686 FEDERAIi BEPOETEE. �find that unnecessary force was used in expelling him; aad then, on the undisputed facts of the case, the resistance he ofiered to the con- ductor would contribute to those injuries to that extent, that, in this case, be would be entitled to recover nothiug on that score. And now, on the undertaking of the defendant's counsel that a verdict may be entered up for the money paid by the plaintiff for the extra tickets, if the court sball conclude, on the motion for a new trial, or on further consideration withotit sucb motion, that the plaintiff in this action is entitled to it, you are instructed to find for the defend- ant Company. �The court added that it was bis opinion, and it was proper to express it, that, in consideration of the extreme age qf this lady and gentle- man, the conductor sbould have exercised a discretion be clearlybad to not enforce the rule, by taking them at least to Collierville, wbere they could have bad better accommodations tban at the place heput them out; but this was, strictly, only a privilege or courtesy to be shown to old age, and not a legal right. ' ���United States v. Leverich and others. {District Oovri, S. D. Nm York. Deoember 12, 1881.) �1. Lbgact Tax— Act op 1864— Trust Deed. �The act of 1864, (13 St. at Large, 285, } 124,) imposinga legacy taxi on cer- tain Personal property, embraces cases only where the person to whota the beneuciaries are related died possessed of the property. �Where S. D., in 1864, before the passage of the act, executed to trustees a valid deed of a large amount of personal property in trust to collect the inter- est and pay it to himself and his wife until the death of the survivor, and, thereafter, to pay over and distribute the principal to his childrcn, and the grantor thereafter died in 1866, and hia wife in 1868, and thereupon the who'c property was immediately distributed among the children, and the grantor haviug by the state law "no eatate in law or in equity" in the property so transferred, and not being possessed thereof at the time of his deatli, held, that no tax accrued to the government, under section 124, upon the shares distributed by the trustees to the children. �S. L. Woadford, U. S. Atty., and E. B. Hill, Asst, Dist. Atiy., for plaintiff. �Miller e Peckham, for defendants. �Bbown, D. J. This is an action to recover a tax on distributive sbares of personal property under section 124 of the act of June 16, 1864, (13 St. at Large, 285.) ��� �
