Edward Terry Sanford

“ It is clear that as to all the bills which were presented at land-grant rates prior to January 1, 1914, and paid and accepted without protest or other objection, the conduct of the claimant was such as to lead the Government to believe that the land-grant rates were accepted in full satisfaction of the original claims and established an acquiescence on the part of the claimant that operated as a discharge of the claims for the full passenger rates. ”

“ The case is manifestly different as to those bills presented on the land-grant vouchers which bore either the short or long form of 'protest.' While a 'protest' has no definite legal significance in connection with the receipt of money-being ordinarily used in connection with the involuntary payment of money under legal compulsion or duress-it it may nevertheless be effective as an indication of non-acquiescence in the receipt of the amount paid as a final settlement of the claim. ”

“ Oregon-Washington Railroad v. United States, 255 U.S. 339, 347, 41 S.C.t. 329, 65 L. Ed. 667; Western Pacific Railroad v. United States, 255 U.S. 349, 355, 41 S.C.t. 332, 65 L. Ed. 671; Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. ”