Approved in Tanner v. Little, 240 U. S. 382, 60 L. Ed. 701, 36 Sup. Ct. 383, upholding statute imposing license tax on use of trading stamps; The Michigan Telephone Tax Cases, 185 Fed. 641, and Citizens' Telephone Co. v. Fuller, 229 U. S. 330, 57 L. Ed. 1213, 33 Sup. Ct. 833, both holding statute taxing telephone companies not void because exempting those having gross receipts of less than five hundred dollars a year; District of Columbia v. Brooke, 214 U. S. 151, 53 L. Ed. 946, 29 Sup. Ct. 560, drainage law of District of Columbia is not void because providing different methods for enforcement against resident and nonresident owners; Beers v. Glynn, 211 U. S. 485, 53 L. Ed. 293, 29 Sup. Ct. 186, upholding provisions of inheritance tax law for taxing personalty of nonresident decedents who owned realty in State; Michigan etc. R. R. Co. v. Powers, 201 U. S. 293, 50 L. Ed. 761, 26 Sup. Ct. 466 (affirming Michigan R. R. Tax Cases, 138 Fed. 233), upholding tax on railroad property under Pub. Acts 1901, No. 173, fixing basis as average rate of taxation to be found by State board; St. Louis etc. Ry. Co. v. Davis, 132 Fed. 634, upholding assessment of railroad property by State board under Sand. & H. Dig., §§ 6464-6473, providing time and place for assessment which is to be based on proportion of mileage within State to value of entire system; Nettleton's Appeal, 76 Conn. 250, 56 Atl. 570, upholding Gen. Stats. 1902, §§ 2367-2377, imposing inheritance exempting from taxation estates of decedent where value less than ten thousand dollars; State v. McMahon, 76 Conn. 102, 55 Atl. 592, upholding Meridan City By-laws, § 9, requiring land owner to keep sidewalk adjoining land free from snow and ice on penalty of fine; Newman v. United States, 41 App. D. C. 50, upholding statute permitting resident individuals and foreign corporations to be licensed as pawnbrokers, but excluding nonresident individuals; First Nat. Bank v. Holmes, 246 Ill. 367, 92 N. E. 895, bank whose stock was assessed on same value basis as other personalty cannot enforce reduction to valuation basis of realty assessments; Cummins v. Pence, 174 Ind. 121, 91 N. E. 531, upholding statute allowing only freeholders to petition for construction of graveled roads; Smith v. Stephens, 173 Ind. 568, 30 L. R. A. (N. S.) 704, 91 N. E. 169, upholding statute providing special method for assessing realty of banks; Kingsbury v. Chapin, 196 Mass. 535, 13 Ann. Cas. 738, 82 N. E. 701, holding stock of domestic railroad corporation doing business in State, consisting of single issue, was property within jurisdiction of commonwealth, subject to collateral inheritance tax; I. M. Darnell & Son v. City of Memphis, 116 Tenn. 435, 95 S. W. 818, upholding tax on logs purchased in and brought in from another State, while products of State are exempt; State v. Clement Nat. Bank, 84 Vt. 187, Ann. Cas. 1912D, 22, 78 Atl. 952, upholding statute providing different method for assessing depositors in national banks from other taxpayers; State ex rel. Bolens v. Frear. 148 Wis. 510, Ann. Cas. 1913A, 1147, L. R. A. 1915B, 569, 134 N. W. 690, upholding provision of income tax law giving power to increase

1089

MINNESOTA v. HITCHCOCK. 185 U. S. 373-402

assessment of nonresident without notice, while requiring notice to resident; Chicago etc. R. Co. v. State, 128 Wis. 645, 108 N. W. 582, upholding Laws of 1903, c. 315, p. 491, providing for assessment of railroad property by State board based upon average rate of taxation on general property; dissenting opinion in Gaston v. O'Neal, 145 Ala. 493, 41 South. 745, majority deciding case on other grounds.

Constitutional equality as to corporate taxation. Note, 60 L. R. A. 323.

Tax on capital stock of corporations. Note, 58 L. R. A. 606.
Situs, as between different States or countries, of personal property
for tax purposes. Note, L. R. A. 19150, 945.

185 U. S. 373-402, 46 L. Ed. 954, 22 Sup. Ct. 650, MINNESOTA v. HITCHCOCK.

Cession by Chippewa Indians under act of January 14, 1889, to United States of reservation lands was in trust for purposes indicated, and sections 16 and 36 of such lands did not pass to State of Minnesota under grant of such sections of public lands as school lands.

