« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
held not denied equal protection of the laws A domestic corporation whose office and works because section 11 of that act as amended in are outside of the state held not deprived of Act Ark. April 2, 1895, p. 88, § 1, provides for liberty and property without due process of constructive service by publication on nonresi- law by Acts w. Va. 1905, c. 39, relating to dent owners as to unpaid levee taxes for four appointment of State Auditor to accept sery-weeks only.-Ballard v. Hunter, 261.
ice of process, and exacting an annual fee.*Arbitrary, discrimination against sheep in- Sta
. Mary's Franco-American Petroleum Co. v. dustry prohibited by Const. U. S. Amend. 14,
of West held not made by Rev. St. Idaho, 88 1210, 1211, The right to take possession of the property authorizing damages for permitting sheep. to of a street railway company remaining in graze on the public domain within two miles streets at expiration of franchise cannot, conof a dwelling house.-Bacon v. Walker, 289;sistently with due process of law, be conferred Bown v. Walling, 292.
by municipal ordinance on another street railLessee in possession of race track held not way company.-Cleveland Electric Ry. Co. v. denied equal protection of the laws by a stat- City of Cleveland, 202; City of Cleveland v ute compelling it to recognize its own tickets Cleveland Electric Ry. Co., Id. in the hands of persons not drunken or bois- Due process of law held denied by state court terous, or of improper character.-Western in according full credit to a judgment in perTurf Ass'n v. Greenberg, 384.
sonam by a court of a sister state against a *Selection of mineowners as a class on which nonresident not personally served and who dia to impose a responsibility for defaults of cer- not appear.-Old Wayne Mut. Life Ass'n v. Mctain employés required by Mining Act Ill. April Donough, 236. 18, 1899 (Laws 1899, p. 300), to be selected *An owner of sheep held not deprived of from persons holding licenses, held not repug- property without due process of law by Rev. nant to Const. U. S. Amend. 14, as denying St. Idaho, 88 1210, 1211, authorizing damages equal protection of laws.-Wilmington Star for permitting his sheep' to graze within two Min. Co. v. Fulton, 412.
miles of a dwelling house.--Bacon v. Walker, Exception in favor of newspapers, etc., on 289; Bown v. Walling, 292. which shall be printed representations of the national flag, made by Act Neb. April 8, 1903, who has had every opportunity to defend, held
A public officer convicted of embezzlement, p. 644, c. 139, does not make the statute re- not denied due process of law because sentenpugnant to Const. U. S. Amend. 14, as deny-ced under Cr. Code Neb. & 124, which provides ing equal protection of the laws.-Halter v. for fine in double the amount of the embezzleState of Nebraska, 419.
ment.-Coffey v. Harlan County, 305. Order of North Carolina Corporation Commission, requiring railroad to restore connec-ippine Islands on appeal in a criminal case to
Refusal of the Supreme Court of the Philtion at a certain point with a train of another consider objection railway company, held not so unreasonable as held not a conviction without due process of
consider objection to sufficiency of complaint to amount to a denial of equal protection of law, in violation of the Bill of Rights, set law.-Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. North Caro-forth in Act July 1, 1902, c. 1369, 32 Stat. lina Corp. Commission, 585.
691, 692 [U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1905, p. 391). § 7. Due process of law.
-Serra v. Mortiga, 343. Improvement of a railroad company is a pub- Property rights of lessee in possession of lic use for which the lessee of the road and the race track held not taken away without due owner of three-fourths of its stock may pro- process of law by statute compelling it to recceed, under Gen. St. Conn. $8 3694, 3695, to con- ognize its awn tickets of admission in the hands demn outstanding shares without violating due of persons not drunken or boisterous or of bad process of law clause of the federal Constitu- character.—Western Turf Ass'n v. Greenberg, tion, amendment 14.-Offield v. New York, N. H. 384. & H. R. Co., 72.
The liberty guarantied by Const. U. S. Due process of law held not denied a person Amend. 14, is the liberty of natural and not injured in his employment about a railroad, artificial persons.-Western
persons.-Western Turf Ass'n by Act Pa. April 4, 1868, restricting his rights Greenberg, 384. to those of an employé.-Martin v. Pittsburg
Imposition on mineowners by Mining Act & L. E. R. Co., 100.
