(d) As the removal was had on the application of the non-resident defend-
ant, the costs of this court and of the Circuit Court must be paid by
that party. Cochran v. Montgomery County, 260.
2. Case involving construction of Federal statutes.
The interest which arises in an entryman by his entry, who can fulfil the
conditions of settlement and proof in case of his death, and to whom
the title passes depend upon the laws of the United States; and a suit
brought by an heir, claiming under the law of a State, against the
grantee of the widow who perfected title and obtained the patent
involves the construction of sections 2291 and 2292, Rev. Stat., and
other statutes relating to homesteads, and can be removed on that
ground from the state court to the Circuit Court of the United States.
McCune v. Essig, 382.
3. Removal for trial from judicial district in State to District of Columbia.
Section 1014, Rev. Stat., authorizes a removal from a judicial district in
a State to the District of Columbia (Benson v. Henkel, 198 U. S. 1).
Hyde v. Shine, 62.
4. Procedure for removal for trial.
The requirement in § 1014, Rev. Stat., that proceedings for removal shall
be agreeable to the usual state procedure, applies to the proceedings
for arrest and examination of the accused before the commissioner,
but not to subsequent independent proceedings before the Circuit
Court on habeas corpus. Ib.
REPRIEVES AND PARDONS.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 3, 11.
RES JUDICATA.
See PARTITION, 3.
See PATENT FOR INVENTION.
SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
See STATES, 2.
SECOND JEOPARDY.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 14.
SHIPPING:
See MARITIME LAW.
See STREETS AND SIDEWALKS.
1. Absence of pecuniary damages affecting power of State to punish violations
of statute enacted as part of public policy.
The States and the United States have power to punish violations of a stat-
ute enacted as a part of the public policy even though they may not
have suffered any pecuniary damage from such violations. Hyde v.
Shine, 62.
2. Contract arising in favor of school district created by legislature in respect
of property thereof-Legislative power over subordinate municipalities.
Where the legislature of the State has the power to create and alter school
districts and divide and apportion the property thereof, no contract
arises in favor of any district created by an act, the obligation whereof
is later impaired by a subsequent act altering the districts and trans-
ferring property, nor does such later act amount to the taking of the
property of the district taken without due process of law. There are
many ways in which the legislature has absolute power to make and
change subordinate municipalities (Laramie County v. Albany County,
92 U. S. 307). Kies v. Lowr 1, 233.
3. Police power to authorize dams across interior streams previously navigable,
for promotion of health.
In the absence of legislation by Congress, a State has full power to im-
prove its lands and promote the general health by authorizing dams
across interior streams, although previously navigable to the sea. Noth-
ing in the existing constitution of South Carolina interferes with the
common law powers of the State over its navigable waters. Manigault
Springs, 473.
4. Police powers; right of exercise where existing contracts may be affected.
The interdiction of statutes impairing the obligation of contracts does not
prevent a State from properly exercising its police powers for the public
good notwithstanding contracts previously entered into between indi-
viduals may be affected. Ib.
5. Police power; discretion as to exercise.
While the police power of a State is subject to limitations there is a wide
discretion as to its exercise in the legislature, with whose determination
as to what is and what is not necessary the courts ordinarily will not
interfere. ib.
6. Police power; subserviency of private interests to exercise of.
Except where property is taken for which compensation must be made,
private interests are subservient to the exercise of the police power and
must give way to general schemes for the public health. Ib.
7. Public power; reclamation of swamp lands deleterious to public health.
Courts may take judicial notice that the public health is greatly affected
by the existence of swamp lands and the reclamation of such lands is a
proper exercise of the police powers. Ib.
8. Police power in suppression of gambling; constitutionality of law making
judgment a lien against property in which gambling is conducted.
The suppression of gambling is within the police power of the State, and it
may make a judgment against those winning the money a lien upon
property owned by another and in which the gambling is conducted
with the knowledge and consent of the owner, and such a statute does
not deprive the owner of his property without due process of law.
Such a statute does not deprive the owner of the property upon which
the judgment is made a lien of his property without due process of law
because it does not provide for trial by jury in the action to enforce
the lien. The State can give the whole or any part of the amount
recoverable under such a statute to the informer. Marvin v. Trout, 212.
9. Police power to regulate business carried on within State, to protect public
health and welfare.
A State has the right, in the exercise of the police power, and with a view
to protect the public health and welfare, to make reasonable regula-
tions in regard to such occupations as may, if unrestrained, become
unsafe or dangerous, and the conferring of discretionary power upon
administrative boards to grant or withhold permission to carry on such
a trade or business is not violative of the Fourteenth Amendment.
