“Bill in equity for a fraudulent misrepresentation in the sale of a farm, as to the quantity of land. The cause was argued by Randolph for the plaintiff, and by Hunter and Robbins for the defendant, at the last term; and the opinion of the Court was now delivered, as follows . . . This cause was argued at the close of the last November Term of this Court, and derives some of its interest and importance from the character of the parties, who are both clergymen, and the nature of the bill, which contains charges of fraud and misrepresentation.

“Bill in equity to establish the right of the plaintiffs to a priority of use of the waters of Pawtucket river, &tc. The cause was argued at great length, at the last term, by Whipple and Webster for the plaintiffs, and by Cozzens and Searle for the defendants, at the last November Term, and continued for advisement to this term when the following opinion was delivered . . .

“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.

“This cause was tried at the last term, and the facts, as they appeared at the trial, are reported in the former report, page 172. A motion was afterwards made for a new trial, and was argued at the present term, by Loring for the plaintiff, and Webster for the defendants . . . The bill of sale was in their joint names; the ship’s register, and the oath taken by Ohl at the custom-house, all establish the same fact.

“This case comes before the court upon a writ of error to the district court. It was an action of debt, brought in that court in the name of the postmaster general of the United States against the defendant, as one of the sureties of Charles Rice, postmaster at Trenton.

In an action for a violation of a patent right, proof that the plaintiffs at a particular time made a specimen of the thing patented, which had not been before seen or heard of by the witness, is prima facie, evidence that it was invented by the patentee.

“Libel of seizure founded on the Slave Trade Act of 20th of April 1818, ch. 86; the act of 22d March 1794, ch. 11; and the act of 10th May 1800, ch. 51. At the trial the only count, which was sustained by the evidence, was founded on the first section of the act of 1800, ch. 51.