Слике страница



Section numbers to notes refer to the Revised Statutes of 1901.
Sections omitted have not been construed since 1901.










[blocks in formation]





10. Restrictions upon states.

8. Powers of Congress.

Congress alone has power to determine the moral obligations of the government towards the Indians, and the courts can only exercise such jurisdiction over the subject as may be conferred by congress. Blackfeather v. United States, 190 U. S. 368.

The bankruptcy law of 1898 held to be constitutional. Hanover Nat. Bank v. Moyses, 186 U. S. 181.

Power and authority of the postmaster general to seize and hold the letters of persons who are suspected of using the mails to prepetrate fraud. Public Clearing House v. Coyne, 194 U. S. 497.

Congress has power to prescribe the conditions upon which aliens may be admitted into the United States, and may provide for deporting persons who have entered into this country contrary to law. United States v. Williams, 194 U. S. 279.

The power of congress to regulate foreign commerce is unlimited except as to the restrictions imposed by the constitution, and no one has the right to import any article into the United States except upon the terms and conditions imposed by acts of congress. Buttfield v. Stranahan, 192 U. S. 470.

Contracts for seamen's. wages relating to commerce not wholly within a state are subject to restrictions imposed by congress under the commerce clause of the constitution. Patterson v. Bark Eudora, 190 U. S. 169.

The statute of a state prohibiting the sale of adulterated drugs and foods is not in conflict with the commerce clause of the federal constitution, but is a proper exercise of the police power. Crossman v. Lurman, 192 U. S. 189.

Section 218 of the constitution of the state of Kentucky, providing for the regulation of the charges of common carriers is valid when applied to business done within the state, but is in conflict with the federal constitution when applied to carriers engaged in transporting goods between such state and other states. Louisville R. R. Co. v. Kentucky, 183 U. S. 503; Louisville R. R. Co. v. Eubank, 184 U. S. 27.

Statutes providing how railroad companies engaged in carrying interstate commerce shall connect their trains at intersecting points, and providing for the transfer of cars, is not a regulation of interstate commerce. Wisconsin R. R. Co. v. Jocobson, 179 U. S. 287.

States can not by statute require carriers engaged in carrying freight from one state into another and delivering the same to connecting carriers to furnish to the shipper evidence to show what carrier is liable for the loss of or damage to the goods shipped. Central Georgia Ry. Co. v. Murphey, 196 U. S. 194.

Packages of intoxicating liquors delivered to express companies to be carried from one state into another and delivered to the consignee on the payment of a specified sum, can not be confiscated under the liquor laws of the state where delivery is to be made before delivery to the consignee. American Ex. Co. v. Iowa, 196 U. S. 133;

Adams Ex. Co. v. Iowa, 196 U. S. 147.

A statute requiring railroad companies to provide separate coaches for white and colored passengers when carried within the state is not a regulation of interstate commerce. Chesapeake Ry. Co. v. Kentucky, 179 U. S. 388.

The transportation of animals from one state to another is a branch of interstate commerce, and when such transportation is taken under national supervision and regulations are adopted to exclude diseased animals from a state, the statutes of the state on the same subject are superseded. Reid v. Colorado, 187 U. S. 137. States may enact statutes prohibiting the bringing into the states of animals from other states that are infected with contagious diseases. Rasmussen v. Idaho, 181 U. S. 198.

The assessment of a municipal tax upon the poles and wires of telegraph and telephone companies is not a violation of the commerce clause of the federal constitution. Western Union Co. v. New Hope, 187 U. S. 419.

States may impose ordinary taxes upon property within their limits that belong to and is used by corporations in interstate commerce. Atlantic Tel. Co. v. Philadelphia, 190 U. S. 160.

The franchise of a corporation that is engaged in interstate commerce may be taxed by a municipal corporation existing within a state where such corporation is engaged in business. Atlantic Tel. Co. v. Philadelphia, 190 U. S. 160.

States can not impose a tax which is in any way a burden upon interstate commerce, but a tax may be imposed on corporations engaged in interstate commerce for such part of their business as is wholly within the state imposing the tax and which does not affect their interstate business. Allen v. Pullman Co. 191 U. S. 171.

Goods taken from a state into another state and stored, are subject to taxation by the latter state while such goods are in the original packages, although such goods are ultimately to be shipped in such packages to various customers in other states. American Steel Co. v. Speed, 192 U. S. 500.

