Cases Disposed of Without Consideration by the Court. 203 U. S.

from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. October 17, 1906. Dismissed with costs, pursuant to the tenth rule. Mr. Wm. T. Hutchings for appellants. The Attorney General for appellees.

No. 20. WILLIAM J. GALLAGHER, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois. October 22, 1906. Dismissed with costs, pursuant to the tenth rule. Mr. Charles H. Soelke for plaintiff in error. Mr. Erasmus C. Lindley for defendants in error.

No. 65. JAMES VAN BUREN, APPELLANT, v. P. F. HENNESSEY, TESTAMENTARY EXECUTOR, ETC., ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana. October 24, 1906. Dismissed with costs, pursuant to the tenth rule. Mr. Branch K. Miller for appellant. Mr. William J. Hennessey for appellees.

No. 348. JULIAN CASTILLO SLAUGHTER ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. CECILE R. LOEB, EXECUTRIX, ETC. Appeal from the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. October 29, 1906. Dismissed with costs, on motion of Mr. Charles L. Frailey in behalf of counsel for the appellants. Mr. Wilton J. Lambert for appellants. No appearance for appellee.

No. 274. WILLIAM F. HOLTZMAN ET AL., APPELLANTS, V. IRWIN B. LINTON, EXECUTOR, ETC. Appeal from the Court

203 U. S. Cases Disposed of Without Consideration by the Court.

of Appeals of the District of Columbia. November 5, 1906. Dismissed with costs, on motion of counsel for appellants. Mr. A. S. Worthington and Mr. E. Hilton Jackson for appellants. Mr. Irwin B. Linton and Mr. J. Altheus Johnson for appellee.

No. 4, Original. THE UNITED STATES, COMPLAINANT, v. THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. November 19, 1906. Dismissed, on motion of The Solicitor General for the complainant. The Attorney General for complainant. Mr. Horace M. Oren and Mr. Charles A. Blair for defendant.

No. 113. STEPHEN R. WIGHTMAN, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT. In error to the Supreme Court of Errors of the State of Connecticut. December 3, 1906. Dismissed with costs, per stipulation. Mr. Samuel Park for plaintiff in error. Mr. H. A. Hull for defendant in error.

No. 205. THE CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. D. ROY MUMFORD. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Iowa. December 3, 1906. Dismissed with costs, on authority of counsel for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Robert Mather for plaintiff in error. Mr. N. D. Ely, Mr. Arthur G. Bush and Mr. Charles F. Wilson for defendant in error.

No. 135. SAM LEE ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. HERBERT E. ELLIS. Appeal from the Supreme Court of the Territory of

Cases Disposed of Without Consideration by the Court. 203 U. S.

Oklahoma. December 10, 1906. Dismissed with costs, pursuant to the tenth rule. Mr. S. H. Harris for appellants. Mr. Fred Beall for appellee.

No. 336. ALBERT T. PATRICK, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, V. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. In error to the Court of General Sessions of the Peace for the County of New York. December 13, 1906. Dismissed with costs, on motion of Mr. William Lindsay for the plaintiff in error. Mr. William Lindsay for plaintiff in error. No appearance for defendants in error.

No. 524. PETRONA DEL CARMEN GONZALEZ RESTO, APPELLANT, v. PETRONA RESTO Y NEGRÓN ET AL. Appeal from the Supreme Court of Porto Rico. December 17, 1906. Docketed and dismissed with costs, on motion of Mr. Perry Allen for the appellees. No one opposing.

No. 529. RICHARD HYNES, APPELLANT, v. LEO V. YOUNGWORTH, UNITED STATES MARSHAL, ETC.; and No. 530. A. H. HEDDERLY, APPELLANT, v. LEO V. YOUNGWORTH, UNITED STATES MARSHAL, ETC. Appeals from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of California. December 24, 1906. Docketed and dismissed with costs, on motion of The Solicitor General for the appellee. No one opposing.

INDEX.

ACTIONS.

1. Limitation of actions brought under § 7 of the act of July 2, 1890.
The five year limitation in § 1047, Rev. Stat., does not apply to suits brought

under § 7 of the act of July 2, 1890, but by the silence of that act the
matter is left under § 721, Rev. Stat., to the local law. Chattanooga
Foundry & Pipe Works v. Atlanta, 390.

2. Limitation of actions for injuries to property under Tennessee Code.
The three year limitation in § 2773, Tennessee Code, for actions for in-
juries to personal or real property, applies to injuries falling upon some
object more definite than the plaintiff's total wealth, and the general
ten year limitation in § 2776 for all actions not expressly provided for
controls actions of this nature brought under § 7 of the act of July 2,
1890. Ib.