There is no presumption that a power granted to an administrative
board will be arbitrarily or improperly exercised, and this court will
not interfere with the exercise of such a power where the record does
not disclose any ground on which the board acted. It is primarily for
the State to select the businesses to be regulated and if those selected
are proper subjects for regulation, those engaged therein are not denied
the equal protection of the laws because other businesses are not sub-
jected to similar regulations, provided all engaged in the same busi-
ness are treated alike. Lieberman v. Van De Carr, 552.
10. Police power to exact license fee for sale of intoxicating liquors on vessel
engaged in interstate commerce.
Since the passage of the Wilson Act of August 8, 1890, 26 Stat. 313, there
is a distinction between the right to sell intoxicating liquors on vessels
engaged in interstate commerce and other businesses conducted on
such vessels. Under the provisions of that act a State may, in the
exercise of its police powers, exact a license fee as a condition of the
right to sell intoxicating liquors over the bar on board of a steamboat
while within the boundaries of the State, notwithstanding such boat
is navigating the Mississippi River and is engaged in interstate com-
Such a license fee is not a tax on the boat, crew, passengers
or liquor sold, nor a fee for navigating the river, the imposition of which
would be an interference with the commerce clause of the Constitution,
nor does it in any way violate the freedom of the navigation of the
Mississippi River as guaranteed by treaties and statutes. The fact that
the boat is personal property owned by a corporation of another State
does not make it a part of the territory of that State, and exempt
those thereon from the police regulations of another State in regard
to the sale of intoxicating liquor while within the boundaries of the
latter State. Foppiano v. Speed, 501.
11. Executive power to grant reprieves.
The Governor of Vermont has ample power to grant reprieves to persons
sentenced to death for murder.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 4,
8, 12, 15, 16;
INTERNAL REVENUE, 1, 2;
JURISDICTION, C 3;
Rogers v. Peck, 425.
LOCAL LAW;
NATIONAL BANKS, 1, 2;
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, 2;
PUBLIC LANDS, 6;
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
See JURISDICTION, A 5;
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS.
STATUTES.
A. CONSTRUCTION OF.
1. Effect on validity of special act of disregard in its enactment of requirements
of general law.
A general law enacted by a legislature may be repealed, amended or dis-
regarded by a subsequent legislature, and a special act is not necessarily
invalid because the legislature dispensed with certain formalities re-
quired by a general law in regard to the passage of such act. Mani-
gault v. Springs, 473.
2. Repeal by implication.
The rules that repeal by implication are not favored and that a repeal will
not be implied unless there be an irreconcilable conflict between the
two statutes, applies especially where the prior law is a special act
relating to a particular case or subject and the subsequent law is gen-
eral in its operation. The special provisions of the act of March 2,
1887, 24 Stat. 442, relating to judicial districts of Illinois, were not
repealed by the general terms of the Judiciary Act of March 3, 1887,
24 Stat. Petri v. Creelman Lumber Co., 487.
See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 3;
LOCAL LAW (FLORIDA);
RAILROADS, 1.
B. OF THE United States.
See ACTS OF CONGRESS.
C. OF STATES AND TERRITORIES.
See LOCAL LAW.
See JURISDICTION, A 5;
NATIONAL BANKS, 1.
STOCKHOLDERS.
See CORPORATIONS;
NATIONAL BANKS, 3.
STREET RAILWAYS.
See TAXATION, 1.
1. Equality in use of.
Public sidewalks and streets are for use by all on equal terms for proper
purposes subject to valid regulations prescribed by the constituted
authorities. The rights of a railroad company as abutting owner of
the sidewalks adjacent to the property on which its station stands and
those of its passengers are not paramount to the rights of the general
public to legitimately use the sidewalk, and licensed hackmen unless
forbidden by local regulations may, within reasonable limits, use a
public sidewalk in properly prosecuting their calling so long as such
use does not obstruct others in legitimately using it upon equal terms.
Donovan v. Pennsylvania Company, 279.
2. Injunction to restrain use of.
Where there is a continuing trespass by a number of parties, and a suit of
law could only determine a particular controversy at a particular time,
a court of equity may meet such an unusual emergency and by a com-
prehensive decree determine finally the controversy between the parties,
avoid a multiplicity of suits and conserve the public interest; and so
held that the Pennsylvania Company could maintain a suit against
hackmen combined together in disregard of its regulations, enjoining
then from congregating upon the sidewalk adjacent to its terminal at
Chicago so as to interfere with the ingress and egress of passengers.
Ib.
SURVEYS.
See PUBLIC LANDS, 1.
SWAMP LANDS.
See STATES, 7.
1. Classification of property for taxation; equal protection of laws.
The difference between surface street railroads and subsurface street rail-
roads is sufficient to justify classification in the mode and extent of taxa-
|