853

Notes on U. S. Reports. 162 U. S. 359-365

well v. Montana, etc., Ry., 18 Mont. 299, 302, 45 Pac. 212, 213, foreman and repair gang; Hastings v. Montana, etc., Ry., 18 Mont. 497, 46 Pac. 265, section hand, section boss and engineer; Olsen ▼. Nixon, 61 N. J. L. 673, 40 Atl. 695, ship carpenters building scaffold; Railroad v. Gann, 101 Tenn. 386, 70 Am. St. Rep. 690, 47 S. W. 494, section boss operating hand-car brake and gang; Stephani v. Southern Pac. R. Co., 19 Utah, 205, 57 Pac. 36, trackwalker and engineman on lone engine; Richmond Locomotive Works v. Ford, 94 Va. 643, 27 S. E. 511, boss without power to hire and members of gang; Hughes v. Oregon Impr. Co., 20 Wash. 300, 55 Pac. 121, shait and ventilator men and underground coal miners.

Approved also in Bunker Hill, etc., Min., etc., Co. v. Schmelling, 79 Fed. 266, 48 U. S. App. 337, where charge was upheld as not withdrawing from jury doctrine as to fellow servants; Bowes v. Hopkins, 84 Fed. 769, 56 U. S. App.- 221, arguendo.

Distinguished in Pennsylvania R. R. v. La Rue, 81 Fed. 150, 55 U. S. App. 24, where company delegated duty of providing safe side standards for gondola cars.

Master must provide reasonably safe place to work, safe appliances, and hire competent employees, p. 353.

Approved in Bosworth v. Rogers, 82 Fed. 976, 53 U. S. App. 624, and Pool v. Southern Pac. Co., 20 Utah, 215, 216, 58 Pac. 328, following rule; Pennsylvania R. R. v. La Rue, 81 Fed. 150, 55 U. S. App. 24, railroad company cannot avoid duty of providing safe side standards on open cars; New England R. R. v. Conroy, 175 U. S. 338, 20 S. Ct. 90, arguendo; dissenting opinion in Oregon, etc., Ry. v. Frost, 74 Fed. 973, 44 U. S. App. 606, majority holding telegraph operator at station and trainmen are fellow servants.

Master. One in control of distinct department of railroad, not of part of one branch, is vice-principal, p. 355.

Railroads enter no implied contract for safe carriage with employees though furnishing hand cars, p. 358.

162 U. S. 359-305, 40 L. 999, NORTHERN PAC. R. R. v. CHARLESS.

Master. Railroad day laborer and employee on freight train are fellow servants, p. 363.

Approved in Oakes v. Mase, 165 U. S. 364, 41 L. 747, 17 S. Ct. 345, engineer and conductor on different trains; Martin v. Atchison, etc., R. R., 166 U. S. 403, 41 L. 1052, 17 S. Ct. 604, laborer on hand car and train crew; Chapman v. Reynolds, 77 Fed. 276, 33 U. S. App. 686, quarryman on derrick and another operating hoist; Cerrillos Coal R. Co. v. Deserant, 9 N. Mex. 61, 49 Pac. 810, haulers and blasters in coal mine; Stephani v. Southern Pac. R. R., 19 Utah, 205, 57 Pac. 36, track-walker and engineman on lone engine: Hughes v. Oregon Impr. Co., 20 Wash. 300, 55 Pac. 121, shaft and

162 U. S. 366-383

Notes on U. S. Reports.

854

ventilator men and underground coal miners; Bowes v. Hopkins, 84 Fed. 769, 56 U. S. App. 221, arguendo.

Master.- Railroad section gang foreman and laborer in gang are fellow servants, p. 364.

Approved in Alaska Min. Co. v. Whelan, 168 U. S. 89, 42 L. 392, 18 S. Ct. 42, foreman and mining gang; Cleveland, etc., Ry. ▼. Brown, 73 Fed. 973, 34 U. S. App. 759, foreman with power to hire, and bridge gang; Gaynon v. Durkee, 87 Fed. 304, 52 U. S. App. 588, foreman and employees in railway machine shop; The Miami, 87 Fed. 760, mate and boatswain lowering mast, with seamen; Grady v. Southern Ry., 92 Fed. 493, foreman and repair shop employee; Carlson v. United, etc., Pilots' Assn., 93 Fed. 471, mate of pilot boat and seamen lowered in small boat; Goodwell v. Montana Cent. Ry., 18 Mont. 302, 45 Pac. 213, foreman and repair gang; Hastings v. Montana, etc., Ry., 18 Mont. 497, 46 Pac. 265, section hand, section boss and engineer; Gann v. Railroad, 101 Tenn. 386, 70 Am. St. Rep. 690, 47 S. W. 494, section boss operating hand-car brake, and gang; Norfolk, etc., R. R. v. Houchins, 95 Va. 409, 64 Am. St. Rep. 801, 28 S. E. 582, and Jackson v. Norfolk, etc., R. R., 43 W. Va. 389, 391, 27 S. E. 282, 283, conductor and brakeman.

