HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0451 and id is 1 raw text is: MITCHELL V. MOORE.
right conferred upon the officer to enter the building or place
of business of another in such a case is strictly limited to a
building or place of business in which articles or objects subject
to taxation are, at the time of the proposed entry and examina-
tion, made, produced, or kept, and that paid bank-checks,
unless it is alleged and proved that they were not duly and
sufficiently stamped at the time they were made, signed, and
issued, are riot articles or objects subject to taxation within the
meaning of the act of Congress on which the information is
founded. Nothing is admitted by the demurrer except what
is well pleaded in the information; and inasmuch as the only
charge of the information in that regard is that paid bank-
checks were then and there kept in the said building or place
of business described, the court is of the opinion that the
information does not set forth any legal offence against the
defendant, as defined by the said act of Congress.
Judgment affirmed.
MITCHELL v. MOORE.
1. A trustee residing in Alabama during the rebellion, who kept no separate
accounts of the trust fund, but invested it in his own name, cannot charge
it with the losses lie sustained from payments made to him in Confederate
money.
2, Where the allegations of a bill charging a breach of trust, and praying for an
account by the trustee, the payment of the amount found due, his removal,
and general relief, are sustained by the proofs, - Held, that the appointment
of a new trustee, and the decree for the payment to him of the principal
of the fund, is necessary to carry into full effect an order for the removal of
the old trustee.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the
Southern District of Alabama.
In November, 1873, Catharine Moore, by L. D. Moore, her
husband and next friend, filed her bill against Daniel Mitchell,
her trustee, charging him with neglect in the execution of his
trust, and with loss of the fund.
This trust was created by James Mitchell, her father, who,
by will, appointed said Daniel and one Baskin his executors,
and bequeathed to them a negress and her child, in trust for
Oct. 1877.]](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ussccases0451&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)