Ill. April 18, 1899 (Laws 1899, p. 300), of reCarriers may be forbidden by state railroad sponsibility of defaults of mine managers and commission to make their local freight rates mine examiners, held not to deprive them of for phosphates more than one cent per ton per their property without due process of law, in mile without denying due process of law.-Sea- violation of Const. U. S. Amend. 14.-Wilboard Air Line Ry. v. State of Florida, 109.
mington Star Min. Co. v. Fulton, 412. State regulation of local freight rates from
Act April 8, 1903, p. 644, c. 139, making it the Florida West Shore Railway over the Sea- a misdemeanor to use national flag for adver-board Air Line Railway held not to deprive the tising purposes, held not to affect right of perlatter road of its property, without due process sonal liberty guarantied by. Const. U. S. of law.-Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. State of Amend. 14.-Halter v. State of Nebraska, 419. Florida, 109.
Act Neb. April 8, 1903, p. 644, c. 139, makForeign life insurance company doing business ing it a misdemeanor to use 'flags for adin Missouri held not deprived of liberty or prop- vertising, purposes, held not to invade property without due process of law, by Rev. St. Mo. erty rights without due process of law, in § 7890, cutting off any defense by a life insur: violation of Const. U. S. Amend. 14.-Halter ance company based on fraudulent statements,
v. State of Nebraska, 419. except as to matters contributing to the death Decision of state court involving ownership of of insured. - Northwestern Nat. Life Ins. Co. property with all parties in interest before it v. Riggs, 126.
held, not, as to the successful party, depriva-*Point annotated. See syllabus.
tion of property without due process of law.-- *Due process of law does not require that nonTracy v. Ginzberg, 461.
resident owners of land within levee district Order of North Carolina Corporation Commis- shall have personal notice of the suit to colsion, requiring railroad to restore connection at lect levee taxes.-Ballard v. Hunter, 261. a certain point with a train of another railway Error in judgment as to costs in suits to encompany, held not so unreasonable as to amount force payment of levee taxes held not to deto a denial of due process of law.-Atlantic prive owners of their property without due Coast Line R. Co. y. North Carolina Corp. process of law.–Ballard v. Hunter, 261. Commission, 585.
*Decree for sale of lands for unpaid levee Abutting owner held not deprived of his prop- taxes based on constructive service held not to erty without due process of law by erection by deny owners due process of law.-Ballard v. a city, under a statute making no provision for Hunter, 261. compensation to abutting owners, of an elevated iron viaduct for general public use.-Sauer of law in violation of Const. U. S. Amend. 14,
*Property is not taken without due process v. City of New York, 686.
by imposing transfer tax under amendment of Due process of law held not denied stock- the general tax laws (Laws N. Y. 1897, p. 150, holder in domestic corporation by Gen. Laws c. 284) on the exercise by will of power conMinn. 1899, p. 315, c. 272, relating to liability ferred by deed.-Chanler v. Kelsey, 550. of stockholders for debts of corporation.-Bern
State of Indiana cannot, with due process heimer v. Converse, 755; Drey v. Same, Id.
of law, tax debts evidenced by notes given and § 8. - Property and rights therein payable in Ohio by residents of that state to protected.
a resident of New York for loans made in No property rights are taken away without Ohio on lands there situated.-Buck v. Beach, due process of law by state statute incorporat- | 712. ing a local benevolent society with the same
§ 10. Customs and internal revenue name as that of a voluntary association whose
duties, charter has been withdrawn by the foreign corporation that issued it.-National Council,
Ratification by Congress by Act June 30, Junior Order of American Mechanics of United 1906, c. 3912, 34 Stat. 636, of illegal collection States, v. State Council of Virginia, Junior Or: levied under President's order between dates der op tnited American Mechanics of State of of ratification of treaty of peace with Spain Virginia, 46.
and Act July 1, 1902, c. 1369, 32 Stat. 691, The police board of a city by issuing a liquor does not deprive importers of their property license to nominee of a trustee in bankruptcy without due process of law, in violation of of the original licensee held not to deprive one Const. U. S. Amend. 5.-United States v. Heinsto whom the original license had been assigned zen, 742. as security of property without due process of law.-Tracy v. Ginzberg, 461.
CONTAGIOUS DISEASES. § 9. - Taxation of property.
Failure to require notice to be given of special of aliens as affecting right to come into counassessment for back taxes on omitted property, under Ky. St. § 3179, held not to deprive tax
try, see "Aliens," $ 1. payer of property without due process of law.Security Trust & Safety Vault Co. v. City of
CONTEMPT. Lexington, 87.
