UNITED BTATES V. BCCHAKAN. 689 �Blatchpokd, 0. J. The clients and the attorney appear to be at issue, in good faith, on the matters which lie at the foundation of the oontract for service. If the view of the clients is the true one, on the facts, nothing is due to the attorney. If his view of the facts is the correct one, something is due to hina on a quantum menat. Prima facie he has a lien for compensation on the papers in his hands because he rendered some services, and if there was such a contract, that, havinggiven up the employment, he has no claim to be compen- sated, that ought to be made out. Except by consent, the question in dispute cannot be determined by the court in a summary way. It must be left to be determined in a suit to be brought by the attorney to recover the compensation ; the lien, if any, remaining instato quo mean- while. If Buch suit be not brought within a time to be limited, or be not then diligently prosecuted, this court would order the papers to be given up. The order of June 28, 1881, ought to be vacated. The foregoing views are in accordance with the principles laid down In rePaschalt 10 Wall. 483. ���United States v. Buohanan. (Diitnet Court. W. V. North Carolina. November Tenu, 1881.\ �1. Statxjtbs. �Highly penal statutes are to be strictly eonstrued. �2. Samb. �A. statute is to be eonstrued so as to carry out, with reason and discretion, the intent of the legislature, though such construction may seem contrary to the letter of the statute. �3. Mastbr and Servant— CRiMiNAii Liabilitt of the Master. �Where a master, owing a duty to the public, entrusts its performance to a servant, he is responsible criminally for the failure of his servant to discharge that duty, if its non-performance is a crime. �4. Crimes— Rev. St. § 3324— EPFACiNa Stamps from Emptt Casks. �An indictment, under section 3324 of the Revised Statutes, for a failure to eSace a stamp from an empty cask which had contained distilled spirits, can- not be sustained, though the proof shows that the cask had been emptied so far as it could be done by the faucet, if there is proof of the additional fact that it had been removed, with the stamp still on it, from the place where it had been used in the course of business with intent to pour the spirits still remaining in it out of the bung-hole as soon as the necessary assistance could be procured for that purpose, and the delay is within reasonable time. �Thia was an indictment, under section 3324 of the Kevised Statutes, for a failure to efface a stamp from an empty cask which had contained distilled spirits. The defendant was a duly-licensed retail dealer of • distilled spirits. v.9,no.l2— ee ��� �
