BANKRUPTCY ACT of 1898-Continued.

trustee under § 70 of the act pursuant to § 8 as provided by
§ 4041 of the Code of Georgia. Hull v. Dicks..

See Judgments and Decrees.

BILL OF EXCEPTIONS.

Effect of absence of, on questions of evidence. Porto Rico
v. Emmanuel.

BILL OF REVIEW:

Relief prayed in bill of review for newly discovered evidence
is a matter of sound discretion and not absolute right; even
though evidence persuasive of error in former decree relief
not allowed if resulting in mischief to innocent parties.
Hopkins v. Hebard....

Function of such a bill is to relieve meritorious complainant
from clear miscarriage of justice where court can see remedy
applied without mischief to rights of innocent parties or un-
duly jeopardizing stability of judgments. Id.

Bill refused in regard to decree establishing title to land
under Tennessee patent, notwithstanding this court has
decided it to be situated in North Carolina, but court should
not make new decree in view of rights of innocent parties
acquired under former decree. Id.

Bills of review granted on two grounds: first, error of law
apparent on the face of the record without further examina-
tion of matter of fact, second, new facts discovered since the
decree which should materially affect it and probably induce
a different result. Scotten v. Littlefield..

An aspect of the claim involved cannot be held back when
the case is presented to the court, and later made the subject
of a bill of review. Id.

In this case a later decision decided upon principles different
from those which determined the case sought to be reviewed
held not to lay the foundation for bill of review on either
of the grounds on which the bill should be granted. Id.

BOUNDARIES:

Between states: Slick Rock and Tellico Basin sections of
boundary between North Carolina and Tennessee deter-
mined. North Carolina v. Tennessee..

Marks on trees given weight as evidence in establish-

ing a boundary line. Id.

Between land of private parties. See Jurisdiction.

BOYCOTTS.

See Anti-trust Act.

PAGE

584

251

287

407

1

BURDEN OF PROOF:

Statute of Mississippi making happening of certain classes
of accidents presumptive evidence of negligence simply
shifts burden of proof and is a mere regulation of practice in
regard to evidence, does not cut off substantial rights, is not
denial of due process of law even when applied in a case in-
volving an accident happening prior to its enactment.
Easterling Lumber Co. v. Wright...

CARRIER. See Common Carrier.

PAGE

380

CHANGE OF DOMICIL. See Domicil.

CHICAGO:

Assessment for street benefit held not unconstitutional.
Willoughby v. Chicago....

45

CHICKASAW INDIANS. See Indians.

CHILDREN:

Of bankrupt entitled to allowance. See Bankruptcy Act.

CHOCTAW INDIANS. See Indians.

CHOSE IN ACTION. See Assignee.

CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS. See Appeal and Error;
Jurisdiction; Mandate.

CITIZEN AND CITIZENSHIP:

May not be held for custody where there is no provision of
common law or statute making an offense of the act charged.

Henry v. Henkel....

219

Rights of citizens to pass through State in motor vehicles
not interfered with by reasonable license fees imposed on
motors. Hendrick v. Maryland.. ...

610

Diverse giving Federal courts jurisdiction. See Domicil;
Jurisdiction; Jury; Laches; Practice.

CLASSIFICATION:

Of subjects for police regulation and taxation. See Consti-
tutional Law; Equal Protection of the Law; Four-
teenth Amendment.

CLERK, FEES OF:

Provision in act of February 13, 1911, in regard to clerk's
fees for supervising record apply to certain classes of inter-
locutory decrees. Lovell-McConnell Co. v. Auto Supply Co. 383

COAL MINES:

Taxes on lessees of United States of mines in Oklahoma.
See Taxes and Taxation.

CODES. See Criminal Code; Judicial Code.

COLLATERAL ATTACK. See Judgments and Decrees.

COMBINATION IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE. See Anti-
trust Act.

COMMERCE COURT. See Interstate Commerce Com-
mission; Jurisdiction.

COMMERCE. See Anti-trust Act; Constitutional Law;
Interstate Commerce.

COMMISSIONS OF TRUSTEES OF ESTATE:

This court will not disturb allowance made by auditor of
District of Columbia and affirmed by both courts of the
District. Magruder v. Drury...

Trustee cannot participate in commissions made by his
firm on sales of investment to the estate. Id.

