RAILROAD - Continued.

10. Same.-PoWER OF THE STATE.-The state has power to protect such
lands from trespass, and may maintain replevin or trover for logs
cut thereon by trespassers.
1b.
11. RECEIVER TO BUILD RAILROAD.— Under circumstances, the court
appointed a receiver to complete an unfinished railroad. Kennedy
v. St. Paul, &c. Company,
448.

12. Further as to receiver of railroad company. See Equity.
13. NEGLIGENCE.-TURN-TABLE.- Under certain circumstances, a rail-
road company may be liable, on the ground of negligence, for a per-
sonal injury to a child of tender years in a town or city, caused by a
turn-table, built by the company upon its own uninclosed land, and
which is left unguarded and unlocked in a situation which renders
it likely to cause injury to children. Stout v. Sioux City & Pacific
Railroad Company,
294.

RECEIVER. See Equity.

Under circumstances, the court appointed a receiver to complete an
unfinished railroad. Kennedy v. St. Paul, &c. Company, 448.
RECOGNIZANCE. See Bail.

REPLEVIN. See Taxes.

1. MINGLING LOGS.-CONFUSION OF GOODS.-Under the legislature of
Minnesota (Rev. Stats. of Minn. p. 250) it is not necessary, to enable
the state to maintain replevin where the adverse party has indis-
tinguishably mingled logs cut upon such railroad lands with others
bearing the same mark, and especially where he refuses, upon de-
mand made to recognize the right of the state, that the state shall
trace and identify each log, for which it asks a verdict, to have been
cut upon the said railroad lands. Schulenberg v. Harriman, 398.
2. Same.-DAMAGES.- Measure of damages under the statute in such
cases stated.
Ib.

3. Same.- STIPULATION.- Stipulation, in replevin, construed. Ib.
4. TAX COLLECTOR.- When replevin lies against tax collector. At-
lantic, &c. Railroad Company v. Cleino,
175, and note.

REMOVAL OF CAUSES.

1. VERIFICATION OF PETITION. ACT OF JULY 27, 1866.- A cause re-
moved from the state to the federal court, under the act of July 27,
1866, will not be remanded to the state court, merely because the
petition for removal does not appear to have been verified. Allen v.
Ryerson,
501.

2. REMOVAL BY PART OF DEFENDANTS.-Under the act of July 27, 1866
the non-resident defendant may remove the cause, as to him, where
there can be a final determination of the controversy without the
presence of a resident co-defendant.

Ib.

REMOVAL OF CAUSES-Continued.

3. Same-In this case it was held that there could be such a final de-
termination.
Ib.
4. Same.- AFFIDAVIT.- Where a case is made for removal of a cause,
under the act of July 27, 1866, the petitioner therefor is not obliged
to make an affidavit, such as is required by the act of March 2,
1867.
Ib.
5. ACT OF MARCH 2, 1867.- FINAL HEARING OR TRIAL. Whether,
under the act of March 2, 1867, which requires the application for
the removal of a cause from the state court to the federal court to be
made "before the final hearing or trial of the suit," a suit in equity
can be removed when pending in an appellate tribunal, quære?
Waggener v. Cheek,
560.

6. Same.--Such a suit cannot be removed from the appellate court
after it has been finally submitted to it.
Ib.

7. REMOVAL BY PLAINTIFF.-Nor can it be removed by the plaintiff as
to one of several necessary defendants.

Ib.

REVENUE LAWS. See Internal Revenue; Taxation and Taxes.

RES GESTE. See Evidence.

RIPARIAN RIGHTS. See Admiralty; Mississippi River.

SALE. See Bankrupt Law; Warehouse Receipt.

SEIZURE.

See Internal Revenue.

Seizure of property, effect of release on bond, right of owner to sell,
power of government to re-seize: United States v. Mackoy, 299.
SERVANT.

See Master and Servant.

SERVICE. See Judgment; Practice; Process.

SCHOOL DISTRICT. See Municipal Corporation.

SHERIFF'S SALE. See Judicial Sale.

SLANDER. See Libel.

STATE.

1. Cannot sue as plaintiff in the circuit court. Wisconsin v. Duluth,
406.
2. Power of the states over lands granted to them by Congress to aid
in building railroads.

(See Railroads.)

STATE COURT. See Bankrupt Law; Circuit Court.

1. Decisions, when binding upon the federal courts.
2. Removal of suits from state to federal court.
Causes.

398.

25, 26, 36.
See Removal of

STATUTES.

1. Principles of construction of legislative grants conferring exclusive
privileges stated. Parrott v. City of Lawrence,

332.

p. 11.

2. Rules for construing acts creating crimes. See Criminal Law.
3. List of Acts of Congress construed, ante,

STEAMBOATS.

