
    WILLIAMS’S CASE.
    (12 C. Cls. R., 192;
    not reported in U. S. R.)
    William B. Williams, appellee, v. The United States, appellants.
    
      On the defendants’ Appeal.
    
    
      The Commissioner of Internal JRevenue offers a reward for information which will lead to the forfeiture of distilleries whose owners have not given the notice prescribed by law. The claimant gives information. The owners are found guilty by the jury, and a certificate is given to the claimant by the district attorney, but the Commissioner refuses to pay the reward because judgment on the verdict was suspended at the instance of the district attorney.
    
    The court below decides that the terms of the Commissioner’s offer were substantially complied with. Judgment for the claimant. The defendants appeal.
    The judgment of the court below is affirmed, and upon the same ground.
    
      
      The Reporters’ statement of the case:
    The facts of this case will be found fully set forth in 12 0. Cls. R., 192, and likewise the opinion of the court below.
    
      Mr. Assistant Attorney-General Smith for the United States.
    
      Mr. Zeicis Abraham for the appellee.
   The Chief Justice

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, January 5, 1880.

We are satisfied with the judgment below. The points raised and considered below have not been presented here, and that raised and argued here does not seem to have been presented there. We think upon the facts found it sufficiently appears that the terms and conditions of the promised reward were complied with, and that the claimant was entitled to recover what was offered for the services he rendered.

Judgment affirmed.  