Master.- Railroad is not liable to laborer in section gang for injury from extra freight employee's negligence, p. 365.

Master.- Railroad is not liable to section hand for injury from foreman's negligence in running hand car too fast, p. 365.

Cited in Oregon Short Line, etc., Ry. v. Frost, 74 Fed. 971, 44 U. S. App. 606, for opinion of Circuit Court on point not decided above.

Distinguished in Reed v. Stockmeyer, 74 Fed. 192, 34 U. S. App. 727, wherever act is one done in discharge of master's positive duty, negligence is his.

162 U. S. 366-383, 40 L. 1002, NORTHERN PAC. R. R. v. LEWIS. Action on the case is proper remedy for wood burned through defendant's negligence, not trespass de bonis, p. 373.

Approved in St. Louis Ry. v. Mathews, 165 U. S. 21, 41 L. 619, 17 S. Ct. 250, upholding statute making railroad liable for damage by fire.

Public lands.- By act of 1878, no one can cut timber on public lands, except citizen on mineral lands, p. 377.

Followed in United States v. Gumm, 9 N. Mex. 621, 622, 58 Pac. 401, 402.

Public lands.- Presumption is, timber cut on public lands is cut illegally, p. 376.

Followed in United States v. Gumm, 9 N. Mex. 623, 58 Pac. 402.

Public lands.- Title to timber wrongfully cut on public lands

855

Notes on U. S. Reports. 162 U. S. 383-411

is in United States; wrongdoer has no possession while it is piled on public lands, p. 382.

Approved in Mathews v. Great Northern Ry., 7 N. Dak. 84, 72 N. W. 1086, owner alone can recover for damage to property by fire; Southern Pac. Co. v. Tomlinson, 163 U. S. 375, 41 L. 196, 16 S. Ct. 1173, defendant has interest in proper apportionment among plaintiffs, of single judgment against it.

Distinguished in Sullivan v. Schultz, 22 Mont. 544, 545, 57 Pac. 280, defendant cannot disregard contract for tombstone quarried from public lands.

162 U. S. 383-399, 40 L. 1009, McINTIRE v. McINTIRE.

Will of personalty, in District of Columbia, in testator's handwriting, requires no attestation, pp. 388, 389.

Approved in Campbell v. Porter, 162 U. S. 484, 40 L. 1046, 16 S. Ct. 873, Supreme Court of District of Columbia cannot probate will of realty.

Will is not invalidated by immaterial alterations made after testator's death, p. 397.

Wills. Failure of witness to recall destroyed part of will, which he would have known if it existed, implies its non-existence, p. 397.

162 U. S. 399-404, 40 L. 1015, PALMER v. BARRETT.

United States, acquiring land in State without consent of State legislature, may not exercise legislative authority there, p. 403. United States.- States ceding land to United States may limit exercise of Federal jurisdiction and time of holding, p. 403. United States, acquiring exclusive control over ceded land only while used as naval hospital, loses it by lease for markets, p. 404. Not cited.

162 U. S. 404-409, 40 L. 1017, KELSEY v. CROWTHER. Specific performance cannot be enforced by vendee failing to offer payment, though vendor omits abstract of title, p. 408. Approved in Coughran v. Bigelow, 164 U. S. 310, 311, 41 L. 447, 17 S. Ct. 120, vendee's delay in payment releases vendor's surety, though vendor waive rights.

Courts.- Facts found by territorial courts are not reviewable by Supreme Court, p. 409.

162 U. S. 410-411, 40 L. 1020, MONTGOMERY

STATES.

v. UNITED

Post-office.- Embezzling post-office clerk cannot defend on ground that embezzled letter was a decoy, p. 411.

Approved in Hall v. United States, 168 U. S. 637, 640, 42 L. 608, 609, 18 S. Ct. 239, 240 (affirming 76 Fed. 568), and Scott v. United States, 172 U. S. 349, 19 S. Ct. 211, decoy letter with fic

162 U. S. 411-425

Notes on U. S. Reports.

856

titious address is treated as real letter intended for delivery. See 58 Am. St. Rep. 603, note.

162 U. S. 411-415, 40 L. 1020, BRYAN v. KALES.

Ejectment is not maintainable against mortgagee in possession, by holder of bare title, not tendering payment, p. 415.

Approved in Walker v. Warner, 179 Ill. 24, 70 Am. St. Rep. 87, 53 N. E. 597, grantee of equity of redemption not party to foreclosure can sue only in equity; Bryan v. Brasius, 162 U. S. 418, 40 L. 1023, 16 S. Ct. 804, nor against mortgagee's alienees; Robinson v. Alabama, etc., Mfg. Co., 89 Fed. 230, good-faith purchaser in possession under erroneous decree is liable only for profits earned; Chase v. Driver, 92 Fed. 786, arguendo.

