried in the superior court on the general issue, before Smford, J. On the trial…

Case, for a false warranty of a steam boiler made by the defendants for the plaintiff, for fraud in the manufacture and sale of it,- and for negligence in its manufacture. On the trial to the jury the counts for false warranty and fraud were abandoned by the plaintiff. The counts for negligence had been added by amendment after the case came into court, against the objection of the defendants.

Action on the case, for damage to tbe cars of the plaintiffs in being thrown from the track, by running upon a cow of the defendant, negligently allowed by him to stray upon the track.

Bill in equity. The defendants were a corporation, authorized by their charter to divert and use the water of any stream, upon making compensation to parties injured; and in case the amount of damage could not be mutually agreed upon, then either party might apply to a judge of the superior court, who, after causing due notice to be given, should appoint appraisers to estimate the damage.

Case, for damage by flooding the plaintiff’s mill wheel. The defendant claimed the right, as owner of a mill below, to set the water back as he had done. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for one cent damages. The court refused to tax costs for either party, under a statute passed after the action was brought, giving the judge a discretionary power in the matter. The plaintiff excepted, and brought the case before this court by motion in error..

Assumpsit against the defendant as executor of Henry Wolf, deceased. Wolf died intestate, leaving a small sum of money on deposit in a savings bank, of which the defendant was treasurer. After his death his brother brought his bank book to the bank and left it.

Action on the case for a false warranty and deceit in the sale of a horse, the consideration of the sale alleged in the declaration being the payment of fifty dollars in cash and a conveyance of a tract of land situated in the state of New York.

Bill for a foreclosure. Tried before Park, J. William 0. Sanford, on the 1st day of January, 1858, mortgaged the premises, then owned by him in fee, to a large number of his creditors, to secure their several claims against him.

<p>A deputy sheriff committed a default in his office and the party injured brought an action on the case for damages against the sheriff. While this action was pending the sheriff died. Held, that the cause of action survived against his administrator.</p> <p>The maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona does not apply to a case where the tort out of which the cause of action grows is the tort of a third party and not of the party deceased.</p> <p>In this case though the cause of action arose from the tort of the deputy, the action was yet founded, not properly on a tort, but on the liability imposed by the law upon the sheriff for the default of his deputy.</p> <p>A deputy sheriff under our statutes is not the mere agent of the sheriff, but is to a certain extent an independent public officer.</p>

Habeas Corpus. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion. Return held sufficient on demurrer, by Park, J., and prisoner remanded ; motion in error by the prisoner.

Action on the case, against Joseph Richardson, William H. Noble, Nathan S. Morse, H. W. Chatfield, Nathaniel Green, Daniel Hatch and Russell Tomlinson, for an injury to the plaintiff by the fraudulent representations of the defendants, as directors of the Bridgeport Insurance Company, with regard to the assets and condition of the company, by which he was induced to insure his property in the company.

<p>The plaintiffs were a corporation owning a toll bridge, through which was a draw for the passage of vessels, the charter requiring them to keep a draw-tender and to open the draw for vessels desiring to pass through. A general statute required vessels passing through any such draw to warp through and not to sail through, and imposed a penalty for the violation of the act. The defendant in passing with his vessel through the draw, which had been opened by the draw-tender for him to pass, sailed through instead of warping through, and in so doing was driven against the side of the draw and injured it. In an action brought by the company for the damage, the defendant claimed that the plaintiffs had by long use licensed vessels to sail through, and offered evidence of declarations made by the draw-tenders at various times when vessels were passing through under sail, that they preferred to have them go through in that manner. Held,</p> <p>1. That evidence of these declarations was admissible, as the declarations of the agents of the company while in the discharge of their duties as such agents.</p> <p>2. That the defendant was not precluded from settingup the license in defense by reason of the statute forbidding the sailing of vessels through such a draw, the license being merely a waiver on the part of the plaintiffs of all claim for damage caused by that mode of passing through, and not affecting the liability of the defendant to the penalty for the public offense.</p> <p>The declarations of an agent of a corporation as to the matter in his charge, accompanying his acts as agent, stand on the same ground with the acts themselves, and both go to show what has been the conduct of the corporation in the matter to which they relate.</p> <p>As a general rule, what the directors of a corporation know regarding matters affecting the interests of the corporation, the corporation will be held to know, and knowledge on the part of the directors may be inferred from circumstances, and it is not always necessary to show it by direct proof.</p>

