xvi ' CASES REPORTED.
I Page . Page
SIXTH ()Q[B,CU]']]_ Tennessee Coal, Lumber & Tan—
Bark Co. v. Waller. ...... . ....... 545
CIRCUIT COUME D' KENTUCKY` Cmcnrtr Comvr, E. D. Tnmvnssnn, S. D.
Kentucky & I. Bridge Co. v. Louis- Fox v You
- I . g ...................... 385
““°& NR °° ···· ·· ···· ·· ··‘·· 567 Y0¤¤gv.F¤x ......   ....   .... ess
CIRCUIT COUME E' D` MICHIGAN' . Cmourr Comvr, N. D. Tmmnssnn, E. D.
- EEZ5s2i????. ST .Y1.?.Y`i?T°ilT an HIISIIIIII II- INIIIIIIIIIIIII- N- 0- NI T- P-
Cosenow. In re. .... . . .... . . .... . . . . 668 RY C° ························ · ·· 504
‘ Rein v. Clayton ,.... . ............. . 354
Rodebaugh v. Jackson .... . . . .... .. 882 Cmcurr Comvr, W. D. Tnmmssnn.
. Thomas v. Chicago & C. S. Ry. Co. 548
United States v. Badiuelli ...... . . . . 138
I DISTINCT COURT, E_ D_ MICHIGAN_ United States v. Owens .... .. ...... 112
Ontario, The. .... . ....... . ......... 220 DISTRICT Counr, W. D. Tmmnssnn.
. United States v. Taylor .... . ....... 200
United States v. Jolly, two cases. . . 108
Cmcnrrr Comvr, W. D. Mrcmoau, S. D. .
Davis v. Read .... . . ........ . . . . .... 418 SEVENTH (]]]§{QUQ[T_
~ Ingham v. Pierce .... . ............. 647
Torrent v. S. K. Martin Lumber C0. 727
Union Mut. Life Ins. Oo. v. Union Cmcnrr Coum, N. D. I1.1.1N01s.
Mills Plaster Co ............. . .. . . 286 _
McKey v. Village of Hyde Park .... 389
Cmomrr Counr, N. D. Omo, W. D.
D1su·1trcrr Conwr. N. D. ILLINOIS.
Shaw v. Craft. .... . .... . ...... . .... 317 _
Elliot v. The Stafford .... . .... . .... 811
. DISIIIICT ¤<>III*I· N- D- 0III<>· W- D- Mll?l.`§.§Ef‘iY?T’?”T`TYT`}‘?li“.".'lT’l“.’T 910
Alexander H. Mau & C0. v• which 653 Peterson v. The Wayne .... . ....... 808
CIRCUIT COURT, S. D. OHIO- Cmcurr Conrvr, S. D. Immors.
Louis Suydém, Sons C0. V. Arm_ Thomas v. St. Loms & C. R. Co .... 839
strong .......................... . 18
I Cmourr Comcr. D. Iunrsml.
CIICIIIT ¤<>IIIII· S- D- <>III<>· W- D- what V. Rukes .... .. . .... . 754
Armstrong v. 'Stanage .... . ..... . .. . .508
Armstrong v. Wood .... . . . ........ 508 CIRCUIT COURT- E· D- WISCONSIN-
Hamilton Gas-Light & Coke Co. v.
City of Hamilton ...... . ....... . . 832 Qudahy v. McGeoch ......... . . ..... 1
Hellebush v. Coughlin .... .. ....... 29-1 II-astmau v- Sherry .··....... . ...... 844
Jones v. Williamson .......... . . . .. 756
McArthur v.Williamson, two cases., 756 DISTRICT COURT E_ D_ WISCONSIN
rliilorris v. Wélliamson ........... . . ggti ’
imkenv. in .... .. ....   ...... 5 CI fM·] k _ II ·s
· Van sinner v. Williamson .... . .... 756 1g,Q§Id,,f,_"`[§,`}I ‘?]?I,`Q ?§I,‘{g},’Q2_ j   705
- Western Ma¤¤f’s C0- v· The Gvid- Gilbert Knapp, The ............   209
1_ng Star ...................... 4-. . . 641 My-gmt v_ The Gilbert Knapp ____ _ _ 209
WIHKGIS V. Armstrong. ........ .. . . . 508 Peterson v_ The Nellie and Annie_ _ gy;
CIRCUIT Counr, E. D. TENNESSEE. CIRCUIT CQURT,     WISg0NSIN_
i Arthur v. Gordon... .... .. ..... .   558 Boyd v. Janesville Hay Tool Co .... 887