162 U. S. 415-419, 40 L. 1022, BRYAN v. BRASIUS.

Mortgagor cannot recover in ejectment against mortgagee or claimants under him, in possession, after breach, p. 418.

Approved in Bryan v. Pinney, 162 U. S. 419, 40 L. 1023, 16 S. Ct. 805, following rule; Chase v. Driver, 92 Fed. 786, arguendo. Mortgagee's interest as such passes to purchaser at judicial sale, though right of redemption not barred, p. 419.

Approved in Deck v. Whitman, 96 Fed. 886, State statutes govern foreclosure proceedings; dissenting opinion in Jennings v. Parr, 51 S. C. 212, 28 S. E. 83, majority distinguishing under facts.

162 U. S. 419, 40 L. 1023, BRYAN v. PINNEY.

Adjudged in conformity with Bryan v. Brasius, supra, p. 419. Not cited.

162 U. S. 420-425, 40 L. 1023, ANDREWS v. UNITED STATES. Post-office.- Detective who wrote letters, eliciting obscene matter through the mails, may testify in prosecution therefor, p. 423. Followed in Price v. United States, 165 U. S. 315, 41 L. 729, 17 S. Ct. 368.

Post-office.-Mailing of letter with obscene matter is an offense under R. S., § 3893, although only address on envelope, p. 423. Post-office.-"Letter," as used in R. S., § 3893, respecting obscene matter, includes private sealed letter, p. 424.

Cited in 58 Am. St. Rep. 597, note.

Post-office.- Opening of reply to decoy letter, sent under fictltious name, is not within prohibition against opening another's mail, p. 424.

Appeal. Where record does not show instructions given, they will be presumed to cover rejected instructions complained of, p. 424.

857

Notes on U. S. Reports. 162 U. S. 425-466

Distinguished in Chapman v. Reynolds, 77 Fed. 276, 33 U. S. App. 686, where counsel treated point as if properly presented. Miscellaneous.- Cited in Timmons v. United States, 85 Fed. 207, 54 U. S. App. 587, for form of indictment.

162 U. S. 425-434, 40 L. 1025, DASHIELL v. GROSVENOR. Patenting of machine is some evidence of its operativeness as well as utility, p. 432.

Approved in E. M. Miller Co. v. Meriden Bronze Co., 80 Fed. 525, defendant has not burden of proving usefulness of prior patents relied on as anticipating; Universal Winding Co. v. Willimantic Linen Co., 82 Fed. 233, prior patent may be used to negative infringement of later; Patent Button Co. v. Scovill Mfg. Co., 92 Fed. 154, minor defects in construction do not destroy anticipatory character of invention.

Patents. Under state of art, Seabury's patent, No. 425,584, for breech-loading cannon, must be limited to precise mechanism described, and is not infringed by Dashiell patent, No. 468,331, p. 432.

Approved in Wirt v. Farrelly, 84 Fed. 892, anticipatory effect of patent is not to be implied beyond fair construction; Union Writing-Mach. Co. v. Domestic, etc., Mach. Co., 95 Fed. 144, construing strictly Brooks' patent for typewriter.

162 U. S. 435-438, 40 L. 1030, GRAVER v. FAUROT.

Circuit Court of Appeals can only certify to Supreme Court questions of law, not of fact, or of law and fact, p. 437.

Followed in Cross v. Evans, 167 U. S. 63, 42 L. 78, 17 S. Ct. 734, and McHenry v. Alford, 168 U. S. 658, 42 L. 617, 18 S. Ct. 245. Supreme Court need not answer Circuit Court of Appeals' certified question as to which of two conflicting decisions it should follow, p. 438.

Courts. Rules for certification of questions from Circuit Court of Appeals, are to be read in light of previous rules from Circuit Court, p. 437.

Approved in United States v. Union Pac. Ry., 168 U. S. 512, 42 L. 561, 18 S. Ct. 169, holding certificate which brings up whole case Insufficient; United States v. Gleeson, 90 Fed. 778, 62 U. S. App. 312, arguendo.

162 U. S. 439-466, 40 L. 1032, BLAGGE v. BALCH.

United States.- Payments of French spoliation claims by act of 1891 are gratuities, not matter of right, p. 457.

Approved in United States v. Realty Co., 163 U. S. 442, 41 L. 220, 16 S. Ct. 1126, upholding sugar bounty law; Codman v. Brooks, 167 Mass. 501, 46 N. E. 102, arguendo.

Distinguished in Price v. Forrest, 173 U. S. 428, 19 S. Ct. 440, under act directing repayment of money advanced to government.