rendered below not being in conformity to the decision and mandate, and again it is declared that creditors, who are citizens of the United States are entitled to stand on the same plane with resident creditors in the distribution of the estate of a foreign corporation. Blake v. McClung, 176 U. S., 59. See Sully v. Am. Nat. Bk., 178 U. S., 289.

The due process clause of the 14th Amendment does not regulate practice in the State courts nor control procedure therein; and all its requirements are complied with when the person condemned or whose rights are adjudicated has had sufficient notice and adequate opportunity to to defend. Louisville, etc., Co. V. Schmidt, 177 U. S., 230. In this case the point of objection was that the company had been precluded from proving defenses not pleaded. To the general proposition, the same ruling is in Iowa Cent. R'y v. Iowa, 160 U. S., 389; Wilson v. North Carolina, 169 U. S., 586.

A Maryland statute provided that resident traders should take out and pay for licenses to carry on business at one rate and that non-residents should pay at a higher rate, or be punished for doing business. Held, that the statute was void, so far as it conflicted with this provision as to privileges and immunities. The non-resident may lawfully sell or offer or expose for sale, any goods which permanent residents might lawfully sell or offer or expose for sale, without being subjected to any higher

tax or excise than that exacted by law of permanent residents. Ward v. Maryland, 12 Wall., 418, 430.

The citizen has a right to come to the seat of government to press his claims and seek its protection, independent of the will of any State over whose soil he may pass in coming or going. Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall.,

35, 44.

No State can by any law, subsequent to the Constitution, make a foreigner or any other class of persons citizens of the United States, nor entitle them to the rights and privileges secured by the Federal Constitution. Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How., 393.

The right of the people of one State to take what is their property into a territory of the United States and there hold it as property is applicable to property held in slaves in a State where slavery exists by law. Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How., 393.

An act of Congress prohibiting slavery in a territory of the United States held unconstitutional. Dred Scott

v. Sandford, 19 How., 393.

Instances where State statutes are held not repugnant to those provisions.-The provision in the 14th Amendment that "no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" does not deter the State from passing such laws as it deems necessary to regulate the privileges and immunities of its own citizens and as do not abridge their privileges as citizens of the United

States. A State may prescribe what bodies may be organized to constitute its organized militia, and forbid others from organizing. Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S.,

252.

The privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Con- . stitution of the United States. A State may abolish the grand jury system or provide for a charge of crime without the presentment or indictment of a grand jury, or may provide for a jury of less than twelve men to try one accused of crime. Maxwell v. Dow, 176 U. S., 581.

A uniform tax on all sales by auction whether by citizens or non-residents, imposed by ordinance of a city, is not repugnant to this clause. Woodruff v. Parham, 8 Wall., 123.

A State statute which compels peddlers of goods to take out license, under penalty, making no discrimination between residents or products of the State and those of other States, does not violate this section. Emert v. Missouri, 156 U. S., 296.

The law of Louisiana, which gives the community of gains between married persons, does not apply when the marriage is contracted and the parties reside outside of that State, even to lands owned in Louisiana. This is a right which Louisiana may regulate, not one of the per

sonal rights of a citizen within the meaning of the Constitution. Connor v. Elliott, 18 How., 591.

The Iowa statute which provides that any one having Texas cattle shall be liable for damages for allowing them to run at large and spread the "Texas Fever" does not conflict with this section of the Constitution. Kim

mish v. Ball, 129 U. S., 217.

The admission of a person to the practice of law in the courts of a State is not a privilege or immunity which a State may not deny. In re Lockwood, 154 U. S., 116; Bradwell v. The State, 16 Wall., 130. As to privileges and immunities as affected by the 13th and 14th Amendments see Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall., 36.

A general tax laid on all property alike, as where coal is sent from one State to another to be sold, and there becomes intermingled with the property of that State, does not violate this clause of the Constitution. Brown

v. Houston, 114 U. S., 622.

The right to sell intoxicating liquors is not one of the privileges and immunities of citizens, protected by the Constitution. Bartemeyer v. Iowa, 18 Wall., 129; Giozza v. Tiernan, 148 U. S., 657; Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U. S., 623. Licenses may be granted only to residents of the State. Id.

A State law prohibiting the carrying of dangerous weapons abridges no constitutional privilege or immunity. Miller v. Texas, 153 U. S., 535.

The provision in a State law that when the defendant

is out of the State, the statute of limitations shall not run against the resident plaintiff, does not violate Section II of Article IV. Chemung Canal Co. v. Lowery, 93 U. S., 72.

In actions at law in Federal courts the State rule does not apply that the defendant may demur to the complaint when it appears therefrom that the statute of limitations has run. U. S., 72.

Chemung Canal Co. v. Lowery, 93

There is nothing in the Constitution or laws of the United States which exempts an offender, brought before the courts of a State, from trial and punishment, even though brought there by unlawful violence or by the abuse of legal process. Ker v. Illinois, 119 U. S., 436; Mahon v. Justice, 127 U. S., 700; Cook v. Hart, 146 U. S., 183, 190, 192.

In Louisiana it is allowed to take land for the construction of levees on the Mississippi river without compensation, as they were subject to such servitude under the former French law. Land so taken belonging to a citizen of another state gives him no claim that his privileges and immunities have been illegally taken away. Eldridge v. Trezevant, 160 U. S., 452.

The provision of the New York Criminal Procedure Code (Secs. 527, 555) for admitting to bail for noncapital offenses only by filing certificate of a judge as to reasonable doubt whether the judgment should stand, is not repugnant to this section. The Constitution