vate citizen, to the exercise of the right of eminent domain by condemnation. But that case is widely different from the one now under consideration. In the case of the Bellona Company, the land sought to be condemned was held, by purchase, in the usual way. There had been no previous exercise of the right of eminent domain as there had been in the present case. The sovereign power of eminent domain has been previously exercised over the very land upon which the Maryland Mining Company seeks again to exercise it. This cannot be done. The power once used has been exhausted upon the subject.

The theory upon which private property can be condemned at all, is that it is for the public use. The right of eminent domain can only be exercised for the public use.

This power, however, the State may exercise herself, or she may delegate it to corporations, or to individuals, who can then exercise it as the agents of the State. When the State delegates this power to a corporation, and it is exercised by the corporation, the property upon which it is exercised is then dedicated, in the eye of the law, to the public use.

There is another view of the question. The State in granting to a corporation the power to exercise the right of eminent domain by condemnation, for the purpose of constructing a railroad, enters into a contract with that corporation, the effect of which is, that the State, in consideration that the corporation will expend its money in the construction of a certain railroad, and which the State considers would be a public benefit, grants to that corporation the power to exercise the right of eminent domain by condemnation, and to receive tolls, &c., for the road. This contract between the State and the corporation, the State itself cannot touch or violate. The contract is protected by that clause of the Constitution of the United States prohibiting the State from passing laws violating the obligations of a contract.

FIRE INSURANCE ACTION FOR CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD AN INSURANCE COMPANY,

In Court of Common Pleas, (Salem, Mass.,) before Judge Wellen. Anna Foster vs. Bowditch Mutual Fire Insurance Company :

This was an action on a policy of insurance of a stock of millinery and fancy goods, kept by plaintiff, in her store at Lewiston Falls, Maine, on which $900 were insured. By the terms of the policy, two-thirds only of the loss was payable, and the by-laws required a statement of loss to be made under oath, and in case of any fraud, or fraudulent statement of loss, or false swearing, the policy was to be forfeited. The defense set up by the company, was misrepresentation in the application for insurance, change of risk, fraud in removing the stock, and a fraudulent over-statement of claims for loss, and false swearing.

The policy was made in May, 1848, and the building and contents were burned on the night of the 3d of August, 1849, the plaintiff then having been absent in Boston a fortnight, and the store closed. The plaintiff's evidence went to prove that on the 7th of July, 1849, the stock in the store was attached for a debt of $105, and a schedule taken by the sheriff of the goods; that a mortgage was made on the same day of the goods attached, to Messrs. S. C. and M. G. Palmer, of Foxborough, Massachusetts, one of the firm being present, and receipting to the sheriff for the goods. The sheriff's value of the goods attached was put at $739, and the value of the same goods, in the mortgage to Palmer, at $623. The statement of claim made by plaintiff, contained some goods not in the sheriff's schedule, or the mortgage, and valued the goods at $1,150, at retail prices.

The plaintiff also gave evidence of an examination of the stock on the 14th of July, with a view to a purchase, and it was then estimated at $1,200.

The defendants assumed that there was a conspiracy to defraud the insurance company, to which the plaintiff, one Davis, her brother-in-law, and others, were parties that it began with the mortgage on the 7th of July; that the goods were secretly sent off in boxes, barrels, and band-boxes; that there was little or no stock in the store, when the plaintiff left, on the 21st of July; that the store was purposely set on fire, and when burnt there was not twenty dollars worth of property there.

The defendants' proofs rested principally on the testimony of five females from Lewiston, who were examined on the stand, and each of whom stated that their expenses, and a dollar a day, were paid them by the agent of the company for coming to Boston; and that, in addition, the agent had promised to satisfy them for their trouble, or pay them as much as they could make at home. They testified to being in the shop at or about the time Miss Foster left, and that the stock had diminished, or nearly disappeared; and that some of them had looked in the window, after the store was closed, and could see few or no goods; that they called for bonnets, laces, ribbons, and other goods, and Miss Foster said she had none. One witness testified that a large quantity of bonnets and ribbons were taken away at the time of the mortgage; and another, that she was the first person that reached the store at the fire, and looked into the shop through a broken pane of glass, and could see only one bonnet on the counter, and a piece of alapaca and mouslin de laine on the shelf. It was also proved that boxes were sent off at different times by the express to the railroad.

The plaintiff met this array of testimony by showing that the rooms over the shop were occupied as a dwelling by plaintiff's brother-in-law, a provision dealer, who collected poultry and produce, and sent it to Boston by express, and the packages, boxes, &c., sent off, were shown not to have contained any other articles. Two witnesses who were present at the mortgage, testified that no bonnets or ribbons were removed at the time of the mortgage, and others who were in the store on the day Miss Foster left, testified that there was no material change in the stock, except that it had been put away in the drawers, or packed, to protect it during the plaintiff's absence; and that curtains were drawn before the shelves, so that the goods behind them could not be seen. It also appeared that the particular pieces of goods which one of the defendants' witnesses, a Mrs. Littlefield, testified were all she saw on the shelves when the store was on fire, viz:-the alapaca and mouslin de laine, were not in the list of goods, and had not been in the shop at all. The evidence was very voluminous on both sides, and the trial occupied a week.