Universal legatees under the will of a person Appellate jurisdiction of Circuit Court of Apwho died before enactment of the Louisiana peals in contempt proceedings, see "Courts," inheritance tax law of June 28, 1904, held not 8 16. deprived of property without due process of Appellate jurisdiction of supreme court in conlaw by subjecting their share to the tax im- tempt proceedings, see "Courts," $ 14. posed by that statute.-Cahen v. Brewster, 174. § 1. Acts or conduct constituting con
Adoption of the face value of shares as the
tempt of court. basis of the tax on transfers imposed by Laws *Participation in the murder of prisoner unX. Y. 1905, c. 241, does not deprive the owners der sentence of death in a state court to of property without due process of law.-People prevent delay attendant on appeal to the federal of State of New York v. Reardon, 188.
Supreme Court from a denial of a writ of Tax on transfer of corporate shares, imposed Court when committed after the appeal had
habeas corpus, held a contempt of the Supreme by Laws N. Y. 1905, c. 241, held not taking been allowed and the court had ordered all pro. property without due process of law, in viola- ceedings stayed.-- United States v. Shipp, 165. tion of Const. U. S. Amend. 14.–People of State of New York v. Reardon, 188.
*Lack of jurisdiction in the circuit court of
petition for habeas corpus or in the Supreme *Decree in suit to enforce payment of levee Court of appeal from the order denying the taxes held not to deprive owners of their prop- writ does not enable persons to disregard, witherty without due process of law because of mis- out liability for contempt, order of Supreme takes in describing the ownership of the land.- Court that all proceedings against appellant Ballard v. Hunter, 261.
be stayed.—United States v. Shipp, 165. *Four weeks' notice by publication to non-8 2. Power to punish and proceedings resident owners of land within levee district
therefor. created by Act Ark. Feb. 15, 1893, p. 31, of *Sworn answers denying any participation pendency of suit to enforce levee taxes under the alleged murder of a prisoner under sensection 11 of that act, as amended in Act Ark. tence of death in a state court, pending apApril 2, 1895, p. 88. § 1, held due process of peal to the federal Supreme Court, held inlaw.-Ballard v. Hunter, 261.
sufficient to purge affiants of a charge of con* Point annotated. See syllabus.
tempt by taking part in such murder.-United Condemnation of shares of stock owned by States v. Shipp, 165.
minority stockholders as denial of due process
of law, see "Constitutional Law," $ 7. CONTRACTS.
Conspiracy between to monopolize trade, see
"Monopolies," § 1. Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court on is-Denial of equal protection of laws to foreign
corporations, see “Constitutional Law," § 6. sue of impairing obligation of, see “Courts," Denial of privileges and immunities to foreign
$ 14. Decisions of courts impairing obligation of, see Denial to of due process of law, see “Constitu
corporations, see "Constitutional Law," $ 5. "Courts," $ 2.
tional Law," $ 7. Impairing obligation as violation of constitu- Denial to of 'equal protection of law, see "Contional right, see "Constitutional Law," $ 4.
stitutional Law," $ 6. Impairing obligation of as ground of jurisdic- Dismissal of writ of error in supreme court in tion of federal court, see "Courts," $ 4.
action involving validity of laws relating to Liquidated damages or penalties, see “Dam- condemnation of shares of stock belonging
ages," 1. Parol 'or extrinsic evidence, see "Evidence," § 2. Jurisdiction of federal courts in action by or
to minority stockholders, see "Courts," $ 13. Contracts of particular classes of persons.
against stockholders as dependent on citizenSee "Carriers.” § 2;. “Master and Servant"; Laws relating to condemnation of stock of rail
ship, see "Courts," $ 5. "Municipal Corporations," § 1; "Warehouse
road companies owned by minority stockholdmen.”
ers as impairing obligation of contract, see Contracts relating to particular subjects.
"Constitutional Law," $ 4. Limitation of liability of carrier, see "Carriers,” Laws relating to enforcement of stockholders' § 2.
liability as impairing obligation of contract,
see "Constitutional Law," $ 4. Patented articles, see “Patents,” § 2.
Laws relating to stockholders' liability as deny. Particular classes of express contracts. ing due process of law, see "Constitutional See "Guaranty" ; "Insurance"; "Liens";
Law," $ 7. "Sales.”
License tax against corporation as claim in Agency, see "Principal and Agent."
bankruptcy, see "Bankruptcy,” $ 5. Employment, see "Master and Servant."