<p>Action on the case for the diversion of a stream of water. The writ, which was one of attachment, was directéd to and served by an indifferent person, and the defendant pleaded in abatement that it was not lawfully so directed and served, because the oath administered by the magistrate to the attorney of the plaintiff was not in conformity with the statute, which prescribes the form of the oath in such case. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion. The plea in abatement was overruled in the superior court by McCurdy, J., and after final judgment for the plaintiff the defendant brought the record before this court by motion in error.</p>

<p>W G, residing in the state of Massachusetts, by his agent in the town of S in this state, delivered to the assessors of the town a tax list, sworn to by the agent, containing the following item:—“ Stock of copper and spelter, in process of manufacture and manufactured, at works formerly occupied by New Haven Copper Co.; owner’s valuation $20,000.” The assessors estimated the value of the property, and entered against the item—“ assessors’ valuation $40,000.” The latter amount was then entered by the assessors in the grand list, under the head of “amount employed in trade and merchandizing.” The grand list was sworn to by the assessors and lodged with the town clerk. The agent appealed to the board of relief for a reduction of the valuation, and the board made a reduction by the following entry in a book kept for the purpose :—“ Deduct from list of W G f10,000.” The town clerk then erased the entire entry made by the assessors from the grand list, and made the following entry against the name of WO: “Investment in mechanical and manufacturing operations, $30,000.” He did this in good faith, and for the purpose of carrying into effect the action of the assessors and board of relief. Upon the grandlist as thus completed the tax was collected by a levy on property. Held, that the assessment was not invalidated by these proceedings.</p> <p>An assessment list is not a record. The grand list is the only record of the doings of the assessors, and this is not perfected until the board of relief have reviewed it, and made such changes in it as they think proper; The town clerk acts as the assistant of both boards, and properly makes the corrections which the board of relief order.</p> <p>In a suit brought by W O to recover back the tax collected of him upon the above assessment, he claimed that by reason of his non-residence the property was not taxable in this state. Held, that he could not set up this claim after having voluntarily submitted the property to the jurisdiction of the assessing officers.</p> <p>Held also that he was not to be regarded as having submitted the property to their jurisdiction to the extent merely of his own valuation inserted in the list, ($20,000,) but as having submitted it to their jurisdiction for the purposes of full assessment and taxation.</p> <p>The statute requires that selectmen shall make out rate hills under their hands¡ stating the amount which each person is to pay, and shall apply to a justice of the peace to issue a warrant for the collection of the tax. The form of the warrant prescribed by the statute contains a reference to the rate bill as annexed to the warrant. Held, that the rate bill must be signed by the selectmen, and that if it is not the warrant is void.</p> <p>A demand by the collector is not necessary to make the tax due. Such a demand is necessary before a levy, but is not a condition precedent of the duty of the tax-payer to pay.</p> <p>Where a tax has been legally laid and assessed, but has been collected by proceedings that were irregular and invalid, the tax-payer can not recover the money back from the town in an action of general assumpsit. That action is an equitable one, and it having been the duty of the tax-payer to pay the tax without compulsion, it is equitable that the town, having received the money, should retain it.</p> <p>And in that action there must be strictly a right to the money itself. Where then land of the tax-payer has been sold on a void warrant and the money paid by the purchaser to the collector and by the collector to the town, the money, if it could not be retained by the town, would be that of the purchaser or collector, and not of the tax-payer.</p> <p>Where a person has paid a tax voluntarily, though in ignorance of the invalidity of the proceedings under which it is demanded, he can not recover back the money.</p>

General assumpsit, to recover back money paid as a tax upon an assessment claimed to be invalid. The facts were reported by an auditor, and the case reserved by the superior court for the advice of this court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Bill in equity to compel tlie respondent Castle to reconvey land sold upon a tax warrant and purchased by him. The petitioner claimed that the assessment and the levy were illegal. The amount of the tax had been paid by the purchaser to the collector who had paid it into the town treasury. The town of Seymour, by which the tax was laid, was made a party. The facts were reported by a committee and the case was reserved by tbe superior court for the advice of this court.

Action on the case, under the 283d section of the act with regard to civil actions.

Action on the case for a libel. The publication alleged was the following:—“I hereby charge Wales 0. Hotchkiss and George Hall with having voted illegally at the election in April, 1860, and I am prepared to substantiate the charge by legal proof. W. S. Porter. New Haven, September 16,1860.” The declaration stated no special damage.

Ejectment, tried to the jury in. the superior court, on tlie general issue, before Me Curdy, J. On the trial the plaintiff relied upon a title acquired by a deed from one Cornelius Munson, to whom the premises had formerly belonged, dated April 8,1851, and introduced the deed in evidence.

