Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/819

 80e FBDBBAIj B£P0£T£B. �affidavit, and it was, therefore, practicable to serve each of them per- sonally with a copy of the order, which was done. I tliink the act bas been suffioiently complied with to give the court jurisdiction over the property described in the bill, and the rights of the absent de- fendants thereto. If it becomes necessary, the question arising in connection with the intervening petition can be determined here- after. �Motion overruled. ���United States v. Eichabdson and others, Ex'rs. �{Uireuit Court, D. Massachusetts. January 23, 1882.) �1. CoNTRACTS — Offbb TO Pat — "All Claims " — Executobs — Survit al ob . Causes op Action — Penaltibs and FoKifEiTUBEs— Doties. �W., an importer, against whom a personal action was pending in the district court of the United States for penalties alleged to have been incurred on account of certain importations of tobacco, made an ofier to the government to pay a certain sum on the suit in the district court in settlement of all claims it had against him. The government agreed to settle all the known claims, specifying them, for that sum, requiring immediate payment, aud that part of the sum so paid be considered as having been paid for duties, and the remainder only as a penalty. Soon afterwards W. died; before either he had paid the money or the government had tendered him a release. In an action against his executors, in which both parties agree that all suits and causes of action for penalties and forfeitures died with W., and that the right of action for duties survived, it was Md: (1) that the acceptance conformed to the ofEer; (2) that as no tender of a release had been made by the government before the death of W., and after that occurred the occasion for a release had passed, thecontract was not binding upon the executera. �At Law. �Oeo. P. Sanger, XJ. S. Atfcy., and Prentiss Cummings, for the United States. �Sydney Bartlett and Henry D. Hyde, for defendants. �LowELL, C. J. Action of contract. The first count of the declara- tion alleges that in May, 1872, a suit for penalties was pending in favor of the United States against Way, the testator of the defend- ants, in the district court at Boston; that claims were made for penalties and duties in respect to certain importations ef tobacco; that the testator offered to pay the plaintiffs |55,000 in settlement of all said claims and causes of action ; that upon due report by the dis- trict attorney, and upon the recommendation of the soliciter of the treasury, the secretary of the treasury accepted said oiier, May 29, 1872; that the acceptance was notified to Way, June 1, 1872, and ��� �