Privileges and immunities of as citizens, see Leases, see "Landlord and Tenant."
"Constitutional Law," $ 5.
Reasonableness of regulations imposed by corParticular modes of discharging contracts. poration commission against carriers as conSee “Release.”
ferring jurisdiction on supreme court, see
"Courts," $ 14. § 1. Performance or breach.
Receivers of in general, see “Receivers," $ 1. * Architect's certificate of completion accord- Regulations of foreign corporations impairing ing to contract plans and specifications held not obligation of contract, see "Constitutional conclusive.—Mercantile Trust Co. v. Hensey, Law," $ 4. 535.
State laws as rules of decisions in federal courts
as to powers of corporations, see "Courts, CONTRIBUTION.
Taxation of corporations and corporate propBetween vessels for damages from collision, Taxation of transfers of corporate shares, see
erty, see "Taxation," $ 5. see "Collision," $ 1. Former judgment as bar to action to enforce, Tax on transfers of corporate shares as inter
“Taxation," $ 2. see "Judgment,” $ 5. Jurisdiction of admiralty to enforce contribu- fering with interstate commerce, see “Comtion between vessels, see "Admiralty," § 1. merce,” $ 3.
Transfer tax on shares of stock as denial of
due process of law, see "Constitutional Law," CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE. § 10.
Particular classes of corporations. Of servant, see "Master and Servant," 8 2. See "Colleges and Universities"; "Municipal
Corporations"; "Street Railroads."
Banks, see "Banks and Banking."
Insurance companies, see "Insurance." Conveyances of particular species of, or estates $ 1. Members and stockholders. or interests in, property.
Domestic corporation formed for the purchase See "Mines and Minerals," $ 2.
of capital stock and assets of another corpora
tion and to sell implements and machinery held Particular classes of conveyances.
organized for a purpose other than that of carSee “Chattel Mortgages"; "Deeds”;
; “Deeds”; “Mort- rying on a manufacturing business, and not gages."
within exception as to liability of stockholders
made by Const. Minn. art. 10, $ 3.-Bernheimer CORPORATIONS.
v. Converse, 755; Drey v. Same, Id.
Cause of action to enforce liability of stockAction by state to enjoin acts of corporation holder under Minnesota Constitution and laws
causing injury in state hy reason of operations does not accrue so as to start running of the outside of state, see "States," $ 2.
six-year limitation, under Code Civ. Proc. N. Y. Adoption by federal court of practice of state $ 382, until receiver of corporation can sue on
court relative to appearance by railroad cor- the assessment.—Bernheimer v. Converse, 755 ; porations, see “Courts," $ 7.
Drey v. Same, Id. *Point annotated. See syllabus.
Limitation of right to sue stockholder for debt | Jurisdiction of particular actions or proceedings, of corporation to two years after he has ceased To enforce liability of officers of national bank, to be a stockholder, made by Laws N. Y. 1892, see “Banks and Banking," § 1. p. 1841, c. 688, $ 55, held not applicable to suit To enforce maritime lien, see "Maritime Liens,” against stockholder' in foreign corporation.Bernheimer v. Converse, 755; Drey v. Same, Id.
Special jurisdictions and particular classes of § 2. Foreign corporations.
courts. The implied assent of a foreign corporation Courts martial, see "Army and Navy.” transacting business in Pennsylvania without Indian courts, 'see "Indians.” complying with Act Pa. June 20, 1883, that Jurisdiction in criminal prosecutions, see "Crim
. service of process may be made upon the state
inal Law," $ 2. insurance commissioner, does not extend to a suit on a contract of insurance executed in an- § 1. Establishment, organization, and other state.--Old Wayne Mut. Life Ass'n v.
procedure in general. McDonough, 236.
Decisions of the state courts respecting the *Service of process on agent of foreign corpo- title acquired by individual Indians, under the ration doing business in the state must be on treaty of September 24, 1819, with the Chippean agent representing the corporation as to
wa Nations, as to lands reserved for their use, such business.-Peterson v. Chicago, R. I. & P. will not be disturbed by the Supreme Court of R. Co., 513.
the United States where they have become a
rule of property.–Francis v. Francis, 129. Ownership by foreign railway company of controlling interest in stock of a domestic rail- & 2. Courts of general original jurisdicway company held not to make foreign corpora
tion. tion liable to service of process within the state. Contract rights held not unconstitutionally -Peterson v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co., 513. impaired by decision of state court denying Soliciting through its district freight agent in city of an elevated iron viaduct in a street for
compensation to abutting owner for erection by Philadelphia freight and passenger traffic for railway company incorporated in lowa and hay general public use.-Sauer v. City of New York,
686. ing its eastern terminal at Chicago is not doing business in Pennsylvania, so that process can $ 3. United States courts-Jurisdiction be served on the corporation there.-Green v.
and powers in general. Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co., 595.
