Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/261

 FEICK V. CHRISTIAN CO. 253 �to enter into it ; and (2) for the mistakes of f act ; and that the defendant be decreed to pay to Mm the sum of $13,535.06, which he elaims is still due. �defendant demurs for want of equity. �L. H. Noble, for complainant. �BuUitt, Bullitt e Harris, for defendant. �Beown, J. I am clearly of the opinion that the award ought not to be vacated for want of authority in the commis- sioners to make the submission. While it was probably not ■within the scope of their power as agents of the county in the construction of the court-house, the award was formally approved by the county court on the fifteenth of July, 1869, and the money paid in pursuanee of it, and the act of the commissioners in making the submission was thereby ratified. Besides this, it doos not lie in the mouth of the complainant to claim that the defendants had no authority to enter into the arbitration, he having become a party to it, and consent- ing to be bound thereby. �Whether the bill makes out a case for setting aside the award upon the ground that the arbitrator was mistaken in his facts, is not entirely clear. The authorities ail agree that for certain mistakes of fact an award may be set aside, as, for instance, if the mistake appears upon the face of the award in a matter of computation, or if it should turn out that the arbitrator had made use of false scales or measurements, or had used an imperfect compass in running the boundaries of land, or had been guilty of any other gross and palpable error whieh he had committed without fault of the party seeking to set aside the award. �The leading American case upon the subject is that of the Boston Water-Power Company v. Gra^, 6 Met. 131, 169 and 182. In a very learned and exhaustive opinion, Chief Justice Shaw discusses the whole subject of mistakes of law and fact in the award of arbitrators, and cornes to the conclusion that an award may be set aside if the mistake is of such a nature, 80 affeeting the principles upon which the award is based, that if it had been seasonably known and disclosed to the arbitrators, if the truth had been known and understood by ��� �