Decisions on Petitions for Writs of Certiorari.

202 U.S.

for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied. Mr. William E. Warland and Mr. Henry Schreiter for petitioners. Mr. H. Albertus West for respondents.

No. 749. ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY, CLAIMANT, ETC., PETITIONER, V. THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. May 21, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied. Mr. Herbert Green for petitioner. Mr. Charles S. Haight and Mr. Henry Galbraith Ward for respondent.

No. 750. MARY V. CORTELYOU ET AL., ADMINISTRATORS, ETC., ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. CHARLES ENEU JOHNSON & Co. May 21, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted. Mr. Edmund Wetmore for petitioners. Mr. Francis T. Chambers for respondents.

No. 751. GEORGE DESLIONS ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. LA COMPAGNIE GENERALE TRANSATLANTIQUE, ETC. May 21, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted. Mr. Robert D. Benedict, Mr. A. Gordon Murray and Mr. Joseph H. Choate for petitioners. Mr. Edward K. Jones for respondent.

No. 752. THE DENE STEAMSHIPPING COMPANY, LIMITED, PETITIONER, V. THE TWEEDIE TRADING COMPANY. May 21, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied. Mr.

202 U. S

Decisions on Petitions for Writs of Certiorari.

J. Parker Kirlin and Mr. Charles R. Hickox for petitioner. Mr. Charles S. Haight for respondent.

·

No. 753. IRONCLAD MANUFACTURING COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. ORANGE COUNTY MILK ASSOCIATION; and No. 754. IRONCLAD MANUFACTURING COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. DAIRYMEN'S MANUFACTURING COMPANY. May 21, 1906. Petitions for writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied. Mr. Andrew Foulds, Jr., for petitioner. Mr. Henry D. Williams and Mr. Richard L. Sweezy for respondents.

10.755. MARCUS K. BITTERMAN ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. LOUISVILLE AND NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY. May 21, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted. Mr. Louis Marshall, Mr. H. L. Lazarus and Mr. M. Rosenthal for petitioners. Mr. George Denegre and Mr. Joseph Paxton Blair for respondent.

No. 606. WILLIAM T. WAGGONER ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. THE BANK OF AMERICA ET AL. May 28, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied. Mr. W. O. Davis for petitioners. Mr. Ben M. Terrell for respondents.

No. 761. OZAN LUMBER COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. UNION COUNTY NATIONAL BANK OF LIBERTY, IND. May 28, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit granted. Mr. U. M Rose and Mr. T. C. McRae for petitioner. Mr. Morris M. Cohn for respondent.

Cases Disposed of Without Consideration by the Court. 202 U. S.

CASES DISPOSED OF WITHOUT CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT FROM APRIL 17 TO MAY 28, 1906.

No. 243. MARY JOSEPHINE SCANNELL ET AL., PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. COTE BLANCHE COMPANY ET AL. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana. April 18, 1906. Dismissed with costs, pursuant to the tenth rule. Mr. Branch K. Miller for plaintiffs in error. Mr. Alexander Porter Morse, Mr. M. J. Foster and Mr. Charlton R. Beattie for defendants in error.

No. 231. THE DRAKE & STRATTON COMPANY, LIMITED, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. JOHN MANWARING. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Minnesota. April 18, 1906. Dismissed, per stipulation. Mr. Thomas J. Davis for plaintiff in error. Mr. Roger S. Powell for defendant in error.

No. 257. GEORGETOWN AND TENNALLYTOWN RAILWAY COMPANY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. ELIZABETH B. SMITH, ADMINISTRATRIX, ETC. In error to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. April 23, 1906. Dismissed with costs, on motion of counsel for the plaintiff in error. Mr. J. J. Darlington for plaintiff in error. No appearance for defendant in error.

No. 768. FRANCISCO RIVERA alias PANCHETO, APPELLANT, v. JOSE URRUTIA, WARDEN, ETC. Appeal from the Supreme Court of Porto Rico. May 28, 1906. Docketed and dismissed with costs, on motion of The Solicitor General for the appellee. No one opposing.

INDEX.

ACTION.

1. Nature of suit as one against the United States.

A suit brought by a Chippewa Indian on behalf of himself and other mem-
bers of his tribe against the Secretary of the Interior, to enjoin him
from executing the act of June 27, 1902, and to compel him to account
under the act of January 4, 1889, in regard to sale and disposition of
lands, the title to which is still in the Government, is in effect a suit
against the United States, and in the absence of any waiver on the part
of the Government of immunity from suit, the courts have no juris-
diction of such a suit. (Oregon v. Hitchcock, 202 U. S. 60 followed;
Minnesota v. Hitchcock, 185 U. S. 373 distinguished.) Naganab v.
Hitchcock, 473.

