XV1 _ CASES REPORTED. Page Page ' Baltimore, The .... . ............... 613 Drsrmor Comvr, N. D. Naw Yonx. Bessie Whiting, The .... . . . . ....... 79 Bmemo, rho ....... b. ...... ·.. ..., .. sev A, 0- H¤p¤¤¤. The ·-·- - --·----·---- 615 Boharjmg v, Lg, Compagnie Frau- - GIISOH, T]16. . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . 333 %3,1s6 dg Navjggtiouivgpgur Cyp_ Hopson, Tl1B A. O. . . . .. . . . . . . . ..... 615 abro & (358 _____________ __ ____ __ 531 Nettie, The ..... . ................... 615 Carpenter v. The Clinton .......... 672 OU`- Tim William ·······--····· · M5 Case v. The Sus uehanna ..... - .... . 325 P!`0Vid€¤06 W¤Sl1i¤§i0¤ l¤¤· C0- V- Crandall v_ Thg(l3i[,tgr·¤g_ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ 927 IMOTSG . . . . .... _. . ............ . .... 363 ' Devine v. The Tiverton .... . . . . .... 529 PF0Vld€¤0° WRSDIBSWD l¤¤· C0- V- Eubgrwgg v_ La Cgmpaggig Gég- i W8g€P . . . . ...... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 364 V érale Transatlantique .... . . ...... 428 SYlV§*¤ Stream. Tim --···-····--·· · · 314 Eubgrwgg v_ L3 Cgmpagujg Géu. Wllllam. OU`, Tilt`:. . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . · . 615 X rérale Transatlantique .... . . .... . . 530 _ Fcwéar v- TM B¤rm¤¤ L- '1`¤v¤¤—797 Craourr Coeur, s. n. New Yom:. en .............................. Hoboken Land· & Imp. Co. v. The Alaska, The. ....... . ...... .. ....... 555 »~ Baltimore .... . .................. 613 American Bell Tel. Co. v. Kitse11... 521 Lackawanna. The .................. 613 Anderson v. Kissam. ............... 699 Leocadia, The. .............. . ...... . 534 Baldwin v. T. G. Conway Co ....... 519 Martha, The ............. . ..... . .. . 313 Beekman v. Hudson River West McAvoy v. The Mignon .... . ....... 819 Shore Ry. Co .... . ............. . . 3 McCormick v. The Gladys .... . . .... 160 Brahn v. Ramapo Iron-Works ..... 63 Mershon v. The Ramapo ...... . .... 612 Campbell v. City of New York ..... 14 New York, L. E. dn W. R. Co. v. Campbell v. City of New York ..... 504 ‘ The May Clinton .... . . . ...... .. . 325 Celluloid Manuf’g Co. v. American Orison v. The Syracuse ...... . ..... 367 Zylonite Co .... . .......... . ...... 301 Pennsylvania R. C0. v. The Lacka— Cellnloid Manuf’g Co. v. American wanna .... . ................ . ..... 613 Zylonite Co .... . .. .,.. . ...... . . . . 417 » Piskataqua, The ...... . .......... .. 622 Celluloid Manuf’g Co. v. Russell... 1'7 Potts v. The Bridgeport. two cases 222 Chateaugay Ore &Iron Co. v. Blake 804 Robinson v. Fifteen Thousand Five City of New York, The .... . . ...... 604 Hundred and Sixteen Bags of » Clarke v. American Dock & Im- Sugar. . . . . ........... . .......... 603 provementCo .......... . . ........ 478 Straus v. The Martha ........ . . . .. . 313 Cuthbert v. Galloway ............ . 466 Union Ins. Co. v. The Bridgeport.. 222 Dickerson v. De la Vergne Refrig- Van Dyke v. The Bridgeport ....... ‘ 159 erating Machine C0 .............. 143 Ward v. The Piskataqua. .... . ..... 622 Drexel v. Berney .... . ..... . ....... 805 Whiting, The Bessie.. . .. .... .. . .. 79 Duchesse d’Auxv v. Soutter .... . . . . 809 Wilson v. The Bessie Whiting ...... 79 Edison Electric Light Co. v. United Wilson v. The Leocadia ...... . ..... 534 States Electric Lighting Co ...... 134 Woodward v. The Piskataqua .... . . 622 Edward Barr Co. v. New York & N. H. Automatic Sprinkler Co ....... 513 V ; Farmers L. & T. Co. v. Eno. ....... 89 Gmvvw COURT. E. D- NEW YORK. E. D. Foote v. stem ................. 205 Heokinan v. Mackey .... . .......... 353 Lone Star, The .... . .......... . . .. . 793 Hubel v. Dick .... . . . .. . . . ......... 414 » , 'Huhlcl v.IWa1die. ............. . .... ae ne, n rc ........ . . .... . ....... Gmvvw Cover. N- D- New Yom:. moo v. oreoowaoh no Co ......... esi : _ Macham v. The City of New York.. 604 Burrell v. Hackley ........ . ....... 833 Mnltby y. Graham.. .... . ...... . .... 206 Burrell v. Pratt .... . . .... . . .... . . . . 834 Phelps v. Elliott .... . ........ . .... . 455 Catchpole v. Pulsifer .... . ....... . . 766 Rubber & Celluloid H. T. Co. v. In- New York Grape Suga1·Co. v. Amer- dia-Rubber Comb Co., two cases.. 498 ican Grape Sugar C0 ........ . .... 212 Sargent v. Home Benent Ass’n ..... 711 New York Grape Sugar C0. v. Buf~ Schumacher v. Wogram... ......... 210 x falo Grape Sugar Co ........ . .... 212 Strange v. Barney .... . .... . . . ...... 196 Potts v. Accident Ins. Co. of North Streat v. White .... . ............... 426 America .... . ..... . .............. 566 Thompson v. American Bank Note Ryan v. Hard .... . ......... . ....... 831 Co .... . . . ....... . ................ 203 Syracuse Chilled Plow Co. v. Rob- Tomes v. Barney .... . . .... . ....... 112 inson .... . . .. ....,... . ........... 502 United States v. Morgan... . . ...... 489 Vinal v. Continental Const. & Imp. Welling v. La Ban,. .... . . ...... . . .. 301 C0 ............................... 673 I Welling v. La Ban.. ........ . ....... 302