Volume 201 — United States Reports

Held: without qualification, that its provisions apply to every form of state action,- legislative, political or judicial, regardless of race or color, and to-the official acts of every state "officer, as well, and to the benefit of all persons within the jurisdiction of any State.

Held: that as plaintiff had not complained of the District Court judgment the only matter in dispute was that part of the District Court judgment which was disallowed by the territorial Supreme Court and as that was less than $5,000 . the appeal to this court could not under the act of March 3, 1885, 23 Stat.- 443, be maintained. The facts are stated in the opinion.

Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 (1906), was a major United States Supreme Court case in which the Court established the power of a federal grand jury engaged in an investigation into corporate malfeasance to require the corporation in question to surrender its records.

<p>Hale v. Henkel, ante, p. 43, followed, as to the inquisitorial powers of the Federal grand jury and the extent of privilege and immunity of a witness under the Fifth Amendment.</p>

Held: that: Questions under the Constitution of the United States were involved and this court has jurisdiction of an appeal direct from the Circuit Court.

Held: that: While such an order might leave the witness no alternative except to obey or be punished for contempt it is interlocutory in the principal suit and not a final order,, nor does it constitute a practically independent proceeding amounting to a final judgment, and an appeal will not lie therefrom to this court.

Held: after reviewing the authorities, that the defendant on account of his infirmities, could not be tried. The defendant never had a trial as contemplated by the constitution of the State and of the United States. He was never *127 permitted to plead in person and the failure to communicate to him the details of the trial was a denial of his constitutional rights.

Held: that on the record there was a valid trial by a court having jurisdiction of the subject matter and the person and there was no loss of jurisdiction over either at any time during the trial and the judgment of the state court' could not be reviewed on habeas corpus proceedings in the Federal courts.

Held: that the bill should be dismissed without prejudice, or retained until plaintiff’s rights have been determined in an action for damages under the statute pending in the state court.

Held: that: The decree was interlocutory and not final and in the Federal courts no appeal can as a general rule be taken except from a final decree.

' This was a bill in equity brought in the Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Missouri by the appellant, a Missouri corporation, against the appellee, another Missouri corporation, for the infringement of a trade-mark for wire rope, registered under the act of Cong’-’ess of March 3, 1881, 21 Stat.. 502.

Held: that: The refusal of the company to defend the suits constituted such a breach of the contract that it released the assured from the agreement not to settle the claim without its consent and amounted to a waiver of the condition that it was only liable for judgment rendered against the assured after trial and satisfied.

Held: that: In adverse proceedings each party is practically a plaintiff and must show his title.

Held: under such conditions, to bring in the liquidator also. Although irregularities may exist in appeal bonds, if the cases are sent back for further proceedings no order need be entered here regarding them. The facts are stated in the opinion.

IN EQUITY. Original. The State of Wisconsin seeks by this suit to enjoin the defendant as Secretary of the Interior from interfering; in anywise, with its use, possession’or enjoyment of certain lands, embraced within the present La Pointe or Bad River and the Flambeau Indian Reservations in- that State.

The facts, which involve the right of a receiver of a national bank in Florida to enforce the statutory liability under § 5151, Rev. Stat., against a' married woman, a resident of that State and -owner of record of shares of stock' of the bank, are stated in the opinion.

Held: at which 1,696 shares were represented, and a resolution for voluntary liquidation was adopted by an affirmative vote of 1,639| shares. The Union Bank fulfilled its obligations under the contract, having taken up all the liabilities assumed by it.

<p>APPEALS PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT.</p>

■ This suit was brought in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Michigan to restrain the' respondent, the Auditor General of the State, from enforcing against the appellant the provisions of Act No. 173 of the Michigan laws of 1901, an act to provide for the assessment of the property of railroad and certain other companies, for the levying of taxes thereon by a state board of assessors and for the collection of such taxes.

