CHARGE TO JURY. See Instructions to Jury.

CHINESE:

Status of merchant, as defined by treaty with China of 1880,
is that acquired in China. Chin Fong v. Backus. ...
Person detained for deportation held not entitled to direct
appeal from judgment of District Court dismissing petition
for habeas corpus. Id.

CITIZENSHIP:

While a corporation incorporated under an Act of Congress
is a citizen of the United States, it is not within the declara-
tion of the Fourteenth Amendment that citizens of the
United States are citizens of the State in which they reside.
Bankers Trust Co. v. Texas & Pacific Ry.....

A corporation incorporated under Act of Congress, whose
activities are intended to be and are carried on in different
States, is not a citizen of a State within meaning of jurisdic-
tional statute. Id.

Congress has not clothed railroad corporations organized
under acts of Congress with state citizenship for jurisdic-
tional purposes. Id.

CLAIMS AGAINST UNITED STATES:

Contract with Government for construction of filtration
plant construed and held to include roadway shown on
annexed plans, and that contractor entitled to compensa-
tion for work done thereon. White v. United States......
CLASSIFICATION. See Constitutional Law.

CODES:

For sections of Criminal and Judicial Codes construed, etc.
See Congress.

COMMERCE. See Constitutional Law; Interstate Com-

merce.

COMMERCIAL LAW. See Banks and Banking.

COMMISSIONERS:

Illegal arrest by state or municipal authorities does not
affect jurisdiction of United States extradition commis-
sioner. Kelly v. Griffin....

COMMON CARRIERS:

In determining status of corporation important thing is
what it actually does and not what its charter says it may
do. Terminal Taxicab Co. v. District of Columbia..

PAGE

1

295

149

6

252

COMMON CARRIERS-Continued.

Corporation authorized by its charter to carry passengers
and goods, but not to exercise any powers of a public service
corporation, and which does such business, including carry-
ing of passengers to and from railroad terminals and hotels
under contracts therewith, and also does a garage business
with individuals, held a common carrier within meaning of
District of Columbia Public Utility Act of 1913, and sub-
ject to jurisdiction of Commission as to terminal and hotel
business, but not as to garage business; and under the Act
is bound to furnish information properly required by Com-
mission in regard to former, but not as to latter business.
Id.

It will not be presumed that interstate carrier is conducting
its affairs in violation of law. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. Ry. v.
Rankin...

Where carrier by rail offers rates for interstate shipments
fairly based upon valuation, it may limit its liability by
special contract. Id.

Recitals in bill of lading, signed by both carrier and shipper,
that lawful alternate rates based on valuations were offered,
constitute admissions by shipper and prima facie evidence
of choice, and cast on shipper burden of proof to contradict.
Id.
Provision in interstate bill of lading is to be construed the
same as to connecting or terminal carrier as to initial carrier.
Georgia, F. & A. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co.....

Where bill of lading of interstate shipment requires notice of
claim for misdelivery before action can be brought against
initial carrier, such notice must be given to terminal carrier
making misdelivery. Id.

Bill of lading issued by initial carrier upon interstate ship-
ment governs entire transportation and fixes obligations of
all participating carriers to extent that its terms are appli-
cable and valid. Id.

Effect of stipulation in bill of lading for notice of claim for
misdelivery of shipment, cannot be escaped by form of ac-
tion; and if suit cannot be maintained for damages against
delivering carrier without such notice, it cannot be main-
tained for conversion. Id.

Stipulation in bill of lading requiring notice of claim before
action brought held satisfied by telegram from shipper to
terminal carrier.

Id.

Application by state court to interstate shipment of local

PAGE

319

190

COMMON CARRIERS-Continued.

rule investing innocent holder of bill of lading with rights not
available to shipper is reversible error. Atchison, T. & S. F.
Ry. Co. v. Harold...

Requirement of written notice of misdeliveries of mer-
chandise and claims, even with respect to carrier's own
operations, is justified. Georgia, F. & A. Ry. v. Blish Milling
Co....

Right of employee of interstate carrier by rail to recover for
injury depends upon acts of Congress, to which all state
legislation affecting subject-matter yields. Spokane & I. E.
R. R. Co. v. Campbell....

Carmack Amendment casts upon initial carrier responsibil-
ity with respect to entire transportation, including delivery.
Georgia, F. & A. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co..

