CARRIERS-Continued.

investigation afforded basis for argument as to constant
conditions. Id.

4. Possible inaccuracy of apportioning general road main-
tenance expenses between freight and passenger service by
engine-ton miles held not to affect result. Id.

5. Whether adoption of low rates fixed by State would be
followed by increased intrastate traffic and revenue, held too
remote and conjectural to disturb conclusion. Id.

6. A state" long and short haul" provision, applicable only
to intrastate traffic and which allows shipper an absolute
right to recover overcharges, sustained.. Missouri Pac. Ry.
v. McGrew Coal Co.....

7. Order of Mississippi Railroad Commission requiring
restoration of certain passenger trains to service held viola-
tive of due process. Miss. R. R. Comm. v. Mobile & Ohio
R. R..

8. Reasonableness of requiring operation of specified trains
cannot depend upon relation of money return to out-of-
pocket cost, i. e., immediate outlay for wages and fuel, in-
volved in their operation. Id.

9. In determining whether rates fixed by State are confisca-
tory because not yielding proper return, basis of calculation
is fair value of property used in service of public. Darnell
v. Edwards....

10. Strong presumption in favor of rates fixed by an expe-
rienced administrative body after full hearing. Id.

11. Rates should not be held too low because they proved
unremunerative during a brief period, when conditions for
traffic were abnormally poor and little effort made to im-
prove them. Id.

12. In determining adequacy, circumstances that road has
been built in unfavorable locality, and nature and value of
service actually rendered to public, should be considered.
Id.

13. Semble, that, in testing validity of rates affecting a lim-
ited class of traffic in which railroad is for the time engaged,
extra cost of construction, not justified by that traffic but

PAGE

191

388

564

CARRIERS-Continued.
incurred with view to extending road ultimately into more
lucrative territory, should not be accounted as part of fair
value by which rates must be gauged. Id.

14. In absence of fair test of rates challenged as confiscatory,
and in presence of some doubt of their adequacy, dismissal
of bill should not be absolute, but without prejudice to an-
other suit, in case they should prove confiscatory when fully
and fairly tested. Id.

See Water Rates, 5.

15. Where enforcement of state rates is enjoined and ship-
pers and travelers prohibited from suing carrier for failure
to keep them in effect, District Court, after reversal by this
court with directions to dismiss bill, cannot inquire into
and assess damages sustained by shippers and travelers by
reason of temporary and permanent injunctions, for pur-
pose of fixing liability on temporary injunction bonds, at
least as to persons who did not appear. St. Louis, I. Mt. &
So. Ry. v. Mc Knight......

16. Ancillary suit cannot be maintained to enjoin such per-
sons from suing in state court (after dismissal of original
bill) to recover excess rates collected by carrier during the
restraint. Id.

CAUSE OF ACTION. See Amendment, 5.

CIRCUIT COURTS OF APPEALS.

Setting up new defense in. See Res Judicata.

CITY ORDINANCES. See Franchise.

CLOUD UPON TITLE. See Equity, 9, 14, 17-19.

COAL AND COAL CARS. See Interstate Commerce Acts,
I, 1.

COLOR OF TITLE. See Public Lands, (4).

COMMERCE. See Admiralty; Anti-Trust Act; Constitu-
tional Law, III; Interstate Commerce; Interstate
Commerce Acts.

PAGE

368

COMMON CARRIERS. See Admiralty; Carriers; Inter- PAGE

state Commerce Acts.

COMMON LAW:

The remedy of the New York Workmen's Compensation Act
is unknown to common law and hence not among common-
law remedies saved to suitors from exclusive admiralty juris-
diction by Judiciary Act of 1789, § 9. Southern Pacific Co.
v. Jensen..

COMMUNITY GRANTS. See Public Lands (4).

COMPUTATION OF TIME. See Time.

CONDEMNATION. See Eminent Domain.

205

CONFLICT OF LAWS. Liability for interest. See Sureties, 3-5.

CONFORMITY ACT:

Does not require resort to demurrer in place of motion to
quash for attacking service in District Court, even though
state procedure does. Meisukas v. Greenough Coal Co...... 54

CONGRESS. See Constitutional Law; Statutes.

For acts of Congress cited. See Table at front of volume.
Reports of committees, as aid in construction. See Stat-
utes, I, 3.