3. Right of city to maintain action under Sherman Anti-trust Law.
By express provision of the act of July 2, 1890, 26 Stat. 209, a city is a
person within the meaning of section 7 of that act, and can maintain
an action against a party to a combination unlawful under the act by
reason of which it has been forced to pay a price for an article above
what it is reasonably worth. Ib.

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 26;
JURISDICTION, B 1.

ACTS OF CONGRESS.

ANTI-TRUST Act of July 2, 1890 (see Actions): Chattanooga Foundry & Pipe
Works v. Atlanta, 390.

BANKRUPTCY, Act of 1898 (see Courts, 6): New Jersey v. Anderson, 483.
Act of 1898, § 19 (see Appeal and Error, 3): Grant Shoe Co. v. Laird
Co., 502; § 25b (see Bankruptcy, 1, 2): Conboy v. First Nat. Bank, 141;
§ 64a (see Bankruptcy, 4, 5, 6): New Jersey v. Anderson, 483. Act of
1867 (see Bankruptcy, 4): Ib.

CATTLE CONTAGIOUS DISEASE ACT of February 2, 1903, 33 Stat. 1264 (see
Commerce, 7, 8, 9): Illinois Central R. R. v. McKendree, 514.
CHEROKEE INDIANS, Acts relating to citizenship and distribution of tribal
property (see Statutes, A 2): Cherokee Intermarriage Cases, 76.
CHIPPEWA INDIANS, Treaty of 1819 (see Treaties): Francis v. Francis, 233.
CIVIL RIGHTS, Rev. Stat. §§ 1978, 1979, 5508, 5510 (see Jurisdiction, D 2):
Hodges v. United States, 1.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Code, § 233, 31 Stat. 1189, 1127 (see Federal Ques-
tion, 4): Taylor v. Taft, 461.

FLORIDA LAND CLAIMS, Act of June 22, 1860, § 3, and act of May 23, 1828,
4 Stat. 284 (see Jurisdiction, C): United States v. Dalcour, 408.
HABEAS CORPUS, Rev. Stat. § 753 (see Territories): Matter of Moran, 96.
INDIANS, Act of February 8, 1887, (see Indians, 3): Goudy v. Meath, 146.
See also ante.

INTERSTATE COMMERCE, Wilson Act of August 8, 1890, 26 Stat. 313 (see
Commerce, 2, 3): Heyman v. Southern Ry. Co., 270.

JUDICIARY, Act of June 22, 1860, § 11, 12 Stat. 87 (see Jurisdiction, A 5):
United States v. Dalcour, 408. Act of March 3, 1875, §§ 1, 2, 3, 18
Stat. 470, as amended by act of March 1, 1887, 24 Stat. 552, corrected
by act of August 13, 1888, 25 Stat. 433 (see Jurisdiction, B 3): Ex parte
Wisner, 449. Act of March 3, 1885, 23 Stat. 443 (see Jurisdiction,
A 1, 2): McLean v. Denver & Rio Grande R. R., 38. Act of March 3,
1891, 26 Stat. 826 (see Jurisdiction, A 5; Practice and Procedure, 6):
United States v. Dalcour, 408; Nichols Lumber Co. v. Franson, 278.
Rev. Stat. § 709 (see Federal Question, 6): Illinois Central R. R. v. Mc-
Kendree, 514. Rev. Stat. § 720 (see Courts, 5): Mississippi R. R.
Comm. v. Illinois Central R. R., 335. Rev. Stat. § 721 (see Actions, 1):
Chattanooga Foundry & Pipe Works v. Atlanta, 390.

LIMITATION OF ACTIONS FOR PENALTIES, Rev. Stat. § 1047 (see Actions, 1):
Chattanooga Foundry & Pipe Works v. Atlanta, 390.

OKLAHOMA, Organic Act of May 2, 1890, § 10, 26 Stat. 85 (see Criminal
Law): Matter of Moran, 96.

PATENTS, Rev. Stat. §§ 482, 483, 4904, 4910, 4911, and act of February 9,
1893, § 9, 27 Stat. 436 (see Practice and Procedure, 14): Lowry v.
Allen, 474.

PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, Act of July 1, 1902, § 10, 32 Stat. 691 (see Appeal
and Error, 2): Fisher v. Baker, 175.

TARIFF ACT of July 24, 1897, pars. 306, 307, 313 (see Customs Duties):
United States v. Riggs, 136.

TERRITORIES, Rev. Stat. § 1909 (see Jurisdiction, A 4): New York Foundling
Hospital v. Gatti, 429.