United States v. Wright
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Circuit Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. This was an action' by the United States against a principal and his sureties on a postmaster’s bond. At the trial, the defendants claimed, by way of set-off, under the 5th section of the act of March 3,1863,* certain credits which were proved to have been presented by the postmaster to the department and disallowed.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. This was an action' by the United States against a principal and his sureties on a postmaster’s bond. At the trial, the defendants claimed, by way of set-off, under the 5th section of the act of March 3,1863,* certain credits which were proved to have been presented by the postmaster to the department and disallowed. The section mentioned provides “That whenever, by reason of the presence of a military or naval force near any post-office, unusual business accrues thereat, the Postmaster-General is hereby required to make a…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Davis
The instruction given by the learned judge who tried the case was clearly erroneous, for it referred to the jury a matter which, under the law, rested wholly in the discretion of the Postmaster-General. The act of March 3, 1863, which .embraces the section upon whose construction the disposition of the case depended, effected great changes in the administration of the post-office department, but it did not take from the Postmaster-General the right to control and regulate the allowances to postmasters and the expenses of their offices, which was conferred by the 9th section of the act of July…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Modern Woodmen of America v. CasadosDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 1937
- Sheldon v. StewartMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- People ex rel. Horn v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Glenmore Distilleries Co. v. GlennDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1950
- Kansas City, Mexico & Orient Railway Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1918