Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/866

852 FEDERAL REPORTER. �given a riglit unknown to the common law, but it has seen fit to qual- ify this right by providing that no more than one action shall lie for the same subject-matter, and that every such action shall be com- menced within 12 months after the death of a deceased person. �To permit an action to be brought upon it here after the 12 months would be giving plaintiff a right which the statute he invokes does not authorize, and to that extent nullifying the statute. In the Dennick Case the supreme court held that the method of distribution provided by the local act, although a part of the remedy, should be pursued by the court in which the action is brought. It would seem from this that even so far as the remedy is concemed the court will not universally adopt the law of the former, The true rule I conceive to be this : that where a statute gives a right of action unknown to the common law, and, either in a proviso to the section conferring the right or in a separate section, limits the time within which an action shall be brought, snch limitation is operative in any other jurisdiction wherein the plaintiff may sue. �It results from this that the action ia barred by the statute and the demurrer must be sustained ���EicH V. Thb Town of Seneoa Falls. �(Oireuit Court, W, D. Mw York. September 3, 1881.) �1. Mdbicipai, Bonds — Ovebdiie Cottpons — Interbbt. �Coupon bonds bear interest from the date of the maturity of the respective coupons. �Jas. R. Cox, for plaintiff. �Comstock ds Barnet, for defendant. �Wallacb, D. J. The objections raised by the defendant to the validity of the bonds may be sufficiently disposed of by adopting the decisions of the state court in Syracuse Sav. Bank v. Town of Seneca Falls, (MS.) and Angel v, Town of Hume, 17 Hun. 374, as these de- cisions entirely commend themselves to the judgment of this court, The objection to the jurisdiction, based upon the ground that the bonds were transferred to the plaintiff by a written assignment, and that an action eould not have been maintained thereon by the assignor on account of his being a citizen of this state, is not well taken, because these coupon bonds are promissory notes, negotiable by the law-merchant, and therefore not within the restriction of the jurisdiction clause. ��� �