CONSPIRACY OF LABOR UNIONS. See Anti-Trust Act;
Equity, 21.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW:

I. Judicial Power-State and Federal, p. 675.

II. Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction, p. 675.

III. Commerce Clause, p. 676.

IV. Contract Clause, p. 677.

V. Full Faith and Credit Clause, p. 677.

VI. National Banks. Federal Reserve Board, p. 678.

VII. Fifth Amendment; Self-Incrimination; Presence at View;

Due Process, p. 678.

VIII. Sixth Amendment. See VII, supra.

IX. Eleventh Amendment; Suing State Officers, p. 679.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Continued.

X. Fourteenth Amendment:

(1) General, p. 679.

(2) Notice and Opportunity for Hearing, p. 680.
(3) Regulation of Rates and Public Service, p. 680.
(4) Abolishing Private Business, p. 682.

(5) Reserved Power over Corporations, p. 682.

(6) Taxation, p. 682.

(7) Equal Protection of the Laws, p. 682.

XI. Who may Question Constitutionality of Statutes, p. 682.
XII. Adopting State Construction and Findings, p. 683.

For constructions of the Arizona Constitution, as to regula-
tion of public utilities, and embracing in an act only one
subject, expressed in its title. See Arizona.

For constructions of constitutional and statutory provisions
of Kentucky governing assessment and taxation of railroad
capital stock" and "franchises." See Taxation.

PAGE

I. Judicial Power-State and Federal. See Jurisdiction.
1. A state court, having obtained jurisdiction over defend-
ant, has jurisdiction over an action for personal injuries suf-
fered by him while performing work under a contract with
the United States. Ohio River Contract Co. v. Gordon ..... 68
2. An action for personal injuries, being a transitory one,
may be maintained in a state court notwithstanding the in-
juries occurred on a reservation under exclusive federal
jurisdiction. Id.

3. That the courts of the United States have power to pre-
vent systematic discrimination in taxation by state authori-
ties and may enforce the rights of the complainant in that
regard under the state constitution and laws, although the
state courts deem themselves without power to afford
judicial relief in such cases, see

Greene v. Louis. & Interurban R. R.
Louis. & Nash. R. R. v. Greene
Illinois Cent. R. R. v. Greene.

II. Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction.

1. Power of States to affect general maritime law, while
existing to some extent under Constitution and Judiciary
Act of 1789, § 9, Jud. Code, §§ 24, 256, may not contravene
essential purposes of an act of Congress, work material

499

522

555

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Continued.

prejudice to characteristic features of general maritime law
or interfere with harmony and uniformity of that law in its
international and interstate relations. Southern Pacific Co.
v. Jensen...

2. Right of stevedore or longshoreman, or beneficiary, to
recover for personal injuries or death, suffered while unload-
ing ship at wharf in navigable waters, comes within maritime
jurisdiction, and New York Workmen's Compensation Law
may not constitutionally govern the case. Id.
Clyde S. S. Co. v. Walker..

3. Objection that Ohio Workmen's Compensation Law, as
applied to interstate steamship company, invades the fed-
eral maritime jurisdiction, raised but held not sufficiently
presented in Valley S. S. Co. v. Wattawa..

III. Commerce Clause.

1. In absence of special showing to contrary, state regu-
lation affecting interstate railroad, but only in relation to
intrastate traffic, which forbids charging more for shorter
haul than for longer one for same class of freight over any
portion of road within State, and which allows shipper ab-
solute right to recover charges collected in violation, is con-
sistent with commerce clause. Missouri Pac. Ry. v. Mc-
Grew Coal Co.....

2. In absence of congressional legislation, power of a State
to regulate relative rights and duties of employers and em-
ployees, although engaged in interstate commerce, is settled
beyond contention. Valley S. S. Co. v. Wattawa.

3. The Ohio Workmen's Compensation Law, regulating
these relations, upheld as applied to steamship company
engaged in interstate commerce. Id.

PAGE

205

255

202

191

202

See Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction, II, supra.
4. Congress having fully covered subject of liability and
obligation of interstate railroads to compensate employees
for personal injuries in interstate commerce, State has no
power to regulate the subject, as attempted by workmen's
compensation acts. New York Cent. R. R. v. Winfield... 147
Erie R. R. v. Winfield.
170

.....

New York Cent. R. R. v. Tonsellito... 360

See Employers' Liability Act, (1).