A suit to cancel certain deeds and leases of
railway property in the Eastern district of COSTS.
Illinois can be brought in the federal Circuit
Court of that district against defendants, inIn action to construe will, see "Wills," $ 1.
habitants of the Northern district, as a suit to remove a cloud on title within Act March
3, 1905, c. 1427, § 8, 33 Stat. 992, 995 (U. S. COUNTIES.
Comp. St. Supp. 1905, p. 93).-Citizens Sav.
ings & Trust Co. v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 425. § 1. Fiscal management, public debt, *The entire judicial power of the nation securities, and taxation.
granted to federal courts by Const. U. S. art. A presumption of a compliance with conditions 3, § 1, held not limited by section 2.-State of precedent to the issuance of county railroad aid Kansas v. State of Colorado, 655. bonds arises from the fact of subscription and issuance by the officer charged with such duty. vested by Const. U. S. art. 3, § 1, in federal
*The judicial power of the United States -Quinlan v. Green County, 505.
courts, defined.-State of Kansas v. State of
§ 4. Jurisdiction dependent on na
ture of subject matter. See "United States Commissioners."
*Congress was not empowered by Const.
U. S. Amend. 13, to make it an offense COURT OF CLAIMS.
against the United States, cognizable in federal
courts, for private individuals to compel negro See "Courts," $ 17.
citizens to desist from performing their con
tracts of employment.-Hodges v. United COURTS.
*Federal circuit courts have no jurisdiction Clerks, see "Clerks of Courts."
in mandamus to compel return of franchise Commissioners, see "United States Commis- tax collected under the, authority of a state sioners.”
statute, though taxation is alleged to be repugContempt of court, see "Contempt."
nant to the commerce clause of the federal ConCourts martial, see “Army and Navy."
stitution.--Covington & C. Bridge Co. v. Hager, Failure to designate building in which court 24.
is to be held as ground for habeas corpus to obtain release of person convicted of of insolvent national bank to whom Comptroller
Action for rent against agent for shareholders crime, see “Habeas Corpus," § 1. Mandamus to inferior courts, see "Mandamus," of Currency has released the estate is one to $ 1.
wind up the affairs of the bank and within the Nature and form of remedy for review of pro-Trust Co. v. Weeks, 69.
jurisdiction of the federal court.-International ceedings in Supreme Court, see "Appeal and Error," $ 1.
A controversy arising under the federal ConRemoval of action from state court to United stitution, of which a federal court has original
States court, see "Removal of Causes.” jurisdiction without regard to citizenship, held Review of decisions, see "Appeal and Error." presented by a bill asserting that obligation of
*Point annotated. See syllabus.
contract to supply city with water is impaired eral Circuit Court of an action in which such by subsequent ordinance under which the munic- corporation pleaded in answer a demand in reipality is proposing to construct its own water-coupment, where under local practice, as defined works system.-Mercantile Trust & Deposit Co. in Rev. St. Ill. c. 110, $$ 30, 31, defendant v. City of Columbus, 83.
might have a verdict and judgment in its favor. State courts held not to have jurisdiction to - Merchants' Heat & Light Co. v. James B. determine title or right of possession under In- | Clow & Sons, 285. dian allotment held in trust by the United The local practice under which one indicted States under Act Aug. 15, 1894, c. 290, 28 Stat. is not entitled to a preliminary examination 286, delegating such power to the federal Cir- before trial on the merits, held not to apply to cuit Court, and providing that the judgment proceedings under Rev. St. U. S. § 1014 [U. in any such controversy shall be certified by S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 716], for removal to the court to the Secretary of the Interior, and another federal district for the trial of a perby Act Feb. 6, 1901, c. 217, 31 Stat. 760, pro- son charged with an offense against the viding that in such suits the parties shall be United States.-Tinsley v. Treat, 430; Kessler the claimant as plaintiff and the United States v. Same, 434; Morgan v. Same, id. ; Carpenas defendant.-McKay v. Ralyton, 346. ter v. Same, Id.; Whittle v. Same, Id.; Wil
cox v. Same, Id.; Braden v. Same, Id.; Roy§ 5. Jurisdiction dependent on cit- ster v. Same, Id.; Smith_v. Same, id.; Bur
izenship, residence, or character roughs v. Same, Id.; McDowell v. Same, Id.
