“Assumpsit by the plaintiff as payee of a bill of exchange drawn at Philadelphia, by one Edmund Roberts, on the defendant, at Portsmouth, New Hampshire. The bill was dated 12th of May, 1827, for $500 payable to the plaintiff or order, at four months, for value received ‘being the amount of one share and interest in the cargo of the brig Mary Ann.’ The declaration contained three counts. 1. On the bill as an accepted bill. 2. For money had and received. 3. For money laid out and expended. Plea, the general issue.

“Libel of seizure against an open boat and her lading, seized in fact at Eastport on navigable waters for a violation of the laws of the United States, on the 4th of January 1828, by the collector of the district of Passamaquoddy. At the trial in the District Court, a decree of condemnation was pronounced against the boat and all her lading, except 7 barrels of flour, 2 barrels of pork, and 13 bags of meal, for default of any claim.

“Indictment against the prisoner for an assault on one Neil Lemon with a dangerous weapon, and with an intent to kill, founded on the act of Congress of 1825, ch, 276, § 22. The indictment contained several counts, in some of which the offence was alleged to be committed on the high seas, and in others in Massachusetts Bay. The prisoner pleaded not guilty, and was convicted of the offence by the jury.

“On the 27th December, Wharton, of counsel for the complainants in this case, moved for leave to enter an appeal from the decree of the court, rendered on the 23d December. Chauncey, for the captain and part owner opposed the appeal. The complainants must show that the decree made in this case is a final decree, coming within the act of Congress. If the petition was for the sale, or possession of the vessel, it was in nature of a possessory action; it was an application to the court for an order, which the court has decided it had no power to give.

“On the 5th December,.182S, the complainants in this case filed their petition, Getting forth the following facts: That the petitioners are owners of one half part of the brig Seneca, now lying in this port; that the remaining half part belongs to Captain Henry Levely, who has had possession of the brig for several months, with the sole control of her: that he has proceeded on several voyages to the loss and dissatisfaction of the late owners, from whom the petitioners purchased the brig: that he now threatens to take the vessel to sea without their consent, and to their great detriment: th

“This ejectment was to recover four hundred and thirty acres of land in Luzerne county, surveyed in the name of David Brown. It is one of the sixteen surveys mentioned in the case of Lanning vs. London, &.c. ante, 159; and the same, or nearly the same evidence was given in both cases . . . Upon the trial of this case, the plaintiff' offered in evidence the sheriff’s deed of the 6th of May 1802, for one third of Eddy’s interest in the land conveyed by Thomas to Eddy and Hollenback, to Samuel W.

“The bill-states the plaintiffs to have been, since the 10th of April 1821, owners of a grist mill, situated on a branch of the Speedwell river, in Morris county, New Jersey, which, with the pond, the waters flowing into it, and all other appurtenances, they purchased on that day, at a sale thereof made by the administrator of Ural Tuttle, under an order of the orphan’s court, and received a regular conveyance therefor.

“Bill in equity brought by the United States, as trustees of the Newport Bank, against the defendants as administrators of the estate of Lewis Rousmaniere. The bill in substance states, that the Newport Bank is a bank of deposit of the United States for the revenue collected in that district, and agent for the collection of such revenue.

“Leave having being granted to amend the bill under the intimation of the court at the last term, the plaintiff now filed an amendment to the bill.

“Debt on five obligations, executed by Joseph Hubbard as principal, and the defendant as surety, for certain sums of money, set forth in the declaration.