The court ruled that notwithstanding the law against extra judicial oaths, the plaintiff was bound to make oath to her statement of loss, as a condition precedent to her right to recover; and if there was an overstatement of goods which the plaintiff knew were not in the store, or which she had no reason to believe were lost; or if she had sworn falsely, she could not recover even for an actual loss of a less amount; but had forfeited the policy. That the amount of indemnity was two-thirds of the loss, not at the retail prices, but at the wholesale value at Lewiston. That it was incumbent on the plaintiff to prove the loss, and the actual value, and the burden of proof was on the defendants to show any fraud or removal of the goods, or any false statement or false swearing in the claim. It was also proved that the plaintiff had sent her statement to the defendants, without retaining a copy, and that after notice, they had declined to furnish a copy, or to produce it, until the trial; and the plaintiff contended, and the court held, that after such notice, the defendants could take no exception to the form of the statement, and were confined to the charge of fraud and overstatement set up in their specification of defense.

The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and assessed the damages at $621 60.

ACTION TO RECOVER BACK MONEY PAID FOR COFFEE SOLD, AND ALLEGED TO BE OF SAME QUALITY AS A SAMPLE EXHIBITED AT TIME OF SALE.

In the Court of Common Pleas, (Boston, Mass.,) January 7, 1851. Wm. M. Jackson vs. Joseph G. Perley:

This was an action of assumpsit to recover back money-$81 83, paid by the plaintiff to the defendant, upon the 15th day of February last, for five barrels, or 835 pounds of burnt and ground coffee. The writ contained the common counts, under which a specification of claim was filed, alleging that on the 15th of February, the defendant, by his agent, one Berry, sold to the plaintiff five barrels of burnt and ground coffee, alleged to be of the same quality as a sample then pro

duced; that the plaintiff paid $81 83 for the coffee at the time of sale; that it was soon discovered that the coffee delivered to plaintiff was unlike the sample, and worthless, and that, therefore, the plaintiff gave notice to the defendant to refund the money and take back his coffee. There was also a special count in the writ upon the warranty.

The case was tried at the October term, and resulted in a verdict of $83 50 for the plaintiff; but afterwards a new trial was granted.

It appeared in evidence, that on the 15th of February, the defendant, accompanied by Berry, went to the plaintiff's store, and Berry, in the presence and hearing of the defendant, said:--This is the gentleman that has the coffee to sell, if the plaintiff would like to buy. Berry negotiated the sale, always consulting with defendant, and assisted by defendant, took a sample from one of the barrels, and showed it to the plaintiff. When a price per pound was agreed upon, and the amount calculated, Berry said: "There will be a charge for the barrels, I suppose." Plaintiff then said, "I will not have them." The defendant, however, said plaintiff would want something to have the coffee in, and allowed Berry to charge nothing for them. Berry rendered a bill, which he then wrote, the defendant being with him. The plaintiff's clerk said that it was then after bank hours, and as he had deposited the money, he would not make payment in cash. Berry said he would rather have cash, but defendant said, "I would as lief have a check; I know where I can cash it." It turned out, on the plaintiff's opening the barrels to sell the coffee, that a few inches in depth of coffee, like the sample, was found at the ends of the barrels, and all the rest was filled up with coffee which had been damaged by salt water, and was nauseous and utterly worthless. It also appeared in evidence that the defendant afterwards admitted to a third party, "that every spoonful of the coffee" was his, and that he had paid Berry for selling it.

The defense was, that the defendant did not own the coffee, but that it belonged to Berry. There was no dispute as to the quality of the sample, or the coffee. It was also objected, that the bill put in by plaintiff as the original bill, was not the original. This bill was in the form :

The defendant contended the original bill specified that the coffee was adulterated. The clerk of the plaintiff could not swear that the bill presented was the original bill, but he knew of no other, but swore that that bill, or one just like it, was the original. Another witness, also employed in plaintiff's store, testified that he filed the bills away, within two days after the sale, and that he had never seen any other. The defendant attempted to show that the plaintiff, in his evidence at the Municipal Court, where the defendant was tried on an indictment found on this same transaction, stated that the bill offered was not the original bill; but it appeared that the plaintiff said he could not swear that it was. The defendant also attempted to prove that the plaintiff's witnesses had testified differently at the former trial on the criminal prosecution.

The court ruled that the plaintiff could not recover under the common counts, inasmuch as the plaintiff's rescinding of the contract had not been accepted by the defendant; but if the jury were satisfied that the coffee was sold by sample, and proved to be unlike the sample, then there was a breach of warranty, and the plaintiff was entitled to recover, under the special count, the difference between what the coffee was worth, as it proved to be, and what it would have been worth in the market had it been all like the sample.

