CASES REPORTED. IX Page Page Ei ghty—Five Mining Co., AuroraHi_ll Grace. Seibert Cylinder.Oil-Cup .00. » Con.Min.Cov .... . ...... ;...J...515 v .... .................. ` .....,38 Eleanor, The; ...... . . . . .... . ....... 140 Grand Isle, The ........ . .......... 767 Eleanor, The,_v. The Leo .... . ..... 140 Grand Isle, The, Nicole v. ......... 767 Emack v. Kane .... . ........... . . . . 46 Greenwell v. Ross. . . L . . .... . . .. 656 Emerson v. Hubbard .... ‘ ..... _ ..... 327 Gunther v. Liverpool & London & Enterprise Manuf’g Co. v. Sargent 134 Globe Ins. Co .......... . .. ....... 501 Evans v. Lawton ...... . . . . .... . . . . 233 ‘ Everhart v. Everhart .... . ..... L.. .. 82 Haag v. Board of County Com’rs. . . 778 · ” ` Hall v. Weaver .... . .......... . .... . 104 Falk v. Howell ..... . ..... . .... . .. . 79 Hall, Cordell v .... , ...... . . . .... . .. 866 Farwell v. Maxwell. ........... . . . . 727 Halstead v. Manning, Bowman & Co 565 . Fazende v. City of Houston .... . . . . 95 Halton v. Uhlinger; ‘. .......... . 390 Feder, Benkert v .... `. . . .. . ...... 534 Hansen ‘v. The Glenmont. ......... 402 Fells v. The C. G. Cranmer .... . . . . 405 Harmon, United States v. ...... . . . . 872 Fern Holme, The. .' . .... ’. . ...... .. . 814 Hat Sweat Manuf’g Co. v. Porter.. . 745 Field, Clay v. .... . ........... ‘. . .... 375 Hawley, The Edwin ............... 68 Finn, Brown v. ..... . .... . .. ., . . . 124 Hazardv. Dillon ................... 485 Fitch, Gatch v ..................... 566 Heath v. The St. Johns and The Gen. Fitzpatrick, Kraus v. .. .... .. ...... 39 Rosecrans. ....... . ............... 763 Flavel, Olson v ........... · ..... . . . . 477 Hecht v. Weaver .... . . . . .... . . . .. . 11] Flint & P.‘M.‘ R. Co., Mackintosh v. 582 Helena, The ....... . ............... 425 Flint’& P. M. R. Co., Parker v. .... 582 Helena, The, v. The Lord O’Neill. . 425 Ford, UnitedStates v.. . . .... . . . .. . 26 Henry v. Bond ..... . .... . . . . .... 101 Foster, Neal v ..................... 496 Henry v. Trave1ers’ Ins. Co ........ 258 Fotheringham v. Adams Express Co. 646 Henry L. Crane Boot dt Shoe Co. v. Fox, Camden Iron—Works v .... . . . 200 Trentman .... ’ .... . ..... . ......... 620 Frammas Warsaktiebolag, The, v. Heyman v. Uhlman.. . . .. ...... . . . . 686 The Jas. A. Dumont ............. 428 Hill v. Scotland County. ........... 208 Frank P. Lee, The ............... . . 480 Hiltetrant v. The City of Chester.. 429 Frank P. Lee, The, Insurance Co. of Hoboken Land &. Imp. Co. v. The “ North America v. .... . ........... 480 Edwin Hawley .... ;. . ..... .... 68 giankenthal v. `Gilbert ......... . . . . 5 Hoffman v. Bul ock. ............... 248 eds. A. Willey, The .... . . . . ...... 71 Holme, The Fern ............. . . . . 814 Freda A. Willey, The, Wilson v .... 71 Hope Ins. Co. v. The Dora ......... [343 Freeman, Asmus v` ........... .. . .... 902 Hope Ins. Co. v. The Dora ......... 348 . " . Howard v. The Rose and Cargo .... 928 Galesburg Water Co., City of Gales· Howell, Falk v. .................... 739 burg v..` ..... . . . . .... . . .... . ..... 675 Hubbard. Emerson v. .... . ......... 327 Gatch v. Fitch ..................... 566 Huber v. Myers Sanitary Depot .... 752 Gatch, Sunman v .... . . ............ 566 Hudgins v. The Sea Lark .... . ..... Gen. Rosecrans, The. ...... . . .... . 763 Hudson v. The Wasp .... . . .... .. . . 223 Gentilli v. The Sidonian .......... . . 805 Hudson, Churchill _v.. . ..... . . . . .... 14 Georgia, The, Platt v .... . . . . ...... 79 Hughes, United States v. ....... . . . 732 Gest v. Packwood ................. 368 Hulbert v. City of Topeka ......... 510 Gest, South Covington & C. S., Ry. Humphreys v. The New York ..... 922 Co. v .... . . .` .. . .... . . .... . . . . .... 628 Humphreys, Buster v ........ . .... ., .507 Gilbert, Frankenthal v. . . .... . ..... 5 Humphreys, Pearce v ........ . . .... 282 , Gildersleeve, Thompson v ......... 43 Hunt, Jr., The Benjamin F .... .. . . 816 Giulio, The ........... . . .. . ...... 909 Hunter, Price v. .... . ........ . 355 Giulio, The, Cormaek v ...... . . J .. . 909 A ~ Glenmont, The .......... . . . . ...... . 402 Ida Campbell, The, Oleson v ....... 432 Gle¤mont,'The, Hansen v .... . . . 402 Insurance Company of North Amer- Good, Smith v ........ . . ........ .. 204 ica v. The Frank P. Lee . ....... ' 480 Gormully, Pope Manuf’g Co. v .... . 877 Gormully & Jeifrey Manuf’g Co. v. James H. Brewster, The .... . .. . .... {7 » Pope Manuf’g`Co .... . . . .J .,.. .... 818 James H. Brewster, The, v. The Gormully do Jeffrey Manuf’g Co., Champion. ....................... 77 Pope Manufég Co. v .... . ........ 885 Jas. A. Dumont. The ...... . ...... 428 Gormuily & eifrey Manuf’g Co., Jas. A. Dumont, The, The Fram- Pope anuf’g Co. v... .... . .... 893 mas Warsaktiebolag v .... ,.. .... 428 Gormully du Jeifrey Manuf’g Co., J. B. Brewster & Co. v. Tuthill Pope Manuf'g Co. v .......... 896 Spring Co ................. . . , 769 " Gottlieb v. Thatcher ...... . . . ..... . ,435 J. D. Hall, The, Stillwell v. .... . . . . 904 Gould, State of Connecticut v ...... 319 John Cottrell, The ............... ». . ,907