Approved in Cobban v. Hyde, 212 Fed. 483, 485, and United States v. Morrison, 240 U. S. 207, 208, 209, 60 L. Ed. 606, 607, 36 Sup. Ct. 331, both holding Oregon did not take title to sections 16 and 36 granted. by act of 1859 prior to survey, and Congress had power to dispose of them on compensating State for deficiency; Sawyer v. Osterhaus, 212 Fed. 776, holding United States could devote lands to public use, notwithstanding grant of public lands to State under generic description where title did not pass till lands ascertained; United States v. Cowlishaw, 202 Fed. 320, 321, holding under act of 1859, title to Oregon school lands did not pass till survey; Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. United States, 191 Fed. 959, 112 C. C. A. 359, Northern Pacific land grant did not include any lands within true boundaries of Yakima Indian reservation; dissenting opinion in Morrison v. United States, 212 Fed. 37, 38, 39, 128 C. C. A. 485, majority holding under act of 1859, Oregon's title to school lands became complete on survey and dated back, and could not be defeated by intervening withdrawal.

Distinguished in Morrison v. United States, 212 Fed. 36, 128 C. C. A. 485, holding under act of 1859, Oregon's title to school lands became complete on survey and dated back, and could not be defeated by intervening withdrawal; Balderston v. Brady, 18 Idaho, 242, 108 Pac. 743, holding State board of land commissioners had no power to relinquish State's title to sections 16 and 36.

In action by State to enjoin Secretary of Interior from selling lands within Indian reservation, claimed by State as school lands, United States is to be taken as real party in interest adverse to State.

Approved in Louisiana v. McAdoo, 234 U. S. 629, 58 L. Ed. 1507, 34 Sup. Ct. 938, holding suit by State producing sugar against Secretary

XVIII-69

of Treasury to determine import duty chargeable on competing imported sugar was in effect suit against United States; Kansas v. United States, 204 U. S. 341, 51 L. Ed. 513, 27 Sup. Ct. 388, Supreme Court has not original jurisdiction over bill by attorney general of Kansas on behalf of State as trustee of railroad of certain lands in Indian Territory, alleged to have been granted by Congress to State for benefit of railroad where name of State is simply used for prosecution of claim of railroad; Pitcock v. State, 91 Ark. 537, 134 Am. St. Rep. 88, 121 S. W. 746, suit to restrain State penitentiary board from violating contract for convict labor is suit against State; Deseret Water etc. Co. v. State, 167 Cal. 158, 163, 138 Pac. 986, 988, holding provisions of State statute for condemnation of public land were ineffective without consent of United States.

Distinguished in Naganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U. S. 476, 50 L. Ed. 1114, 26 Sup. Ct. 667, party may not restrain Secretary of Interior from disposing of Indian lands under act of June 27, 1902, as being an action against United States; Oregon v. Hitchcock, 202 U. S. 68, 69, 50 L. Ed. 938, 26 Sup. Ct. 568, State cannot enjoin Secretary of Interior and commissioner of general land office from patenting swamp-land within Indian reservation; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Andrews, 154 Fed. 101, holding suit against State officers to enjoin enforcement of penalties for noncompliance with void act was not suit against State; Wadsworth v. Boysen, 148 Fed. 778, 779, 78 C. C. A. 437, suit to enjoin Indian agent from obstructing complainant from making selection of lands as authorized by act of Congress is not suit against United States; Smith v. Alexander, 146 Fed. 108, injunction will not lie where its real purpose is enforcement of contract against State, terms of which are in dispute.

When public officers are subject to suit, although they assume to be acting for a State or the United States. Note, 108 Am. St. Rep. 835.

Congress has provided right of State to school sections in Indian reservation may be determined by suit, without making Indian tribe party, against Secretary of Interior.

Approved in United States v. Mayer, 235 U. S. 70, 59 L. Ed. 136, 35 Sup. Ct. 16, where District Court raised question of jurisdiction of motion to vacate judgment of conviction made after term, consent of United States attorney to consider case on merits does not confer jurisdiction; Heckman v. United States, 224 U. S. 442, 56 L. Ed. 832, 32 Sup. Ct. 424, Congress has power to authorize government to sue to maintain statutory restrictions on alienation of Indian allottee lands; Oakes v. United States, 172 Fed. 310, 97 C. C. A. 139, quaere, whether in suit by United States to enforce allotment of specified land, which has been allotted to another Indian, such allottee is necessary party.

The Indian's right of occupancy has always been held to be sacred; something not to be taken from him except by his consent, and then upon such consideration as may be agreed upon.

1091

MINNESOTA v. HITCHCOCK.

185 U. S. 373-402

Approved in Ex parte Van Moore, 221 Fed. 968, discussing jurisdiction over Great Sioux reservation under Sioux treaty of 1868, and act of Congress of 1889.

The words "public lands" are habitually used in our legislation to describe such as are subject to sale or other disposal under general laws. Approved in Union Pacific R. R. Co. v. Harris, 215 U. S. 388, 54 L. Ed. 248, 30 Sup. Ct. 138, lands held in actual possession by entryman are not public lands within meaning of grant to railway of right of way, through public lands; United States v. Lee Wilson & Co., 214 Fed. 642, unsurveyed lands do not pass under swamp-land grant of public lands.

It is presumed that Congress will not impair scope of school land grant. Approved in Johanson v. Washington, 190 U. S. 183, 47 L. Ed. 1010, 23 Sup. Ct. 826, holding Congress intended by act of 1859 that Washington should have sections 16 and 32 unless settled upon and then such selections as approved by Secretary of Interior.

