Page images
PDF
EPUB

Co. v., (Ala.......

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

452

45

...... 452

Graham o. Boston & A. R. Co., Kerlin v. Chicago, Pittsburg & St.

(Mass.). ...................207, 450 Louis R. Co., (C. C.). ......... 530 - Memphis & Charleston R. Kinkead v. Oregon Short Line &

.. 396 Utah Northern R. Co., (Ore.)., 218 Grant 1. Pennsylvania & N. Y. C. Kinney v. Baltimore & Ohio Em.

& R. Co.. (N. Y.)............. 182 ployés' Relief Assoc., (W. Va.) 34 Gulf C. & 8. F. R. C. R. 0. John | Kruse v. Chicago M. & St. P. R.

son. (Tex.).... ........... 254, 275 Co., (Wis.). ................... 181 Hanning, Louisville, Evansville & Lacroy v. New York, Lake Erie

St. Louis Consolidated R. Co. o., & Western R. Co., (N. Y.)..... 405 (Ind.)...............

Lake Erie & W. R. Co. 0. MiddleHawthorn, Columbia & Puge ton, (IN.). .................... 589

Sound R. Co. v., (U. S.)....... 289 - 0. Mugg, (Ind.)............ 449 Henly, Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. Langlois v. Maine Cent.R. Co.,(Me ) 450

Co. o., (Ohio)................. 194 Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. CommonHenry a Wabash W. R. Co., wealth of Pennsylvania, (U. S.) 679

(Mo.). ................... 207, 378 | Lehigh v. Omaha St. R. Co., (Neb.) 209 Hogan o. Northern Pacific R. Co., Lessard 0. Northern Pac. R. Co., (C. C.)........

384 (Wis.). ................:::::: 500 Hampbreys, Aerfetz v., (U.S.). ... 459 Long v. Chicago, Kansas & WestHurd o. Pacific R. Co., (Utah)..... 244 ern R. Co., (Kan.)..... Indiana, Illinois & Iowa R. Co. o. Lorimer v. St. Paul City R. Co., Suyder, (Ind.)...

(Minn.)......

209 In re Interstaté Commerce Com Louisville, Evansville & St. Louis mission, (C. C.).........

........

Consolidated R. Co. v. Hanning, International & Great Northern R. (Ind.)..........

Co. o. Anderson, (Tex.). ....... 59 - 0. Summers, (Ind.).......... 458 - o. Hinzie, (Tex.). ...........

375 - v. Utz, (Ind.).......194, 279, 447 - 0. Ryan, (Tex.) .............

587 Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. p. Williams, (Tex.).......... Boland, (Ala.). ............... 169 Interstate Commerce Commission, - Copp v., (C. C.) ......... 25 In re, (C. C.).........

— v. Northington, (Tenn.)..... Irvine o. Flint & Pere Marquette - 0. Pearson, (Ala.) 194, 207

R. Co., (Mich.). ............... 210 Isancs v. Southern Pac. R. Co., (C.

..........293, 446

Warden o , (Ala.). ..... .... 470 C.)........: .............. 293 | Louisville, N. 0. & T. P. o. Doug. Jackson ville, Tampa & Key West lass, (Miss.). ...

R. Co, v. Galvin, (Fla.)........ 341 Lutz 6. Atlantic & Pacific R. Co., Johnson 0. Chesapeake & O. R. (N. Mex.)........

Co., (W. Va.). .............225, 245 McCormack, Pennsylvania Co. v.,

- 7. State, (Ala.) ............ 37 (Ind.) ....... Johnston v. Canadian Pac. R. Co., McKelvey v. Chesapeake & Ohio (C. C.)......

R. Co., (W. Va.). ............. 230 -0. Oregon 8. L. &U. N. R. Co., McLaren v. Williston, (Minn.).... 352 Ore.).................133, 280, 293

Maher v. Boston & A.R.Co.,(Mass.) 447 Jolly o. Detroit, L. E N. R. Co., Manhattan R. Co., Palmeri v., (N. (Mich.)........................ 374 Y.).........