The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the sum of $105 46.

COMMERCIAL CHRONICLE AND REVIEW.

STATE OF BUSINESS-INVESTMENTS OF CAPITAL IN RAILROADS AND BANKS-AVENUES FROM THE WEST TO TIDE-WATER-THE MONEY MARKET-ACCUMULATION OF GOLD AT THE MINT-EXPORTS AT THE PORT OF NEW YORK-CUSTOMS' DUTIES AT THE PORT OF NEW YORK IN JANUARY-FOR NINE YEARSDIVIDENDS ON UNITED STATES STOCK PAID IN NEW YORK-REVENUE OF PUBLIC WORKS-THE GOLD AND SILVER QUESTION-WEIGHT AND RELATIVE FINENESS OF UNITED STATES AND BRITISH COINS.

THE general state of business throughout the Union is very satisfactory. The production of wealth is very considerable, and the application of means to its interchange very great. The construction of railroads is pushed to a great extent. In New York $60,769,797 has been so applied, and the roads are all profitable. Very many of the western cities have adopted the plan of loaning credit, and it will prove injurious to their interests. The amount of capital going into railroads, all over the country, is immense, and also into banks. In New York the multiplication of these latter is very rapid, and will not fall short of an increase of $10,000,000, for the present year. In New England the increase is also very great. This state of affairs tends to promote an extension of credits in making sales, and to revive those long credits which led to the disasters of former years, and which caused a suspension of all the banks, in the words of Mr. Biddle, "until next crop," as if those who had, by getting goods on credit, consumed a crop in advance, would go a year without consuming at all, until they had paid up. It is, however, the case that the resources of the country are vastly greater now than at the date of the former years of speculation. Up to 1835 there may be said to have been but one route to connect the country west of the Alleghanies with the Atlantic, and that was the Erie Canal. There are now five in operation, and still another in course of construction. The following are these lines, with their cost and revenue:

The revenue of the Erie Canal, in 1835, the year the Pennsylvania Canals were opened, was $1,392,130, and that represented all the tolls collected on western trade. This last year that trade has paid, on the five lines, a sum greater by $8,410,000, or nearly seven times greater, and if we remember that the tolls are now very much less than then, we can safely estimate that the trade west of the Alleghanies, with the Atlantic slope, was ten times greater in 1850 than in 1835. We are also to bear in mind that a considerable quantity of goods now passes down the lake to Ogdensburg, over Lake Champlain to New York, and over the railroad to Boston, constituting a new route; and also that the Pennsylvania Railroad, already 174 miles, is about to open still another route to

the West. In this glance at means of communication, the merchant at once sees the broad foundation, on which a large business now rests, as compared with fifteen years since. If we continue the view into the vast works of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Illinois, we shall find, that by means of public works, what may be called the "working surface" of those fertile States has been increased to a still greater extent, and if our external Commerce this year has been large, it has not kept pace with the vast development of our internal intercourse. The money market during the month has been exceedingly well supplied with funds, and although at times attempts were made, mostly by the banks, to advance the rates, they failed, through the promptness with which the loans were replaced from private sources. In almost every case where outstanding loans were notified of higher rates, they were paid up with money procured at a less figure. This has been the case, although at New York nearly $3,250,000 were absorbed in the month of Jannary into the Government Treasury for duties, and gold accumulated to the extent of $10,000,000 at the Mint, through the inadequacy of that establishment to perform its duties. It is not alone the abundance of mere money (specie and bank-notes) which causes capital to be apparently so cheap, but it is the ample supply of natural wealth, which comes down in payment of goods consumed, continually canceling obligations, and throwing money back into the reservoirs whence it issued. It is also the case that a large amount of capital has of late reached this country from Europe in exchange for evidences of debt, public and corporate, while in the last ten years, there has been no increase of government obligation.

The emigration of capital, to some extent, assumes the shape of imported goods, and the exports are equal to the actual payments. The movement of produce sent from the port of New York, not only increases the supply of sterling here, but it also swells the amount of bills running on New York, and a new element is now entering into the internal exchanges. This is the progress of manufacturing at the South and West. For every bale of cotton manufactured in those regions at least $100 less is to be paid the North for cotton goods, and as the quantity of produce which comes forward to New York increases, the greater the probability of periodical cash drafts from that region. The exports from the port of New York for the month of January in several years have been as follows:

The value of domestic produce exported in the month of January from the port of New York is larger than ever before, exceeding that for the famine year, 1847, by $152,744. The most gratifying feature of the return is in the steady increase of the business in foreign goods. Our warehousing system is causing us to recover that carrying trade which the port enjoyed under the bonded system of former years. To make a depot for foreign merchandise free of gov