1. Against United States; suit to restrain Secretary of Interior and Land
Commissioner from illegal action; nature of suit.
A suit to restrain the Secretary of the Interior and the Land Commis-
sioner from doing, under color of their office, an illegal act which will
cast a cloud upon the title of complainant is not one against the
United States, nor in this case is it one for recovery of land merely
or an attempted appeal from the decision of the Interior Depart-
ment or a trial of title to land not within the jurisdiction of the
court and wherein the United States is not present or suable.
Lane v. Watts, 525.
2. Right to sue on supersedeas bond; effect on right to sue for damages under
existing law.
The existence of the right to sue on a supersedeas bond does not imply
an exclusion of the right to sue under an existing general and ap-
plicable law for proper and reasonable damages. Missouri Pacific
Ry. Co. v. Larabee, 459.
ANTI-TRUST ACT of July 2, 1890, 26 Stat. 209, c. 647 (see Restraint of
Trade): Eastern States Lumber Asso. v. United States, 600.
ARIZONA ENABLING ACT of June 20, 1910, §§ 32, 33, 36 Stat. 557, c. 310
(see Jurisdiction, A 9): Van Dyke v. Cordova Copper Co., 188.
BANKRUPTCY ACT of July 1, 1898, § 2, 30 Stat. 544, c. 541 (see Bank-
ruptcy, 5): Lazarus v. Prentice, 263. Section 3a (3) (see Bank-
ruptcy, 1, 2, 3): Citizens Banking Co. v. Ravenna National Bank,
360. Section 60d (see Bankruptcy, 4): Lazarus v. Prentice, 263.
Act of June 25, 1910, 36 Stat. 838, c. 412 (see Bankruptcy, 5): Ib.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.-Materialmen's Act of 1899 (see Contracts,
6, 7, 8): Equitable Surety Co. v. McMillan, 448.
EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT of April 22, 1908, 35 Stat. 65, c. 149 (see
Employers' Liability Act): Southern Ry. Co. v. Crockett, 725 (see
Jurisdiction, A 15): Ib. Section 6 (see Judgments and Decrees, 1):
Ex parte Roe, 70.
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT.-Rev. Stat., § 905 (see Constitutional Law,
37): Roller v. Murray, 738.
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS.-Materialmen's Act of Aug. 13, 1894, 28
Stat. 278, c. 280 (see Contracts, 6, 7, 8): Equitable Surety Co. v.
McMillan, 448.
INDIANS.-Act of Feb. 8, 1887, 24 Stat. 388, c. 119 (see Indians, 4):
United States v. First National Bank, 245. Nelson Act of Jan. 14,
1889, 25 Stat. 642, c. 24 (see Indians, 9): Johnson v. Gearlds, 422.
Act of July 1, 1902, § 15, 32 Stat. 641, c. 1362 (see Indians, 2):
Mullen v. Simmons, 192. Act of June 21, 1906, 34 Stat. 325 (see
Indians, 4): United States v. First National Bank, 245. Act of
March 1, 1907, 34 Stat. 1015 (see Indians, 4): Ib.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE.-Act to Regulate (see Constitutional Law,
8): Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. Harris, 412 (see Constitutional
Law, 19): Pipe Line Cases, 548 (see Interstate Commerce Com-
mission, 3): Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. American Tie & Timber
Co., 138 (see Interstate Commerce, 35): Intermountain Rate Cases,
476. Section 3 (see Interstate Commerce, 39; Interstate Com-
merce Commission, 6, 7): Houston & Texas Ry. Co. v. United
States, 342. Section 4 (see Interstate Commerce Commission, 9):
Intermountain Rate Cases, 476. Hepburn Act of June 29, 1906, 34
Stat. 584, c. 3591 (see Interstate Commerce, 17-21): Pipe Line
Cases, 548; Charleston & W. Carolina Ry. Co. v. Thompson, 576.
Act of June 18, 1910, 36 Stat. 539, c. 309 (see Interstate Com-
merce, 33, 34): Intermountain Rate Cases, 476; United States v.
Union Pacific R. R. Co., 495 (see Interstate Commerce Commis-
sion, 9): Intermountain Rate Cases, 476.
JUDICIARY.-Act of March 3, 1891, 26 Stat. 826, c. 517 (see Appeal and
Error, 1): Missouri Pacific Ry. Co. v. Larabee, 459. Commerce
Court Act of Oct. 22, 1913 (see Mandate): Los Angeles Switching
Case, 294. Rev. Stat., § 720 (see Injunction): Hull v. Burr, 712.
