Indictment for making a false declaration as to the employment of a vessel in the cod fisheries, contrary to the act of Congress of the 29th of July, 1813, ch. 34, §§ 7 and 9.
“This was a proceeding in the District Court, under the 10th section of the act of 21st of February 1793, ch. 11, to repeal a patent right, granted to the defendant, upon the allegation, that it was obtained surreptitiously and upon false suggestion.
“Information or libel of seizure for importing into Boston, from the province of New Brunswick, certain coal, which was not truly goods or merchandise of the growth, produce, or manufacture of the said province, contrary to the act of 15 May 1820, ch. 122, § 3. At the trial, the principal inquiry was, whether the coal was the produce of the province of New Brunswick; and the evidence on both sides was so contradictory, that the question, on whom the burthen of proof rested, became the turning point of the cause.”
“The present is a joint indictment against the prisoners for murder [onboard the schooner Fairy out of Boston]. They have severally pleaded not guilty. And a motion has now been made in writing, in behalf of one John D. White, otherwise called Charles Marchant, that he may be tried separately; and this he claims, as a matter of right. The motion is resisted on the part of the District Attorney for the United States, who utterly denies, that there exists any such right in law; and the parties are now before us upon the mere matter of right.
“Indictments for the murder of Edward Selfridge, on the high seas, on the 28th of August, 1826. Plea, not guilty. After a verdict of guilty, Jarvis and Dunlap, counsel for the prisoner, moved in arrest of judgment, and also for a new trial, because no copy of the indictment was furnished two days before the prisoner’s arraignment and pleading, according to the statutes of 1790, eft. 9, § 29. The motions were argued at length by them, and replied to by Blake, District Attorney, for the United States.”
“Indictment on the second and third sections of the Act of 20th of April, 1818, ch. 86, against the slave trade. There were various counts in the indictment, but that which was principally relied on, was for causing a certain vessel, called the Science, to sail from the port of New York, for the purpose of procuring negroes, &c. from Africa, to be transported and held, sold and disposed of as slaves. At the trial the cause turned principally on questions of fact.”
“Debt for the penalty of 500 dollars against the defendant, master of a coasting vessel, for suffering the locks and fastenings, put on the hatches of the vessel, by an inspector of the customs, to be broken, contrary to the 54th section of the Revenue Collection Act of 2d of March, 1799, ch. 128. The defendant pleaded nil debet, on which issue was joined.
“Assumpsit with the common money counts. The defendant pleaded in bar of the action the statute of limitations of the State of New-York, where the contract was made, to which the plaintiffs demurred. The question raised in the present case, is whether the limitation act of the state, where a contract is made, shall govern the decision of this court, sitting in another state, in which judicial proceedings are instituted for the purpose of enforcing the contract.”
“Case for an infringement of certain patent rights, granted to the plaintiff. There were two counts on two distinct patents in the declaration, but the first was the only one relied on at the trial, being on a patent for ‘an improvement on the double speeder for roping cotton,’ &c. The cause was tried on the general issue. The patent was dated the 3d of April, 1819, and the specification annexed to it, contained a very minute description of the double speeder as improved by the plaintiff, under distinct articles.
“Case for infringing a patent for ‘a new and useful improvement of a spinning frame for spinning cotton,’ invented by Paul Moody, and assigned by him to the plaintiffs. The patent was dated the 17th of January, 1818, and the assignment the 14th of January, 1819.