2. Nature as suit against State within meaning of Eleventh Amendment.
A suit brought by a railway company against the members of a state rail-

way commission to restrain them from interfering with complainant's
property and interstate business under a state statute alleged in the
bill to be unconstitutional as imposing burdens on interstate com-
merce is not a suit against the State within the meaning of the Eleventh
Amendment. McNeill v. Southern Railway Co., 543.

See ADMIRALTY;
CONGRESS, B 3;
CONTRACTS, 3;

COURTS;
JURISDICTION;

LOCAL LAW (PORTO RICO)

ACTS OF CONGRESS.

ALIEN CONTRACT LABOR LAW of March 3, 1903, 32 Stat. 1218, §§ 21, 25
(see Aliens): Pearson v. Williams, 281.

BANKRUPTCY, Act of 1898, § 23 (see Jurisdiction, C 4): Bush v. Elliott.

477. Sec. 67 (see Bankruptcy, 1): First National Bank v. Staake, 141. .
COURT OF CLAIMS, Tucker Act (see Admiralty, 1): United States v. Cornell
Steamboat Co., 184.

CRIMINAL LAW, Act of July 20, 1840, 5 Stat. 394, and § 800, Rev. Stat.
(see Criminal Law, 1): Sawyer v. United States, 150.

CUBA, Act of December 17, 1903 (see Customs Duties): Franklin Sugar
Co. v. United States, 580.

CUSTOMS DUTIES, Rev. Stat. § 2899 (see Bonds, 1): United States v. Diecker-
hoff, 302. Sec. 2977 (see Customs Duties, 2): Franklin Sugar Co. v.

VOL. CCI--40

(625)

United States, 580. Secs. 2984, 3689 (see Admiralty, 2): United States
v. Cornell Steamboat Co., 184. Customs Administrative Act of Decem-
ber 15, 1902, 32 Stat. 753, § 20 (see Customs Duties, 2): Franklin
Sugar Co. v. United States, 580.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Acts of February 12, 1901, 31 Stat. 767, 774 and
February 28, 1903, 32 Stat. 909 (see Congress, B 3): Millard v. Roberts,
429.

FEES OF SOLICITORS, Rev. Stat. § 824 (see Costs, 2): Missouri v. Illinois,
598.

INDIANS, Cherokee Act of July 1, 1902, 32 Stat. 726, as construed by act
of March 3, 1903, 32 Stat. 996 (see Indians): United States v. Cherokee
Nation, 101.

INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT (see Carriers): Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v.
Mugg, 242.

JUDICIARY, Rev. Stat. § 639, sub-sec. 1, and acts of March 3, 1875, 18 Stat.
470; March 3, 1887, 24 Stat. 556 and August 13, 1888, 25 Stat. 433
(see Jurisdiction, C 5): O'Conor v. Texas, 501.
Jurisdiction, A 3): Hulbert v. Chicago, 275.
Courts, 6): James v. United States, 401. Appropriation Act of 1895
(see Courts, 8): Ib.

Rev. Stat. § 709 (see
Rev. Stat. § 714 (see

NATIONAL BANKS, Rev. Stat. § 5139 (see National Banks, 3): McDonald
v. Dewey, 510. National Bank Acts (see Jurisdiction, A 5): Merchants'
Nat. Bank v. Wehrmann, 295.

OFFICERS OF GOVERNMENT, Rev. Stat. § 1782 (see Congress, B 1; Criminal
Law, 6, 7, 8, 9; Jurisdiction, E): Burton v. United States, 344.

PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, act of July 1, 1902, 32 Stat. 691 (see Philippine Islands):
Lincoln v. United States, 484.

PORTO RICO, Foraker Act of April 12, 1900, § 34 (see Local Law): Perez
v. Fernandez, 80.

Public Lands, Acts of June 27, 1902, and January 4, 1889 (see Action, 1):
Naganab v. Hitchcock, 473.

RECOVERIES ON FORFEITURES, Rev. Stat. § 961 (see Bonds, 2): United
States v. Dieckerhoff, 302.

SWAMP LANDS, Acts of September 28, 1850, 9 Stat. 519, and March 12,
1860, 12 Stat. 3 (see Jurisdiction, A 8): Oregon v. Hitchcock, 60.
TARIFF ACT of July 24, 1897 (see Customs Duties, 1): United States v.
American Sugar Co., 563.

See STATUTES, A 1.

ADMINISTRATION.

See TESTAMENTARY LAW, 1.

ADMIRALTY.

1. Salvage; jurisdiction of Court of Claims of claim against Government.
While a claim for salvage of Government property based on services ren-
dered without request of any officer of the Government does not arise
upon any contract, express or implied, it is properly one for unliquidated
damages in a case not sounding in tort, in respect to which the claimant