209 U.S. Counsel for Parties. with the opinion of the Secretary of War that the plaintiff had no property that survived the extinction of the sorereighty of Spain. The emoluments to which she claims a right were merely the incident of an office, and were left in her hands only until the proceedings for condemnation of the office should be com- pleted and she should be paid. The right to the office was the foundation of the right to the emoluments. Whether the office was or was not extinguished in the sense that it no longer could be exercised, the right remained so far that it was to be paid for, and if it had been paid for the right to the emoluments would have ceased. If the right to the office or to compensa- tion for the loss of it was extinguished, all the plaintiff's rights were at an end. No ground is disclosed in the bill for treating the right to slaughter cattle ,as havihg become a hereditament independent of its source. But of course the right to the office or to be paid for it did not exist as against the United States Government, and unless it did the plaintiff's case is at an end. SMITH v. RAINEY. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF ARIZONA. A partner has a lien on the firm's assets for the repayment of his advances to the firm, and in this case held, tlmt the articles of copartnership, con- strued as a whole, provided that the partner in a land venture advanc- ing the amount needed for the venture should have a lien on the land regarded as a?ets. Taz facts are stated in the opinion. Mr. Lewis M'. Ogden, with whom Mr. James G. Flander.? was on the brief, for appellant.
�
