Thorndike v. United States
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
[Error to the district court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts.] At the March term of the district court of the district of Massachusetts, 1819, the district attorney brought an action of debt in the name of the United States, against the plaintiff in error [Israel Thorndike], on a bond given to the collector of the port of Boston, for duties by the plaintiff in error, which bond became payable on the 21st day of November.
Read the full summary
[Error to the district court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts.] At the March term of the district court of the district of Massachusetts, 1819, the district attorney brought an action of debt in the name of the United States, against the plaintiff in error [Israel Thorndike], on a bond given to the collector of the port of Boston, for duties by the plaintiff in error, which bond became payable on the 21st day of November. Upon oyer prayed the bond with the condition was set forth, the condition being in the common form of a bond for duties, “to pay the sum of forty…
1Opinion of the Court
STOItY, Circuit Justice.
The replication of the United States is clearly bad for several reasons. In the first place it relies upon an act of congress (Act March 3, 1815. c. 76S; 4 Bior. & D. Laws. Ed. 1810, S31 [3 Stat. 227, c. 87]) as justifying a stoppage of interest *1130upon the treasury notes tendered in payment of this bond, which is wholly inapplicable. That act is confined to treasury notes, which had already become due and remained unpaid; and the replication itself avers, that the treasury notes now in question were not due until after the first day of the succeeding August. In the next…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Metropolitan Bank v. . Van DyckNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Latham v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1864
- Monteith v. ParkerOregon Supreme Court · 1899
- Hague v. PowersNew York Supreme Court · 1863