Indian reservation is not public lands.

Approved in Wisconsin v. Hitchcock, 201 U. S. 215, 50 L. Ed. 732, 26 Sup. Ct. 498, under grant of sixteenth sections for school purposes, Wisconsin has no interest in lands ceded to United States by Chippewa Indians, who reserved right of occupancy; United States v. Tully, 140 Fed. 905, Federal court is without jurisdiction to try one for homicide committed in locality occupied as military post but which passed to State on its admission; United States v. Blendur, 128 Fed. 913, 63 C. C. A. 636, holding lands in Bitter Root Valley, Montana, formerly occupied by Flathead Indians, became public land on removal of Indians and extension of homestead laws.

By act of January 14, 1889, unallotted lands of White Earth and Red Lake reservations were ceded to United States in trust, to be sold and proceeds deposited in treasury to credit of Indians for maintenance of schools.

Approved in United States v. Mille Lac Band of Chippewa Indians, 229 U. S. 509, 57 L. Ed. 1305, 33 Sup. Ct. 811, holding under act of January 14, 1889, United States were required to dispose of and account for benefit of Indians all lands in reservation except those in Red Lake reservation.

Distinguished in dissenting opinion in United States v. Ash Sheep Co., 221 Fed. 588, 137 C. C. A. 306, majority holding under act of 1904, modifying Crow treaty, United States became trustee to dispose of Indian lands and pay over proceeds, and lands did not become public lands on which free grazing of sheep was permitted.

The language used in treaties with Indians should never be construed to their prejudice.

Approved in Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. United States, 227 U. S. 366, 57 L. Ed. 550, 33 Sup. Ct. 368, rule that resolves doubts in favor of

'United States patents does not apply to patents for lands within boundaries of Indian reservation fixed by treaty; United States v. Rickert, 188 U. S. 443, 47 L. Ed. 538, 23 Sup. Ct. 482, holding permanent improvements, as houses and structures on land allotted to Indians, are not taxable as personal property by county; United States v. Chehalis County, 217 Fed. 286, rule that taxes voluntarily paid cannot be recovered does not apply to suit by United States to recover taxes wrongfully collected on lands of Indian allottees.

Miscellaneous. Cited in In re Heff, 197 U. S. 497, 49 L. Ed. 852, 25 Sup. Ct. 506, act of January 30, 1897, prohibiting sale of liquor to Indian, is applicable to sale to allottee Indian who became citizen under act of February 8, 1887.

185 U. S. 403–487, 46 L. Ed. 968, 22 Sup. Ct. 698, CARNEGIE STEEL CO. V. CAMBRIA IRON CO.

A process patent can only be anticipated by similar process, and not by mechanism which might, with slight alteration, have been adopted to carry out that process.

Approved in Expanded Metal Co. v. Bradford, 214 U. S. 385, 53 L. Ed. 1041, 29 Sup. Ct. 652, patent for process for expanding metal held to be substantial improvement of art producing new and useful result and valid; Tompkins v. St. Regis Paper Co., 226 Fed. 747, patent for making paper stock held to be for process and valid; Frank Holton & Co. v. Pepper, 216 Fed. 373, upholding patent for improvement in cornets as disclosing novelty and invention; Fowler etc. Mfg. Co. v. McCrum-Howell Co., 215 Fed. 910, 132 C. C. A. 143, upholding patent for radiator, by construing claims in light of specifications; Jones v. Evans, 215 Fed. 588, 131 C. C. A. 654, patent for window lifter construed and held sufficiently specific to cover structure erected in manner shown in drawings; Ball v. Coker, 210 Fed. 281, 127 C. C. A. 126, upholding patent for process of hulling cotton-seed; Minerals Separation v. Hyde, 207 Fed. 961, 963, patent for process for ore concentration held valid; Safety-Armorite Conduit Co. v. Mark, 207 Fed. 348, 125 C. C. A. 16, upholding patent for process for treating and enameling metal surfaces; Duncan v. Stockham, 204 Fed. 789, 123 C. C. A. 133, upholding patent for coal-washer; Young v. Burley, 200 Fed. 261, 118 C. C. A. 368, holding patent for process for decorating pottery void for lack of invention; Schmertz Wire Glass Co. v. Western Glass Co., 178 Fed. 989, upholding patent for process for making wire glass; Malignani v. Hill-Wright Electric Co., 177 Fed. 433, upholding patent for process for producing vacuum in bulbs for incandescent lamps; Donaldson v. Roksament Stone Co., 170 Fed. 196, upholding patent for improved process of forming artificial stone; Fullerton Walnut Growers' Assn. v. Anderson-Barngrover Mfg. Co., 166 Fed. 449, 92 C. C. A. 295, upholding patent for process for bleaching nuts; Expanded Metal Co v. General Fireproofing Co., 164 Fed. 854, 90 C. C. A. 611, uphold.