The statute of a state imposing a tax upon persons who act as agents for the owners of property without the state, and who make sales of such property by sample within such state, violates the commerce clause of the federal constitution. Stockard v. Morgan, 185 U. S. 27.

9. Habeas corpus-Taxes.

Congress has power to impose a tax on oleomargarine, and to provide a greater tax when such article is colored so as to resemble butter, and courts have no power to declare such a tax void because of the amount thereof. McCray v. United States, 195 U. S. 27.

Congress may require that when a tax is imposed upon articles inclosed in packages and the tax is paid by affixing stamps thereon, that only such articles as are taxed shall be included in such packages. Felsenheld v. United States, 186 U. S. 126.

Stamp duties imposed by the act of Congress of 1898 on the sales of shares of stock, are included within the words imposts and excises as used in the constitution, and do not constitute direct taxes. Thomas v. United States, 192 U. S. 363.

Construction of the acts of Congress, and power of the United States to impose and collect duties upon importations from the islands acquired under the treaty of peace between the United States and Spain. De Lima v. Bidwell, 182 U. S. 1; Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U. S. 244; Dooley v. United States, 182 U. S. 222.

Duties or imposts upon merchandise sent from the United States to the island of Porto Rico. Dooley v. United States, 183 U. S. 151.

Power of congress and of states, and construction of statutes imposing a tax upon legacies or inheritances. Orr v. Gilman, 183 U. S. 278; Billings v. Illinois, 188 U. S. 97; Snyder v. Bettman, 190 U. S. 249.

States may enact statutes providing for the collection of taxes for previous years which were not collected because of the want of laws authorizing such collection, or because of misunderstanding or neglect of officers. Florida R. R. Co. v. Reynolds,

183 U. S. 471.

10. Restrictions upon states.

A statute enacted allowing a state the right to take an appeal in a criminal action after an offense has been committed and a trial had, is not an ex post facto law within the meaning of the constitution. Mallett v. North Carolina, 181 U. S. 589.

Statutes which mitigate the rigor of the law in force at the time a crime was committed, can not be regarded as an ex post facto law with reference to such crime. Rooney v. North Dakota, 196 U. S. 319.

It is only persons who will suffer an injury by the impairment of a contract who will be heard to complain, of such impairment. Hooker v. Burr, 194 U. S. 415.

The mere change of decision of a court is not an impairment of a contract within the meaning of the federal constitution, but there must be a subsequent statute of a state which is upheld or given effect by the state in order to impair a contract. National Mutual Assn. v. Brahan, 193 U. S. 635.

If after the rights of a mortgagee under a mortgage have become vested a statute is passed which deprives him of any substantial right, such statute impairs his contract and is void. Bradley v. Lightcap, 195 U. S. 1.

The statute of Pennsylvania declaring that after a lapse of twenty-one years, ground rents for lands should be presumed to have been paid unless some act should be done within such time, as specified by the statute, which would rebut such presumption, does not impair the obligations of contracts. Wilson v. Iseminger 185 U. S.


If a general tax law exempts railroads afterwards built from taxation for a specified period, such provision is not a contract within the meaning of the federal constitution prohibiting the impairing of the obligation of contracts. Wisconsin Ry. Co. v. Powers, 191 U. S. 379.

Provisions in the statute of a state providing for creating a new corporation upon the reorganization of a railroad by a purchaser at a foreclosure sale, do not constitute a contract within the meaning of the provision of the federal constitution which prohibits the impairment of contracts. Grand Rapids Ry. Co. v. Osborn, 193 U. S. 17.

The filing of a map and profile of a route and the payment of the incorporation tax, without in some manner acquiring the exclusive right to use such route as provided by law, does not constitute a contract which the state may not repudiate and disregard. Underground R. R. v. City of New York, 193 U. S. 416.

If in accordance with the articles of association, and the law governing such organizations, the business of an insurance company is changed from one plan to another, there is no such impairment of the contracts with the original stockholders as give them cause for complaint. Wright v. Minnesota Ins. Co. 193 U. S. 657.

Statutes requiring foreign corporations to do certain things in order to be allowed to do business in a state, will not impair the obligations of contracts executed before such statutes took effect as to business to be transacted after such statutes are in force. Diamond Co. v. United States Co., 187 U. S. 611.

When a municipal corporation enters into a contract authorized by law, neither the state, nor such corporation, can afterwards impair such contract by subsequent legislative acts. Vicksburg Waterworks Co. v. Vicksburg, 185 U. S. 65.

