CASES BEPOBTED• X11}
Page , Page
Waldman v. Pennsylvania R. Co... 801 ' Whitford v. Clark O0unty......844, 837
Wallace v. No es.................. 172   Whittlesey v. Ames ...... .......... 893
Wallace v. Wiider. . ..... . ..... .... 707 ` Whittier, United States v....... .... 534
Wall, In re ....... ....... .......... 814 Wiggins, Strong v. ................ 418
Walser v. Seligman. . .............. 415 Wil er, Wallace v .... . .... . .... ... 707
Washington Mills Emery Manuf’g Williams, Micas v., (Note,)......... 303
" Co. v. Columbia Fire Ins. C0 .... 646 Williams & Leidig, In re........... 30
Washington Mille Emery Ma.nuf'g Williams v. Nottawa, (Note,). . .... 302
Co. v. Commercial Fire Ins. Co... 646 Wilson v. Pearson ................. 386
Washington Mills Emery Manuf’g Wm. H. Blurner & C0., In re. ...622, 623
Oo. v. Meriden Fire Ins. Co. .... 646 Wolverton, The. .... ............... 44
Washington Mills Emery Manuf’g W01·¢len, Searls v .... . .............. 716
Co. v. Roger Williams ns. Co ..... 646 Worthington, United Nickel C0. v... 392
Washington Mills Emery Manuf; [
C0. v. Trade Ins. Co. . .. ..... .. .. 646 I Yaeger Milling C0., Stout v.. ....... 802
Watson v. Brooks. ..... ............ 540 Young v. Northern Illinois Coal &
Watson v. Evers. .... .............. 194 IronC0 .... ................ ...... 806
Webberv. Bishop.................. 49
V\'hist]gr, Tim __________________ 295;.Za11e v. Peck Bros. & C0. ..... . .... 475
K
l