of parties. Alienage of plaintiff held sufficiently alleged $ 8. - State laws as rules of decision. to sustain jurisdiction of the federal Circuit
*Decision of the highest court of the state as Court.-C. A. Nichols Lumber Co. v. Franson, to whether the exemption from certain taxa102.
tion has been repealed held binding on the fed*The jurisdiction of the Circuit Court of the eral courts.-Wicomico County Com’rs v. Ban
croft, 21. United States for the Northern District of Illinois in a suit brought by a California stock
*The construction given by the highest court holder of an Illinois gas company on refusal of a state of a conveyance of mining property of company to sue held not fraudulently in- will be followed by the federal Supreme Court voked.- City of Chicago v. Mills, 286.
on writ of error to state court.-East Cent.
Eureka Min, Co. v. Central Eureka Min. Co., The United States is the real plaintiff so as 258. to sustain the original jurisdiction of a federal court under judiciary acts of March 3, 1887,
*The decision of the highest court of a state C. 373, 24 Stat. 552, and Aug. 13, 1888, c. 866, that a state statute is repugnant to the Con25 Stat. 433 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 508), stitution of that state held conclusive on the without regard to the amount in dispute in a Supreme Court of the United States.-State of suit under Act Aug. 13, 1894, c. 282, § 5, 28 Montana v. Rice, 281. Stat. 279 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 2316), for *Rulings of highest court of state on questhe use and benefit of a materialman on the tions as to powers of corporations under the bond of a contractor for a public work.–United laws of that state held conclusive on federal States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United Supreme Court.--Stone v. Southern Illinois & States, 381.
Missouri Bridge Co., 615. § 6. Jurisdiction dependent
*Decisions of highest court of state that an
on amount or value in controversy.
owner of land abutting on street has no easeSuit to recover land valued at $5,000, and ment of light, air, and access as against the $2,000 damages for detention, cannot be dis- public use of the street, or any structure erectmissed under Act March 3, 1875, c. 137, $ 5,ed thereon for public use, held conclusive on 18 Stat. 470 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. '511], Supreme Court of the United States on writ of as not involving a controversy within'the juris- error.–Sauer v. City of New York, 686. diction of the court, because, after hearing the $ 9. Original jurisdiction of Suevidence, the court is satisfied that the land
preme Court and procedure in extaken by each defendant was of less value than
ercise thereof. $2,000.-Smithers v. Smith, 297.
Original jurisdiction of Supreme Court of * Plaintiff's allegations of value govern in de- the United States held not to extend to a bill termining the jurisdiction of a federal court. filed by the Attorney General of Kansas as
, unless fraudulently made.-Smithers v. Smith: trustee of a railway of certain lands in the In
dian Territory granted to the state for the bene
fit of the railway, where the name of the state Jurisdictional amount involved in suit by Cot- is used only to prosecute the claim of the comton Exchange to enjoin the defendant from re- pany.-State of Kansas v. United States, 388. ceiving the quotations of sale on such exchange
Original jurisdiction of Supreme Court of held to be measured by the value to the ex- | United States held to extend to controversy change of the right to control the same.- between Kansas and Colorado and the United Hunt v. New York Cotton Exch., 529.
States as to whether Kansas has a right to Testimony in suit by Cotton Exchange to en continuous flow of the waters of the Arkansas join using quotations of sales on such exchange river.-State of Kansas v. State of Colorado, that the value of the right to control quotations
655. is much greater than $2,000 held not impaired Question of liability of West Virginia for its by evidence that the value varies with the proportion of the debt of Virginia held not subvolume of business.-Hunt v. New York Cottonmitted to the West Virginia Legislature so as Exch., 529.
to defeat original jurisdiction of the United
States by provision of Const. W. Va. art. 8, § $ 7. - Procedure, and adoption of 8 [Code 1906, p. lxxi], when read together with practice of state courts.
Virginia ordinance of August 20, 1861.-ComLack of valid service of process on foreign monwealth of Virginia v. State of West Virgincorporation does not defeat jurisdiction of fed- | ia, 732.
*Point annotated. See syllabus.