...... 56 Justice o, Pepnsylvania Co., (Ind.) 604 Martin v. California Central R. Kansas City, Fort Scott & Gulf Co., (Cal.).......

R. Co., Relyea d., (Mo.)....... 578 | Mary Lee Coal & R. Co, 0. ChandKansas City, Memphis & Bir

liss, (Ala.).... mingham R. Co. v. Burton, Mason w. Richmond & Dan ville R. (Ala.). ...................... 115. Co., (N. Car.) ............... -0. Crocker, (Ala.)...........

589 Matchett v. Cincinnati, Wabash & - 0. Webb, (Ala.)............. 135 Michigau R. Co., (Ind.)........ Kansas City, St. Joseph & Coun Melville v. Missouri River, F. 8. &

cil Bluffs R.Co., Francis v., (Mo.) 410 G. R. Co., (U. 8.)..........374, 534 Kelleher 0. Milwaukee & N. R. Memphis & Charleston R. Co. v.

Co., (Wis.)..... .......134, 449 Graham, (Ala.). ............... 396 Kentucky Central R. Co. v. Ryle, Mensch v. Pennsylvania R, Co.,

(Ky.)......................... 87' (Pa.). ........................ 198

275

478

.........

107

208

107

30

Mexican & Central R. Co. v. Shean, Oregon Short Line & Utah North.

(Tex.). ....... .........351, 352 ern R. Co., Carlson 0., (Ore.).. 135 Michigan Central R. Co., United

Conlon v., (Ore.). ........... 356 States v., (C. C.). .........

- Fisher v., (Ore.). ........... 539 Miller o. Chicago & G. 1, R. Co.,

Kinkead o., (Ore.). ....... 218 (Mich.) .............

245 Osborne, Chicago & Northwestern - 0. Missouri Pac. R. Co., (Mo.) 598 R. Co. 0.. (C. C.)..... Missouri Pac. R. Co., Miller v., Overby o. Chesa peake & Ohio R. (Mo.). ........................

598 Co., (W. Va.)... - O'Malley 1., (Mo.)...... 280 Paland v. Chicago, St. L. & N. 0. - Thomas v., (Mo.)..... 146 R. Co., (La.). ..... Mixter o. Imperial Coal Co., (Pa. Palmer 0. Michigan Central R.

| Co., (Mich.).......

612 Monden, Uniou Pacific R. Co. v. Palmeri v. Manhattan R. Co., (N. (Kan.). ........

Y.) ............ Mulligan v. New York & Rocka Pennington v. Detroit, G, H. & N.

way Beach R. Co., (N. Y.)..... R. Co., (Mich.). .... Nattress v. Philadelphia & R. R. Penusylvania, Lehigh Valley R. Co., (Pa.)....

..... 448 Co. v., (U. S.). ......... Nelson v. Central R. & B.Co.,(Ga.) 275 Pennsylvania Co., Justice 0., Nevhart v. St. Paul City R. Co., (Ind.). ....................... 604

(Minn,)........ .....230, 275 - 0. McCormack, (Ind.). ...... New Jersey & N. Y. R. Co. o. — Toledo, Ann Arbor & North

Young, (U. 9.)............275, 502 Michigan R. Co. v., (C. C.).... 293 Newport News & M. V. R. Co. v. - Toledo, Ann Arbor & North

Howe, (C. C. A.). .............. 577 Michigan R. Co. 0., (C. C.). ... 307 New York, Lake Erie & Western | Pennsylvania R. Co., Mensch 0.,

R. Co., Lacroy v., (N. Y.)..... 405 (Pa.). ........................ 198 New York & New England 'R. R. Peoplé o. Phyfe, (N. Y.)......... 80

Co., New York & Northern R. Phyfe, People o., (N. Y.)........

