Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/110

96 FEDBBAL BSFOBTSB. �Nor does it make any difference that at the time of giving the stipn* lation the defendant filed an appearance containing a qualiacation. Jurisdiction over the parties to the stipulation was acquired by the stipulation given, and not by the appearance ; and, as before stated, the stipulation was without qualification. But if it be open to the defendants, after giving such a stipulation, to deny the jurisdiction of the court over the parties to that stipulation, still the libellants are entitled to a decree, and upon two grounds : �First, because the marshars return shows a regular attachment of the goods and chattels seized, and it is conceded that such property belonged to the de- fendant ; that return not having been set aside by the court, upon motion, is in this stage of the case conclusive to show that the court acquired jurisdic- tion of such goods and chattels. Second, because the evidence outside of the return shows that the marshal did in fact on the nineteenth of August, 1880, and before the day on which the defendant, by its secretary, appeared at the marshal's office and ofEered to accept service of the process, attach the goods and chattels of the defendant, which were subsequently released from custody upon the giving of the stipulation to pay the decree. �The question argued in the defendant's brief in regard to the abil- ity of the marshal to find the defendant on the nineteenth of August, when he received the process, is outside the case as presented on the trial. , �There must, therefore, be a decree for the libellant for the amount of the claim, with interest. The amount of the decree can no doubt be agreed on. If not, let thete be a reference. ��� �