If the charter of a city water company is not exclusive, but is subject to legislative control, there is no impairment of a contract by a subsequent statute authorizing the city to erect its own waterworks. Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport, 193 U. S. 561.

The granting by a municipal corporation of a franchise to a water company to erect water works and to supply the inhabitants with water, does not constitute an implied contract that such corporation will not erect its own water works during the life of such franchise. Helena Water Works Co. v. Helena, 195 U. S. 383.

If under the statute of a state a municipal corporation may grant a franchise for a fixed period to supply the inhabitants with articles of necessity, or such corporations may erect plants to supply such articles, the grant of a franchise for such purpose is not an implied contract that such corporation will not erect a plant to supply the same articles during the life of such franchise. City of Joplin v. Southwest Light Co., 191 U. S. 150.

If a contract made by a city with a water company reserves to the city the right to make rules and regulations in accordance with law, and the law applying to such city is afterwards changed, regulations adopted by such city in accordance with such changed law is not an impairment of the contract with such company. Owensboro v. Owensboro Water Works Co., 191 U. S. 358.

If a statute limits the power of officers to fix water rates at a minimum rate, a subsequent statute authorizing a reduction of such rate to a lower sum is not an impairment of a contract within the meaning of the federal constitution. Stanislaus County v. San Joaquin Co., 192 U. S. 201.

Decisions relating to the impairment of contract rights where statutes or charters are involved, and also the rights of corporations which are consolidations of other corporations or have succeeded to their rights. Pacific Electric Ry. Co. v. Los Angeles, 194 U. S. 112; Peoples Gas Co. v. Chicago, 194 U. S. 1; Cleveland v. Cleveland Ry. Co., 194 U. S. 517.

The statute of Indiana limiting the right to assign money obligations belonging to building and loan associations, does not impair the obligations of contracts. Bowlby v. Kline, 28 App. 659.

Remedies for the enforcement of contracts may be changed by the law making power of a state when a substantial remedy is provided by which parties to contracts can enforce their rights thereunder. Oshkosh Co. v. Oshkosh, 187 U. S. 437.


16. Extent of judicial power


16. Extent of judicial power.

The supreme court of the United States has original jurisdiction of an action by a state against another state in a controversy between such states as to their rights in streams of water which flow through both of such states. Kansas v. Colorado, 185 U. S. 125.

States are not citizens within the meaning of the constitution or acts of congress regulating the jurisdiction of the United States courts. Minnesota v. Northern Securities Co., 194 U. S. 48.

Whenever the constitutionality of an act of congress is involved in an action a federal question is involved, and jurisdiction is conferred upon the United States courts without regard to the residence of the parties. Patton v. Brady, 184 U. S. 608.

United States circuit courts have jurisdiction of actions against election officers to recover damages for refusing to allow a legal voter to vote for a member of congress. Wiley v. Sinkler, 179 U. S. 58; Swafford v. Templeton, 185 U. S. 487.

Courts of the United States have jurisdiction of proceedings between citizens of different states when the purpose is to condemn lands under the right of eminent domain, and the amount in controversy is sufficient to confer jurisdiction on such courts. Madisonville Traction Co. v. St. Bernard Co., 196 U. S. 239.

Congress alone has power to determine the moral obligations of the government towards the Indians, and the courts can only exercise such jurisdiction over the subject as may be conferred by congress. Blackfeather v. United States, 190 U. S. 368.

In what cases the courts of the United States will or will not follow the decisions of the state courts in the construction of the state constitutions or statutes. Mason v. Missouri, 179 U. S. 328; W. W. Cargill Co. v. Minnesota, 180 U. S. 452; Wilkes County v. Coler, 180 U. S. 506; Louisville R. R. Co. v. Kentucky, 183 U. S. 503; Stockard v. Morgan, 185 U. S. 27; Mobile Trans. Co. v. Mobile, 187 U. S. 479; Schaefer v. Werling, 188 U. S. 516; Waggoner v. Flack, 188 U. S. 595; Smith v. Indiana, 191 U. S. 138; Great Southern Co. v. Jones, 193 U. S. 532.

The supreme court of the United States held that the statute of Ohio regulating mechanics' liens did not violate the constitution of Ohio, although the supreme court of such state had held the statute to be unconstitutional. Great Southern Co. v. Jones, 193 U. S. 532.


18. Effect of acts.

19. Privileges of citizens.



20. Admission of states-Territories.

18. Effect of acts.

The provision of the constitution requiring full faith and credit to be given to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of each state in other states, applies

« ПретходнаНастави »