R. Co. v., (C. C.).............. Pitisburg & Lake Erie R. Co. v. New York & Northern R. R. Co. Henly, (Ohio.)...

v. New York & New England Platt v. Chicago, St. P., M. & 0. R. R. Co., (C. C.). .....

7 R. Co., (Iowa). ................ 447 New York & Rockaway Beach R. Port Royal & Western Carolina

Co., Mulligan v., (N. Y.). ..... R. Co., Brauch 0., (S. Car.).... 276 Nickels, Northern Pacific R. Co. Potter 0. New York Central & I. 0., (C.C. A.)....

.....

388 1 R. R. Co., (N. Y.)............. 587 Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. Briggs, Preston o. St Johnsbury & L. C. R.

(Va.) ......................... 396 Co., (V.). .................... 279 - v. Donnelly's Adm'r, (Va). 571 | Ragon v..Toledo, A. A. & M. M. - 0. Lindamood's Adm'r, (Va.). 576 R. Co., (Mich.)................ 375 - 0. Munnally, (Va.).........: 276 Reichel 0. New York Central & H. Northern Pacific R. Co. 0. Amato, R. R. Co., (N. Y.)............. 86 (U. S.).....................

449 Reiser o. Pennsylvania Co., (Pa.).. 534 — v. Barnes, (N. Dak.) ..... 616 Relyea v. Kansas City, Fort Scott - 0. Cavanaugh, (C. C. A.). ... 530 & Gulf R. C., (Mo.). ........... 578 - Hogan o., (C. C.). ....... 384 | Reynolds v. Boston & Maine R. - 0. Nickels, (C. C. A.). ...... 388 Co., (Vt.). .....

177 - 0. Peterson, (C. C. A.)... 611 Richmond & Danville R. Co. v. Northington, Louisville & Nash

Burnett, (Va.)., ............. 209 ville R. Co. o., (Ala.)...

- 0. Farmer, (Ala)......... 435 O'Donnell v. Duluth, s. 8. & A. R.

-0. Garner, (Ga.). ......... Co., (Mich.)............... 135, 145 Mason v. (N. Car.)........ Old Colony R. Co., Dolan V.,

0. Pannill, (Va.). ...... (Mass.). ......

Schlapbach o., (S. Car.). ... - Tyndale o., (Mass.)

-0. Weems, (Ala.)...... O'Malley V. Missouri Pacific R. Ross, Wisconsin Central R. Co. v. Co., (Mo.)...

280 O'Neill v. Chicago & I. C. R. Co., Rumsey o. Delaware, Lackawanna (Ind.).... ........

& Western R. Co., (Pa.)....... 376

451

(Ill.).....

1441

.....86

0. Geiger, (Terb

448

[ocr errors]

182

Russo Wabash Western R. Co., (Mo.) 610 | Texas & Pacific R. Co. 0. Brick, Rutledge v. Missouri Pacific R. (Tex.)....................3 | Co., (Mod).....

- v. Crilly, (La.). ........ 104 Ryan 0. Louisville, N. 0. & T. R. 27 B C

Thomas o. Missouri Pacific R.Co., St. Louis, A. & T. R. Co. v. Kel. ***

. Kel." (Mo.) ................................... 140 ton, (Ark.)........

......

275 Thyng 0. Fitchburg R. Co., - 0. Lemon, (Tex.)..........375, (Mass.). ...........

535 St. Louis, I. M. & 8. R. Co. o. Toledo, Ann Arbor & North MichDavis. (Ark.). .....

374 igan R. Co. 0. Pennsylvania St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Tra

Co., (C. C.).................... 293 week, (Ter.).................. 448 — o. Pennsylvania Co., (C. C.) 307 Schlapbach ó. Richmond & Dan Tozer v. United States, (C. C.)... 14

ville R. Co., (S. Car.)........ Tuck 0. Louisville & N. R. Co., Schroeder o. Chicago & Alton R. (Ala.). ...... | Co., (Mo.)....