PAGE

371

190

497

190

See Bill of Lading; Employers' Liability Act; Inter-
state Commerce; Railroads; Safety Appliance Act.

CONCURRENT JURISDICTION. See Jurisdiction.

CONDEMNATION OF LAND:

Seventh Amendment has no application to an assessment or
condemnation proceeding in a state court. St. Louis & K.
C. Land Co. v. Kansas City.

Nothing in Constitution prevents inclusion in supplemental
condemnation proceedings properties omitted from original
proceeding. Id.

Owner of property which may be assessed for benefits to pay
for property condemned, is not entitled under due process
provision of Fourteenth Amendment to be made party to
condemnation proceedings or be heard as to amount of
awards; provision requires only those whose property is to be
taken to have prior notice. Id.

CONFLICT OF LAWS:

Under Carmack Amendment, duty to issue bills of lading
and the responsibilities thereunder is action of Congress and
necessarily excludes state action in regard thereto. Atchi-
son, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Harold.....

Right of employee of interstate carrier by rail to recover for
injury depends upon acts of Congress, to which all state
legislation affecting subject-matter yields. Spokane & I. E.
R. R. Co. v. Campbell...

When Congress enters field of regulation within its para-

419

371

497

CONFLICT OF LAWS-Continued.

mount authority, state regulation of that subject-matter is
excluded. Texas & Pacific Ry. v. Rigsby. ... ..

CONFORMITY ACT:

Quare, whether under Act trial court is required, in action
under Employers' Liability Act, to adhere to state practice
governing effect of general verdict and special findings.
Spokane & I. E. R. R. Co. v. Campbell..

CONGRESS:

Acts construed and applied:

Apportionment Act. Ohio v. Davis..

Bankruptcy Act. Dayton v. Pueblo County.

Carmack Amendment. Northern Pacific Ry. v. Wall......

Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. v. Harold

Georgia, F. & A. Ry. Co. v. Blish Milling Co..

PAGE

33

497

565

588

87

371

190

Certiorari. Stowe v. Taylor. . . .

658

Chinese Exclusion. Chin Fong v. Backus....

1

Conformity Act. Spokane & I. E. R. Co. v. Campbell...

497

District of Columbia. Terminal Taxicab Co. v. District of
Columbia....

252

Employers' Liability Act. Baugham v. New York, P. & N.
R. R......

237

CONGRESS-Continued.

Extradition. Bingham v. Bradley

Hepburn Act. Menasha Paper Co. v. Chicago & N. W. Ry.

Co..

Indians. Lane v. Mickadiet

Levindale Lead Co. v. Coleman ..

United States v. Hemmer.

United States v. Nice ...

Indian Territory. Gidney v. Chappel...

Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. v. Rankin..

Interstate Commerce. A., T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Harold.. 371

Georgia, F. & A. Ry. v. Blish Milling Co.
Menasha Paper Co. v. Chicago & N. W. Ry..
Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. Wall...

Rosenberger v. Pacific Express Co.

Judicial Code, §§ 9, 10, 11. Abbott v. Brown.

PAGE

511

55

201

432

379

591

99

319

190

55

87

48

606

§ 24. Bankers Trust Co. v. Texas & Pacific Ry...

Knights of Pythias v. Mims

§ 238. Chin Fong v. Backus..

Lamar v. United States.

Merriam v. Saalfield...

§ 239. Rosenberger v. Pacific Express Co...

Judiciary Acts. Bankers Trust Co. v. Texas & Pacific Ry..

Lamar v. United States ..

Montelibano v. La Compania Tabacos.
Stowe v. Taylor.....

Knights of Pythias. Knights of Pythias v. Mims...

Oklahoma Enabling Act.

Opium Registration Act.

Southern Surety Co. v. Oklahoma. 582

United States v. Jin Fuey Moy.. 394

Maritime Law. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Schmidt...

Penal Code. See Criminal Code.

245

Pure Food and Drugs Act. United States v. Coca Cola Co.. 265
Safety Appliance Act. St. Louis & S. F. R. R. Co. v. Brown 223

San Antonio & A. P. Ry. v. Wagner.

371
574

1

103

22

48

295

103

455

658

574

Texas & Pacific Railway Act. Bankers Trust Co. v. Texas

& Pacific Ry. Co.

295

White Slave Traffic Act. United States v. Lombardo...

73