“This was an action of trespass against the defendant, the marshal of this district, for seizing certain teas imported into Philadelphia by Edward Thomson, in the ships Addison and Superior, under an execution at the suit of the United States against said Thompson; to which teas, the plaintiffs asserted a property in themselves.

“The defendant was indicted for manslaughter committed by him, being one of the ship’s company of the Arabella belonging to citizens of the United States, on another of the ship’s company of said vessel, in the river Elba. After the evidence was concluded, it was objected by the defendant’s counsel that no evidence having been given to prove that the vessel on board of which the offence is alleged to have been committed, belonged to a citizen of the United States, a verdict could not be found against the defendant.

“A rule was granted upon the mayor of the city of Philadelphia, on the motion of the prisoner, to show cause why he should not deliver to the prisoner certain bank notes of the bank of the United States, alleged to be genuine, to the value and amount of $1550, which the mayor had taken from the person of the prisoner upon his examination upon a charge of forgery. The mayor appeared by counsel to show cause, and admitted the notes to be genuine; but denied the right of the court to interfere in a summary way in a matter of this kind.”

“This case resembles that of M’Culloch vs. Girard, which was tried at the October sessions of this court in 1822, (see ante 289,) the present plaintiff having been one of the persons on whose account Mr Jones made, the contract with the defendant. The few points of difference between the two cases are totally immaterial to the point decided in this cause, and therefore are not stated.

“This was an action of covenant for nonpayment of a certain sum of money, the consideration for a tract of land lying in the state of New York.

“This was an ejectment to recover two hundred and fifty acres of land in Union county. The lessors of the plaintiff claim as the representatives of John Snyder. The title of the plaintiffs was as follows: a warrant dated the 17th of March 1762, which, after reciting a prior order of the proprietor to the surveyor general, dated ------ 1754, to survey two thousand acres for Conrad Wiser, which had not been complied with; directs the said quantity of land to be surveyed for the heirs and representatives of the said Conrad Wiser, then deceased.”

“The prisoner was tried upon five indictments, three of which were for counterfeiting the notes of the bank of the United States, of different denominations, and the other two for having in his possession bank notes of different denominations, engraved and printed after the similitude of notes issued by the said bank, with intent to use them in forging the notes of the said bank. Upon the trial of these indictments, the following points of evidence were ruled by the court. .1.

“This was an action on the case for an infringement of a patent granted to Edward Treadwell on the 181h of May 1826, for an improvement in the art of manufacturing biscuit and sugar, bread. The schedule describes the whole instrument, viz. the circular knives, dotters, clearers, the holes and the niches for connecting the cakes and clearing away the loose dough, as in the former patent.

“This was an action for the infringement of a patent granted to E. Treadwell, for an improvement in forming and piercing bread, called by him ‘a cracker or biscuit finisher.’ The specification describes the different parts of the machine, amongst which are the circular cutters, the piercers, and the clearers, which cut, pierce, and clear the biscuit at one operation.

“The plaintiffs filed their bill on the equity side of the court setting forth that the plaintiff Ogle is the original inventor of a new and useful improvement in the plough, for which he obtained a patent in the year 1818. That in the year 1824, he, by deed, and for a valuable consideration, assigned and conveyed to the other plaintiff all his exclusive right to the said invention, with the liberty of making, constructing, using, and vending the same toothers to be used, in and throughout the state of Pennsylvania, with a power of attorney for those purposes.