Tyndale v. Old Colony R. Co., Shields 0. New York Cent. & H. R. (Mass.). . Co., (N. Y.)....

275 Umfried' o. Baltimore & 0. R. Co., Snyder, Indiana, Illinois & Iowa (W. Va.). .....

577 Ř. Co. O., (Ind.)

225 Union Pacific R. Co. v. Monden, Southern Kansas R. Co.o. Michaels, (Kan.) ..... (Kan.). .........

- 0. O'Brien, (U. 8.). . 106, 145, 362 —0. Moore, (Kan.)............ United States v. Forokes, (C. C, A.) 18 Southern Pacific R. Co. v. Markey, - 9. Mellen, (Kan.) .......: 18, 25 (Tex.)....

- v. Michigan Central R. Co., Spancake v. Philadelphia & R. R. (C. C.).......

......... 28 Co., (Pa.) ...... ......... 608 -0. Tozer, (C. C.)........... Spencer o. Ohio & M. R. Co., (Ind.) Wabash W. R. Co. v. Morgan,

.........448, 535, 577 (Ind.)...... State, Johnson 0., (Ala.)......... 37Warden 0. Louisville & Nashville State to Use of Abbott, Baltimore R. Co., (Ala.)................ 470

& Potomac R. Co. v., (Md.).... 379 Waterhouse v. Comer, (C. C.).... 329 Steffe o. Old Colony R. Co. (Mass.) 469 Wellman 0. Oregon S. . & . N. Stephenson o. Southern Pacific Co., R. Co., (Ore.) ............550, 612

(Cal.)........................ 79 Welch 0. Alabama & V. R. Co., Sterpart o. Pennsylvania Co. (Ind.) 4501 (Miss.).... Sullivan v. New York, N. H. & H. Williams v. Norfolk & W. R. Co., R. Co., (Conn.). ..............

(Va.)....... - 0. Old Colony R. Co., (Mars ). 450 Wilmington & Weldon R. Co. 0. Sweat 0. Boston & A. R. Co.,

Alsbrook, (U. S............. (Mass.).......

- 0. Alsbrook, (N. Car.)...... Sweeney v. Gulf C. & 8. F. R. Co., | Wilson v. Michigan Central R. Co., (Tex.).......

(Mich.)........ Teras & N. 0. R. Co. v. Conroy, Wisconsin Central R. Co. v. Ross, (Ter.)........

... 181! (Ill.)..

................

612

609

THE

AMERICAN AND ENGLISH
RAILROAD CASES.

VOL. LIII.

In re INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION.

(U. 8. Circuit Court, N. D. Ill., Dec. 7, 1892, 53 Fed. Rep. 476.). Interstate Commerce Act-Jurisdiction of Federal Courts-Constitutional Law.-So much of section 12 of the Interstate Commerce Act as authorizes or requires the United States courts to use their process in aid of inquiries before the Interstate Commerce Commision is unconstitutional and void.

APPLCATION by the Interstate Commerce Commission for an order to compel the production of certain books and papers before the commission, and the answering of certain questions.

Thomas E. Milchrist, U. S. Dist. Atty., for Interstate Commerce Commission.

Prussing, Hutchins & Goodrich, for Calumet & Blue Island Railway Company.

Williams, Holt & Wheeler, for Brimson, Keefe & Stanley.

GRESHAM, Circuit Judge.—June 18, 1892, the Interstate Commerce Commission made an order at Washington, requiring the Calumet & Blue Island Railway Company, the Joliet & Blue Island Railway Company, the Chicago

Case stated. & Southeastern Railway Company, the Chicago Car & Kenosha Railway Company, and the Milwaukee, Bay View £ Chicago Railway Company, and certain other railway companies, to appear at Chicago on July 13, to answer an informal complaint, made by unknown persons, charging.

« EelmineJätka »