COMMON CARRIER:

PAGE

106

231

May be required by State to furnish separate but equal ac-
commodations to the white and African races-as in Okla-
homa. McCabe v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. ...... 151
A receiver of a railroad corporation who carries on the busi-
ness is in regard thereto a common carrier. United States v.
Nixon..
Right to primarily determine whether a higher rate should
be charged for a shorter than a longer distance was taken
from the carrier by the amendment of § 4 of the Act to Regu-
late Commerce by the act of June 18, 1910, and primarily
vested in the Interstate Commerce Commission.
States v. Louisville & Nashville R. R.
Common-law rule that carrier has option of demanding
freight in advance or on delivery applies not only to shippers
but also to connecting carriers; but this right may be modi-
fied by statutes preventing discrimination. Wadley South-
ern Ry. v. Georgia...

United

Order of Georgia Railroad Commission directing carrier
cease discriminating by demanding freight in advance from
some connecting carriers and not from others, not uncon-
stitutional. Id.

See Interstate Commerce Commission; Railroad.

314

651

COMMON LAW:

Even if contract is unenforceable at common law if Federal
statute broad enough to prohibit it, this court has jurisdic-
tion to review under § 237, Jud. Code. Sage v. Hampe....
Common-law rule as to right of carrier to demand freight
in advance. See Common Carrier; Pleading.
COMPENSATION ACTS. See Ohio Workmen's Compen-
sation Act.

COMPETITION:

When use of later manufacturer's name on goods manu-
factured by earlier established person of same name results
in mistake and confusion, later man must take reasonable
precaution to prevent such results. L. E. Waterman Pen
Co. v. Modern Pen Co... ...

Only protection manufacturer can get against later person of
same name manufacturing similar goods is to require latter
to so use name in marking goods that they cannot be con-
fused with goods manufactured by the former. Id.

CONDITIONS PRECEDENT:

Franchise based on carrying out of proposed plan which
proved abortive fails and cannot be basis of declaring sub-
sequent ordinances invalid as impairing obligation of con-
tract. Louisiana Ry. & Nav. Co. v. New Orleans....

See Public Lands; Taxes; Taxes and Taxation.

CONFLICT OF LAWS. See Statutes; United States.
CONGRESS:

PAGE

99

888

164

Acts of, Construed and Applied: Alaska Code of March 3,
1899. United States v. Wigger..

276

Arizona Enabling Act. Arizona & New Mex. Ry. v. Clark.. 669
Arkansas laws in Indian Territory. Taylor v. Parker
Anti-trust Act of 1890. Lawlor v. Loewe

42

522

Bankruptcy Act of 1898.

Hull v. Dicks.

584

Circuit Court of Appeals Act. Shapiro v. United States...

412

CONGRESS.-Continued.

McGovern v. Phila. & Reading R. R..
Norfolk & West. Ry. v. Holbrook .

Arizona & New Mex. Ry. v. Clark.

Fee Bill Amendment. Lovell Co. v. Auto Supply Co...
Foraker, Porto Rico Act. Porto Rico v. Emmanuel .
Indians, Acts affecting. Taylor v. Parker..

Skelton v. Dill. .

PAGE

389

625

669

383

251

42

206

Interstate Commerce Acts. United States v. Louis. & Nash.

Materialmen's Acts. A. Bryant Co. v. N. Y. Steam Co..... 327
Meat Inspection Act.

United States v. Lewis..

282

Penal Code, § 195. United States v. Erie R. R... .
Quarantine Acts of 1904 and 1913. United States v. Nixon 231
Tariff Act of 1907, § 28. United States v. Salen..
Territorial Practice Act of 1874. Porto Rico v. Emmanuel. 251
White Slave Traffic Act. United States v. Portale .. .. .. ..
Acts Cited, Construed and Applied: See Table of Statutes
Cited at front of volume.

513

...

237

27

Consent of Congress not necessary: Under Art. I, § 10, Cl. 3,
of Federal Constitution to agreement between States made
under provision of North Carolina deed of cession. North
Carolina v. Tennessee.

...

Construction of Acts of Congress: A provision in act of Con-
gress removing restrictions may indicate the understanding
of Congress that such restrictions existed under earlier acts.
Taylor v. Parker....

Power of Congress: Quare whether Congress has power to
require witness in congressional inquiry to make material
and non-criminatory disclosures and punish him for refusal
so to do; that question should be decided by the trial court
and not in habeas corpus proceedings on removal. Henry
v. Henkel....

1

42

219