ATJDBNHBID t». WOODWARD. 178 �Dakota territory could prevent its abatement as tf miîsàùce anless sanctioned, perhaps, by the congress of the United States. It is doubtful whether the bridge is authorized to be built by the legislature of the territory of Dakota, but this point it will only be proper, in my opinion, to consider when an objection to its construction is made by the United States. The state of Minnesota, if it objecta, can be heard in its own courts. An examination of the afSdavits filed by the defend» ants shows that the bridge -will not be an obstruction neees- earily amounting to a nuisance, and foUowing the principle adopted by the United States supreme court in the Wheeling Bridge Case, as I understand it, I shall not interfere with the erection of the bridge proposed by the defendants at this time. They may take the responsibility of its construction^ and if it should be settled after it is built that it is a nui- sance, and injuriously affects the complainant's private inter- «st, it wHl be abated. �Motion for injunction denied. ���AuDENEEiD and others v. WobbwABD. (Circuit Cowrt, <J>. Maine. Scpteinber, 18S0.) �1. JuDGMENT — Paeiies Conoluded — ^NoTiOE.— A judgment W conati- sive upon ail parties dlrectly Interested, both as to the v^lidi^ and amount of a clalm, where such parties bave recelved notice of the pendeney of the suit. Robhims v. The OUy oj Chicago, 4 WalL 667, �Chas. P. Mattocks, for plaintiffs. �C. W. Larrabee, for defendant. �Fox, D. J. This is an action for the recovery of the pries of a cargo of coal, fumished by the plaintiffs to the defendant in March last, at the agreed rate of $2.95 per ton, amounting to $2,301, together with the further sumof $62.40, advanced by plaintiffs to the master on account of his freight money. The coal was loaded at Weehawken on board the bark Castalia, bound to Portland. ����
