“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.

“Libel on information of seizure for a violation of the Coasting Act of 1793, ch. 8, and the Revenue Act of 1799, ch. 128. At the trial at October Term, 1821, the acts of illicit trade being proved to be in Passamaquoddy Bay, the principal question was, whether they were done within the territorial limits of the United States, or within the British waters.

“This was a writ of error from the District Court of Maine. The action was brought by the United States as indorsees of a promissory note made by the defendants at Eastport on the 10th of February, 1826, whereby for value received they promised to pay the president, directors, and company of the bank of Passamaquoddy or order, three months after date, the sum of twenty-three hundred and thirty-three dollars and thirty-three cents; and afterwards the bank, by its cashier, indorsed the same to the United States.

“These were actions of debt, brought officially by the postmaster general upon bonds given for the faithful performance of his duties, by one Benjamin Whittier, late postmaster at Belfast, Maine, who is since deceased.

“Assumpsit. The principal circumstances were as follows. The defendants (who are citizens of Maine) were owners of the brig Diana, of which William Heddean was master. She arrived at Havana in the island of Cuba, and was consigned to the plaintiff (a citizen of Connecticut, but a resident merchant at Havana), by the master, to procure freight on a freighting voyage.

“This was a bill in equity, brought to obtain an injunction and general relief against a judgment rendered in this Court at May term, 1825, in favour of the present defendant, and against the present plaintiffs, for the recovery of a moiety of certain parcels of land. The original action was a writ of entry sur disseisin, upon a supposed disseisin of one William McGlathry, under whom the plaintiffs derived title as tenants of the freehold.

“Libel in the admiralty in personam.

“Indictment for taking a false oath under the Pension Act of 1st of May, 1820, ch. 51. Plea, not guilty. At the trial a verdict was found against the defendant. Fessenden, for the defendant, made two points of law on a motion in arrest of judgment. 1. That the act did not make the offence perjury in its technical sense, though it affixed to it the same punishment. 2. That the indictment having concluded in the usual form of indictments for perjury, ‘And so the jurors &c. do say, that the defendant did falsely &c.

“Assumpsit. This action was brought for the recovery of about $3000, together with the additional damages of two per cent, per month, authorized by the laws of Massachusetts, in cases where any bank shall refuse or neglect to pay its bank-bills in specie on demand. The facts were as follows.

“Trespass for cutting down 4000 timber trees on lot No. 1, in the fifth division of lands drawn to the right of David Chandler, in the township formerly called New Suncook, now composing the towns of Lovell and Sweden, whereof the plaintiffs and defendants are tenants in common, against the statute of the 15th of March, 1821, ch. 35. Plea, the general issue of not guilty.