This was a-suit brought in the Court of First Instance of the province of Iloilo by the appellant as plaintiff against her husband, the defendant, for a judicial separation or divorce a mensa et thoro, and equal separation of the property of the conjugal partnership, for an allowance to the plaintiff for her support during the pendency of the action, and for counsel fees, costs and general relief, upon the ground of the husband’s adultery and the public scandal and disgrace…

Held: that a train consisting of empty freight cars being prepared and taken to a point without the State for the purpose of transporting coal within the State is not engaged in interstate commerce. Norfolk &c. R. R. Co. v. Commonwealth, 93 Virginia, 57.

Held: must appear by the plaintiff’s statement of his own claim, and it cannot be made to appear by the assertion in the plaintiff’s pleading that the defense raises or will raise a Federal question.

Held: that the York Manufacturing Company had no lien on the machinery, but was a general creditor only.

<p>Carbon sticks from twelve to twenty inches in length and which require only a slight and inexpensive process to adapt them for use in electric lighting are manufactured articles similar in material, quality, texture and use to carbons for electric lighting enumerated in paragraph 98 of the Tariff Act of 1897, 30 Stat. 156, 205, and therefore under § 7 of that act are subject to the same duty.</p>

<p>APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF PORTO RICO.</p> <p>The facts are stated in the opinion.</p>

<p>. The provisions of the Civil Service Act of January 16,. 1883, are broad and comprehensive; under it, the Executive or.der of May 16,1896, Rule III, and the order and list of the Secretary of the Interior of June 9 and September 26, 1896,'based thereon, stenographers receiving the specified salaries employed in offices of surveyors-general were brought within the protection of the law and can only be removed — at least by a subordinate officer of .the Department — for just cause and upon written charges on notice with opportunity to defend; and until removed- in accordance with the law and rules thereunder, and so long as he remains ready and willing to discharge the duties of his place, he cannot be deprived of the' compensation legally belonging to one entitled to hold the position notwithstanding the surveyor-general in whose office he is employed attempts to. discharge him and excludes him from the office.</p>

Held: that 1 1. The Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois had jurisdiction to render the judgments against the Chicago Union Traction Company, the North Chicago Street Railroad Company and the West Chicago Street Railroad Company set up in the bills afterwards filed for the appointment of receivers. 2.

Bill in equity to .enjoin, the enforcement of an ordinance of the city of Cleveland, passed January 11, 1904, purporting to grant to the Forest City Railway Company the' right to maintain and operate a street railroad upon streets alleged to be covered by grants to the appellee not yet expired and which, it is contended, constitute contracts, the obligation of which is impaired by the ordinance of January 11, 1904, in violation of the contract clause of the Constitution of…

Held: under the circumstances of this case, to be a tax upon the property of the corporation, and not a tax upon thé shares of stock held by the stockholders.

Held: Without questioning the power of the State of Connecticut to enforce the decree within its own borders, and without intimating any doubt that the State of -New York might give it such degree of efficacy that it might be entitled to in view of-the public policy of the-State, that the Connecticut decree, rendered as it was without being based on personal Service of the process on, and therefore without personal…

<p>ERROft TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP NEW YORK.</p> <p>The facts are stated in the opinion.</p>

<p>If the state constitution and laws in regard to selection of jurors, as construed by the' state court, are consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment, this court can go no further, and will not revise the decision of the state court as to whether the local law has been complied with.</p> <p>There is nothing in the Fourteenth' Amendment which prevents a State from excluding and exempting from jury duty certain classes on the bona -fide ground that it is for the good of the community that their regular work should not be interrupted.</p> <p>Even when persons liable to jury duty under the state laws are excluded it is no ground for challenge to the array, if a sufficient number of unexceptionable persons are present.</p>

<p>In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana.</p>

<p>In error to the Supreme Court of the State of New York.</p>

<p>In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Georgia.</p>

<p>In error to the Supreme Court of- the State of Kansas.</p>

<p>In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas.</p>