1. NUMBER OF PASSENGERS.
August 30, 1862 (10 Stats. at Large, 61), as to the number of passen-
gers vessels may carry, apply to steamers navigating inland waters,
quære? [It was held in this court in 1855, that this portion of the
act did not apply to Mississippi steamers.] Union Insurance Com-
pany v. Shaw,
14.
2. IGNITIBLE COMBUSTIBLES.--HAY IN BALES.- DECKS AND GUARDS.—
The act of July 25, 1866 (14 Stats. at Large, 227), prohibiting igniti-
ble commodities from being " carried on the decks and guards" of
passenger steamers, "unless protected by a complete and suitable
covering of canvass or other proper material, to prevent ignition
from sparks," construed; and it was held that hay in bales piled up
in the engine, or deck-room, back of the engines, and surrounded
and protected by a tier of grain in sacks (made of burlaps or jute-
cloth) on each side, and two or more tiers on each end, and extend-
ing from the floor to the carlings or ceiling, and stripped with plank
to make the sacks steady, was a sufficient compliance with this
statute.
lb.
3. Same. Hay thus placed in the engine or deck-room, though the
room be enclosed by bulkheads, is upon "the decks or guards" of
the steamer, within the meaning of the above mentioned act. Per
TREAT, J.
Ib.
4. NEGLIGENCE.— FIRE.— ACTION AGAINST Boat Owner.—ONUS.— In
an action against the owner of a steamboat to recover the value of
cargo destroyed by fire, on the ground that the loss was occasioned
by the carelessness of the officers of the boat, the burden of proof
is on the plaintiff to establish the alleged negligence of the officers,
and that it caused or contributed to produce the injury.

Whether sections 9 and 10 of the act of

STOCKHOLDERS. See Corporation; Individual Liability,

(See Bankruptcy.)

STREETS AND HIGHWAYS. See Eminent Domain; Wharf.

Ib.

99.

SURETY. See Bankrupt Law.

TAX AND TAXATION. See Internal Revenue; Mandamus.

1. Construction of charters and general statutes of Missouri as to
rate of taxation to pay judgment creditors of municipalities. Brit-
ton v. Platte City,

1.

2. Effect of limit as to rate of taxation on the powers of a county.
Kinsey v. Pulaski County,
253.

3. Internal revenue taxes and remedy for enforcement. See Inter-
nal Revenue.

4. Scope and limits of the taxing power.

Commercial Bank v. Iola,
353, note.

5. LEGISLATIVE EXEMPTION.-The Atlantic & Pacific Railroad Com-
pany is entitled to the benefit of the legislative exemption from
taxation contained in the act of the legislature of December 25th,
1852. Per TREAT, J. [Other tax cases, see note.] Atlantic & Pa-
cific Railroad Company v. Cleino,
175.
6. TAXES ON REALTY. - HOW COLLECTED. - Under the legislation of
Missouri back taxes upon real estate cannot be collected from the
personal property of a subsequent purchaser of such real estate;
and if such personal property be seized by the tax collector the
owner may maintain replevin against him to recover its possession,
Ib. and note.

7. REPLEVIN.- VOID TAXES.- Replevin lies against the tax collector
when the assessment of the taxes is void for which the property was
seized. Per TREAT, J.

Ib.

8. INJUNCTION.- PERSONAL PROPERTY.— A sale of personal property for
an illegal tax will not in general be enjoined, there being an ade-
quate remedy at law; following Dows e. Chicago, 10 Wall. 108. Rail-
road Company e. County Treasurer,

279.
9. INJUNCTION.-FEDERAL COURTS.- The federal courts will exercise
great caution in interfering with the collection of revenues by the
states, or their municipal or public agencies.
Ib.
10.– Sime.— An injunction to restrain the sale of property assessed as
omitted property refused, it appearing that the property was taxable,
and that if the taxes were paid, the complainant would pay no
more than its share of the public burdens.
Ib.

11. TAX TITI E- REDEMPTION.- The county auditor can not lawfully
refuse to receive from the owner of the patent or regular title to
lands, the amount of money, when tendered in time, necessary to
redeem the same from a sale for taxes, on the ground that there is
an outstanding tax title to the same lands in some one else. Lan-
caster r. County Anditor,
478.

12. TAX DEED - Under the statutes of Arkansas a tir deed which
shows by its recitals that from or rare separate town lots were sold en
– །
14 1887, for a gross sum, is void on its face, and cannot be contradicted
by evidence aliunde. Walker r. Moore,

256.

TERRITORIAL COURTS. See Courts.

TRESPASS.

Right of state to maintain, for logs cut on lands granted to it to aid in

1. JURISDICTION OVER. - Under the act of Congress creating the
Union Pacific Railroad Company (12 Stats. at Large, 489, sec. 1), the
federal courts have jurisdiction in actions by and against that cor-
poration whenever these courts would have jurisdiction of the same
class of actions between other parties. Smith v. Union Pacific
Railroad Company,
278.

2. Same. MANDAMUS.-Mandamus to compel it to operate its road
according to law under the act of March 3, 1873 (17 Stats. at Large,
509). United States v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 527.
3. LAND GRANT TO. - The land grant to the Union Pacific Railroad
Company (12 Stats. at Large, 492, sec. 3), excepts, inter alia, lands to
which homestead claims had attached at the time the line of the rail-
road was definitely fixed: Held, that this exception did not operate
in favor of a sham and fraudulent homestead claim. Union Pacific
Railroad Company v. Watts,

4. What would constitute such a claim, illustrated.

VESSELS. See Admiralty; Steamboats.

WAREHOUSE RECEIPT.

310.

Ib.

1. REQUISITES. — In the absence of statute or usage, instruments
known as warehouse receipts need not be in a particular form. Harris
v. Bradley,

284.
2. Same.-FORM. - An instrument executed and signed by ware-
housemen in the following words: “Received in store for account
of Bailey & Weightman, 3,000 sacks of corn," is a warehouse re-
ceipt, and has an assignable or negotiable quality, and its indorse-
ment and delivery by the persons to whom it was issued to a third
person for value, passes the title to the corn, and the makers of the
instrument are liable to the holder" or assignee, if, without his con-
sent, they afterwards deliver the corn to the persons from whom it
was originally received, without the production of the receipt. Ib.
3. The statute of Nebraska on the subject of warehouse receipts,
construed.
Ib.