Peaslee, Stairs ve. See Stairs vs. Peaslee. Peck vs. Miami County Com missioners. U. S. Cir. Ct. Peck, Fletcher vs. See Fletcher vs. Peck. Peck, Steinaman VS. See Steinaman vs. Peck. Pederson, In re. U. S. Dist. Ct. S. D. N. Y. 1851; Fed. Cas. 10899a, BETTS, J., Vol. II, Peggy, The Schooner, United Page 214 266 States vs. See United States High Ct. of Chancery, 1750; 557 166, 295 Vol. II, Pennock VS. Franklin Co. Commissioners. U. S. Sup. Ct. 1880; 103 U. S. 44, FIELD, J., Vol. II, Pennsylvania vs. Wheeling Bridge Co. U. S. Sup. Ct. 1855; 18 Howard, 421-460, NELSON, J., Vol. I, Pennsylvania, Bell's Gap R. R. Co. vs. See Bell's Gap R. R. Co. vs. Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania, Phila. & Southern S. S. Co. vs. See Phila. & Southern S. S. Co. ys. Pennsylvania. 214 546 50 Pennsylvania, Prigg vs. See Prigg vs. Pennsylvania. People vs. Compagnie Generale &c. U. S. Sup. Ct. 1882; 107 U. S. 59, MILLER, J., Vol. II, People (Cala.) VS. Gerke. Sup. Ct. Cala. 1855; 5 Cala. 381, HEYDENFELT and BRYAN, JJ., Vol. II, 42, 59, 60 People (Cala.) vs. Naglee. Sup. Ct. Cala. 1850; 1 Cala. 232, BENNETT, J., Vol. II, People (Cala.) vs. Washing. ton. Sup. Ct. Cala. 1869; 36 59 317 38 37 People (Michigan) vs. Tyler. Percheman, United States vs. man. 292 Permoli VS. Municipality. 98 See Page Wardens, Cooley vs. Phoenix Ins. Co., Liverpool Pickering, Lomax VS. See Pilot, The. U. S. Cir. Ct. App. Piper, Brown vs. See Brown vs. Piper. Pitot, Sere vs. See Sere vs. Pitot. 51 361 83 547 Pittsburg and Sou. Coal Co. vis vs. Pollard vs. Hagan. U. S. 538 539, 553, 554, 559 Vol. II, 18, 159, 165, 282, 318 Pollard's Heirs vs. Kibbe. U.S. Sup. Ct. 1840; 14 Peters, 353, THOMPSON, J., Vol. I, 470 538, 539, 544, 554, 559 Page Vol. II, 18, 20, 159, 165, 361 Pollard's Lessee vs. Files. U. S. Sup. Ct. 1844; 2 Howard, 591, CATRON, J., Vol. II, 18 159 Pollock vs. Farmers Loan Vol. II, ner vs. Porter. Porter, Jackson vs. son vs. Porter. Porterfield's Exrs. vs. Clark. 114 U. S. Sup. Ct. 1844; 2 Howard, 76, CATRON, J., Vol. II, 221 Portland, City of, Baker vs. See Baker vs. City of Port- Porto Rico Pilotage Case. See Porto Rico Tariff Cases. See 545 Port Wardens, Board of, 73 12 52 Prigg vs. Pennsylvania (Fug- Society for. See Society for Quah's case. 320 Quarles, In re. U. S. Sup. Ct. 1895; 158 U. S. 532, GRAY, J., Vol. I, 537, 551 Queue, The Chinese Case. See 163 U. S. 504, WHITE, J., Vol. II, 33, 34, 63, 86, 130,132 133, 134, 214 Race Horse, Ward vs. See Ward vs. Race Horse. Radford, Craig vs. See Craig vs. Radford. Rahrer, In re. U. S. Sup. Ct. See 1891; 140 U. S. 545, FULLER, Ch. J., Vol. II, Rahtjen's &c. Co., Holzapfel's &c. Co. vs. See Holzapfel's &c. Co. vs. Rahtjen's &c. Co. Railroad Co., Dennick vs. Dennick vs. R. R. Co. Railroad Companies. See Bell vs. Atl. & Pac. R. R. Co. Bell's Gap R. R. Co. VS. Pennsylvania. Buffalo R. & P. R. R. Co. vs. Lavery. Buttz vs. Northern Pacific R. R. Co. Capital Traction Co. vs. Hof. Cherokee Nation vs. Southern Kansas Ry. Co. Chicago, Milwaukee &c. R. R. Co. vs. Tompkins. Chicago, Rock Island and Pac. R. R. Co. vs. McGlinn. Dennick vs. R. R. Co. Fort Leavenworth R. R. Co. vs. Lowe. Herman vs. New Orleans R. R. Co. Hubgh vs. New Orleans R. R. Co. Illinois Cent. R. R. Co. vs. Illinois. Leavenworth &c. R. R. Co. vs. United States. Metropolitan