Judicial Code, § 24 (see Jurisdiction, A 2): Hull v. Burr, 712 (see
Jurisdiction, C 4): Taylor v. Anderson, 74. Section 57 (see Juris-
diction, C 1, 2, 3): Louisville & Nashville R. R. Co. v. Western
Union Tel. Co., 369. Section 237 (see Jurisdiction, A 17, 18,
20, 26): Roller v. Murray, 738; New Orleans & N. E. R. Co. v. Na-
tional Rice Co., 80; Grannis v. Ordean, 385. Section 238 (see Juris-
diction, A 3, 4, 6): Johnson v. Gearlds, 422; Louisville & Nashville
R. R. Co. v. Western Union Tel. Co., 369; Moore-Mansfield Co. v.
Electrical Co., 619. Section 265 (see Injunction): Hull v. Burr,
NORTHWEST TERRITORY.-Act for Government of (see Navigable
Waters): Illinois v. Economy Power Co., 497.
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS.-Act of July 1, 1902, 32 Stat. 691, c. 1369 (see
Philippine Islands, 5, 6): Ocampo v. United States, 91.
PUBLIC LANDS.-Act of July 27, 1866, 14 Stat. 292, c. 278 (see Public
Lands, 16): Burke v. Southern Pacific R. R. Co., 669. Joint Resolu-
tion of June 28, 1870, 16 Stat. 382 (see Public Lands, 13): Ib. Rev.
Stat., § 2301 (see Public Lands, 2): Gilson v. United States, 380.
Section 2324 (see Public Lands, 6): Burke v. Southern Pacific R. R.
Co., 669.
SAFETY APPLIANCE ACTS of March 2, 1893, 27 Stat. 531, c. 196, and
March 2, 1903, 32 Stat. 943, c. 976 (see Jurisdiction, A 15): South-
ern Ry. Co. v. Crockett, 725; (see Safety Appliance Act): Ib.
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS.
See BANKRUPTCY, 6.
1. Jurisdiction; locality as test of.
As a general principle, the test of admiralty jurisdiction in this country
is locality. Atlantic Transport Co. v. Imbrovek, 52; Atlantic Trans-
port Co. v. Szczesek, 63.
2. Jurisdiction of suit in personam against stevedore by employê.
Admiralty has jurisdiction of a suit in personam by an employé of a
stevedore against the employer to recover for injuries sustained
through the negligence of the latter while engaged in loading a
vessel lying at the dock in navigable waters. Ib.
3. Jurisdiction; scope of; quære as to non-maritime torts.
The precise scope of admiralty jurisdiction is not a matter of obvious
principle or of very accurate history, The Blackheath, 195 U. S. 361,
and quare as to the exact extent to which admiralty jurisdiction
extends where the tort is not maritime although committed on
navigable waters. Ib.
A tort committed on a vessel in connection with a service thereto may
be maritime even if there is no fault on the part of, or injury to,
the ship itself. Atlantic Transport Co. v. Imbrovek, 52.
5. Stevedores; status of.
Stevedores are now as clearly identified with maritime affairs as are
the mariners themselves. Ib.
ALIENATION OF ALLOTMENTS.
ALLOTMENTS.
See INDIANS, 1-4.
AMENDMENTS TO CONSTITUTION.
Fifth. See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 23, 39.
Fourteenth.-See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
ANCILLARY JURISDICTION.
See BANKRUPTCY, 5.
ANTI-TRUST ACT.
See RESTRAINT OF TRADE.
1. Writ of error from this court and supersedeas; Federal and not state acts.
A writ of error from this court to review the judgment of a state court
and the supersedeas authorized by the Judiciary Act are Federal
and not state acts. Missouri Pacific Ry. Co. v. Larabee, 459.
2. Correction of error of District Court in following decision of state court;
mode of.
Where the District Court errs in following later decisions of the state
court rather than those rendered prior to the making of the con-
tract, the error may be corrected by the Circuit Court of Appeals
or by this court under writ of certiorari but not by direct appeal
to this court. Moore-Mansfield Co. v. Electrical Co., 619.
See BANKRUPTCY, 4, 6;
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COM-
JUDGMENTS AND DECREES, 1, 2;
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, 1.
APPEARANCE.
See CORPORATIONS, 11.
1. Act of bankruptcy; effect of failure to vacate or discharge levy of execu-
tion for four months less a day.
The failure by an insolvent judgment debtor and for a period of one
day less than four months after the levy of an execution upon his
real estate, to vacate or discharge such a levy, is not a final disposi-
tion of the property affected by the levy under the provisions of
§ 3a (3) of the Bankruptcy Act of 1898. Citizens Banking Co. v.
Ravenna National Bank, 360.
2. Act of bankruptcy; effect of inaction for four months after levy of ex-
ecution.
An insolvent debtor does not commit an act of bankruptcy rendering
him subject to involuntary adjudication as a bankrupt under the
Bankruptcy Act of 1898 merely by inaction for the period of four
months after levy of an execution upon his real estate. Ib.
3. Act of bankruptcy within meaning of provision of § 3a (3) of Bank-
ruptcy Act.
All of the three elements specified in § 3a (3) of the Bankruptcy Act of
1898 must be present in order to constitute an act of bankruptcy
within the meaning of that provision. Ib.
4. Attorney's fees for services in contemplation of bankruptcy; jurisdiction
to revise.
Under subd. d of § 60 of the Bankruptcy Act, attorney's fees for serv-
|