Habeas corpus ; tried in the superior court before Waldo, J. The respondent was colonel of the 13th regiment of Connecticut volunteers, then quartered in the city of New Haven, which was raised and organized under the act of the General Assembly, approved May 8,1861, and which had been accepted by the United States government and mustered into its service. Michael Lanahan, for whose discharge the proceeding was instituted, was held as a private in the regiment.

Trespass qu. cl. fr. and de bonis asportatis; tried in the superior court, on an issue closed to the court, before Seymour, J. The defendant justified under a search warrant, issued by a justice of the peace, directing him to search the premises of the plaintiff described in the declaration, for certain liquors kept there by the plaintiff contrary to law.

Bill for the foreclosure of a lien for materials furnished to three paper mills in the town of Windsor Locks belonging to the defendants. The facts were found by a committee to whom the case was referred.

Action on the case for the obstruction of a stream of water; tried to the jury in the superior court, before Waldo, J. The declaration was as follows:— “ That the plaintiffs are, and from the 16th day of June, 1857, have been, legally seized and possessed of a certain piece of land situated in said Avon, bounded [describing it,] with a certain building used as a cotton factory thereon, and the privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging; which said factory is situated…

Ejectment, to recover the possession of a dwelling-house and two pieces of land situated in the town of Bristol, of which the plaintiff claimed to be tenant in common with the. defendant; tried to the jury in the superior court, on the general issue, before Seymour, J. On the trial, after the plaintiff had closed his evidence, the counsel for the defendant moved for a nonsuit, on the ground that there was not sufficient evidence of an ouster to go to the jury.

Information against the defendants for attempting to steal from the person, and for an assault with intent so to steal; tried in the superior court before Waldo, J. The information was as follows:— “ Richard D. Hubbard, attorney for the state within and for said county, presents.and informs that heretofore, to wit, on the 4th day of September, 1861, at Hartford in said county, George Wilson andf William Marsh, transient persons, with force and arms, feloniously did attempt…

Debt, on a bond given by the defendants to a judge of probate for the faithful discharge by the defendant Hiscox of his duties as guardian of Dwight Hiscox, a minor. The bond was dated December 6, 1853. The case was tried to the jury in the superior court, before Seymour, J. The defendants having craved oyer of the bond, set out its condition in their plea, and pleaded performance.

Action on the case, for maliciously shutting off the gas from the plaintiff’s rooms, which were furnished with gas fixtures connected with the main pipes of the defendants, and were dependent on the gas supplied by the defendants. The plaintiff obtained a verdict in the superior court, and the defendants moved in arrest of judgment for the insufficiency of the declaration, which motion was reserved for the advice of this court.

• Appeal from a decree of the court of probate for the district of Norwich, ordering a distribution of certain intestate estate of Jabez… Held: used and disposed of in manner following, to wit:— Said trustee shall from time to time during the life of said Sally Ann, pay to her the dividends, interest, profits and income of the said trust fund as the same shall be by him received ; and upon the decease of the said Sally Ann, the said fund in said trustee’s hands, as the same…

Action on the case, to recover from the defendant the amount of a judgment which had been recovered against and paid by the city of Norwich, for an injury sustained by a person passing along a sidewalk in the city, by falling into an excavation by tbe side of tbe street left open by tbe defendant on Ms own land.

Action for feloniously taking and carrying away a quantity of dry goods, brought upon the statute, (Rev. Stat., tit. 6, § 44,) which provides that every person who shall feloniously take the property of another “ shall forfeit and pay to the owner of the property so stolen treble the value thereof, to be recovered by action founded on this statute.” The case was tried to the jury in the superior court, on the general issue, before Dutton, J. On the trial the plaintiffs…

Bill for a foreclosure; reserved by the superior court, on a special finding of the facts, for the advice of this court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Scire facias in foreign attachment; tried to the jury in the superior court, before Butler, J. The plaintiff had sued the “ New York and… Held: and that it is to be presumed as a matter of law from this fact that they were legally held, and that due notice was given ; and I instruct you that if the record shows that a quorum was present, and if you do not find from other evidence that the directors were in point of fact not notified, then the law authorises a presumption…

Trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s dwelling house. Plea that the defendant entered by authority of a criminal warrant, for the arrest of the plaintiff’s son residing in the house.

Bill in equity for tbe correction of a deed and for an injunction. The case was heard in the superior court before Carpenter, J., by whom the facts were found and the bill dismissed. The petitioner brought the record before this court by motion in error. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.