R. R. Co. vs. Dist. of Col. Minn. & St. P. R. R. vs. Milner. Missouri, K. & T. R. R. Co. vs. Roberts. Missouri, K. & T. R R. Co. vs. United States. Phila. & Reading R. R. Co. vs. Kenney. Phila. & Trenton R. R. Co. vs. Stimpson. Pittsburgh & Southern Coal Co. vs. Bates. St. Paul &c. Ry. Co. vs. Phelps. Stroud vs. Missouri River R. R. Co. United States vs. Joint Traffic Assn. United States vs. Union Pacific Ry. Co. Utah & Nor. R. R. Co. vs. Fisher. Ramsey, Murphy vs. phy vs. Ramsey. See Mur NICHOLLS, Ch. J., Vol. II, 53, 55 Rauscher, United States VS. Race Horse, In re. U.S. Cir. Ct. Wyoming, 1895; 70 Fed. See United States vs. Kauscher. Ravesies vs. United States. U. S. Cir. Ct. Alabama, 1889; 37 Fed. Rep. 447, PARDEE, J., 51 Page Vol. I, Page 548 712, 500, 551 Raymond vs. Thomas. U. S. Reid, Webster vs. erts vs. Reilly. Reinitz, In re. See Crane See Web See Rob U. S. Cir. Ct. S. D. N. Y. 1889; 39 Fed. Rep. 204, BROWN, J., Vol. II, 266, 275 Rent (Tory) Case. See Rutgers vs. Waddington. Repentigny, United States vs. See United States vs. Repentiny. Republic Francaise, La vs. Schultz. U. S. Cir. Ct. S. D. N. Y. 1893; 57 Fed. Rep. 37, TOWNSEND, J., Vol. II, Republic of Hawaii, Lewis vs. See Lewis vs. Hawaii. Republic of Hawaii, Peacock vs. See Peacock vs. Hawaii, &c. Respublica VS. De Long 328 189 champs. Oyer & Terminer, Phila., 1784; 1 Dallas, 111, MCKEAN, J., Vol. II, Respublica vs. Gordon. Sup. Ct. Penna. 1788; 1 Dallas, 252, MCKEAN, Ch. J., Vol. II, Respublica vs. Sweers. Sup. Ct. Penna. 1779; 1 Dallas, 45, MCKEAN, Ch. J., Vol. I, 537 543 Rhodes vs. Iowa. U. S. Sup. Ridgway vs. Hays. U. S. Cir. Riggs, Geofroy vs. See Geofroy Rio Arriba L. & C. Co. vs. Rio Grande Dam &c. Co., Uni- Risch, In re. U. S. Dist. Ct. Roberts vs. Reilly. U. S. Sup. 46, 79, 83 Roberts vs. United States. 327 298 181 266 54 547 539 U. S. Ct. Claims, 1 Devereux, Bartram vs. Robertson. Robertson, Netherclift Blight vs. Rochester. Rodgers, United States vs. See United States vs. Rodgers 207 54 83 See Rose, United States vs. United States vs. Rose. Roselius, United States vs. See United States vs. Roselius. Ross vs. Eells. U. S. Cir. Ct. Washington, 1893; 56 Fed. Rep. 855, HANDFORD, J., Vol. II, Ross vs. United States. U.S. Ct. of Claims, 1894; 29 Ct. of Clms. 176, RICHARDSON, Ch. J. Ross, Bauman vs. See Bauman vs. Ross. Ross, Eells vs. See Eells vs. Ross. Ross, Ex parte. U. S. Dist. Ct. Ohio, 1869; 2 Bond, 252; Ross, In re. 225 267 U. S. Sup. Ct. 1891; 140 U. S. 453, FIELD, J., Vol. 1, 54, 537, 541, 545, 552 553, 556, 557, 559, 560 64, 139, 140, 238, 333 335, 345, 346 U. S. Dist. Ct. Vol. II, Roth, In re. S. D. N. Y. 1883; 15 Fed. Rep. 506, BROWN, J., Vol. II, 267 Roulet, Alexander vs. See Al exander vs. Roulet. Roulet, New York Ins. Co. vs. Rowe, In re. U. S. Cir. Ct. Russian Deserter Case. See United States, &c., vs. Alexandroff Rutgers VS. Waddington (Tory Rent Case). Mayor's Ct. N. Y. City, 1784; Vol. II, 36 Sah Quah's Case. U. S. Dist. Ct. Alaska, 1886; 31 Fed. Rep. 327, DAWSON, J., Vol, I, 554 556, 557, 559, 562 Vol. II, 166, 168, 235 Sailors Snug Harbor, Inglis vs. See Inglis vs. Sailors Snug Harbor. St. Oloff, The. U. S. Dist. Ct. 1790; 2 Peters Adm. Rep. St. Paul &c. Ry. Co. vs. Salamoni, Feol vs. See Feol vs. Sala's Succession. Sup. Ct. 1009, NICHOLLS, Ch. J., Vol. II, 225 55 548 |