Sidebilder
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Virginia v. Rives, 100 U. S. 313 321 Winebrenner
Von Hoffman v. Quincy, 4 Wall.
535
Vreeland v. Town of Bergen, 34
N. J. Law, 438
Wabash R. R. Co. v. Defiance,

v. Forney, 189

252

102

U. S. Winona &c. Land Co. v. Minnesota, 159 U. S. 526 Winston's Administrator v. Illinois Central Railroad, 111 Ky.

148, 613

338

[blocks in formation]

954

223

[blocks in formation]

262

432 Woodward r. Mutual Reserve Life Ins. Co., 178 N. Y. 485 612 Woodward v. Central Vermont Ry. Co., 180 Mass. 599 595, 599 Wright v. Tibbitts, 91 U. S. 252 21 Wrightman v. Boone County, 82 Fed. Rep. 412 102 Wylie v. Coxe, 15 How. 415 21 349 Yardley r. Philler, 167 U. S. 344 418 Yarnell v. Kansas City &c. R. R. Co., 113 Mo. 570

Yazoo &c. R. R. Co. v. Adams, 180 U. S. 1

Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U. S. 356

488

309

351, 359

45

216

333

Young v. Bryan, 6 Wheat. 146 Young v. Valentine, 177 N. Y. 347

83

612

U. S. 514 Wilson v. Oswego Township, 151 U. S. 56

Wilson v. Wall, 6 Wall. 83

TABLE OF STATUTES

CITED IN OPINIONS.

(A.) STATUTES OF THE UNITED STATES.

PAGE

1789, Sept. 24, 1 Stat. 73, c. 20 82 1815, Mar. 1, 6 Stat. 152, c. 70 143 1822, Mar. 30, 3 Stat. 659, c. 14 526 1827, Mar. 2, 4 Stat. 234, c. 51 526 1833, Mar. 2, 6 Stat. 538, c. 86 143 1844, June 10, 6 Stat. 912, c. 41

141, 142, 143 1851, Mar. 3, 9 Stat. 631, c. 41 355, 358 1864, June 3, 13 Stat. 99, c. 106 418 1866, July 25, 14 Stat. 232, c. 237 141 1866, July 27, 14 Stat. 292, c. 277 71 1875, Mar. 3, 18 Stat. 470, c. 137 1878, June 3, 20 Stat. 89, c. 151 323, 606 1884, July 5, 23-Stat. 552, c. 237 15 1885, Mar. 3, 23 Stat. 443, c. 355 11 1887, Feb. 4, 24 Stat. 379, c. 104

213

391, 398, 405, 537-551 1887, Mar. 3, 24 Stat. 552, c. 373 213, 221, 225, 226 1887, Mar. 3, 24 Stat. 556, c. 376 342 1888, Aug. 13, 25 Stat. 433, c. 866

PAGE

1896, Feb. 12, 29 Stat. 6, c. 18 342 1896, Mar. 2, 29 Stat. 42, c. 39 342, 352 1898, June 13, 30 Stat. 448, c. 448

490, 491

106, 111

1898, July 1, 30 Stat. 544, c. 541 412, 419, 421, 534, 535 1900, Apr. 12, 31 Stat. 77, c. 191 1900, May 12, 31 Stat. 177, c. 393 494, 495 | 1902, May 27, 32 Stat. 207, c. 887 15 1902, July 1, 32 Stat. 691, c. 1369 611 1903, Feb. 19, 32 Stat. 847, c. 708 381 1905, Feb. 24, 33 Stat. 811, c. 778

201, 204

[blocks in formation]

82, 213

[blocks in formation]

182, 185

[blocks in formation]

1890, July 2, 26 Stat. 209, c. 647

1891, Mar. 3, 26 Stat. 826, c. 517 119 1891, Mar. 3, 26 Stat. 854, c. 539 100 1891, Mar. 3, 26 Stat. 1095, c. 561 608 1892, Aug. 4, 27 Stat. 348, c. 375 606 1894, Aug. 13, 28 Stat. 278, c. 280

199, 203, 315

District of Columbia. Code, 233..

(B.) STATUTES OF THE STATES AND TERRITORIES.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

CASES ADJUDGED

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES,

AT

OCTOBER TERM, 1905.

UNITED STATES ex rel. DRURY v. LEWIS, WARDEN OF THE COMMON JAIL.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA.

No. 126. Argued December 12, 1905.-Decided January 2, 1906.

An officer and an enlisted soldier in the military service of the United States were indicted for murder and manslaughter and held for trial in a state court for having killed a citizen of the State who was not in the service of the United States, the alleged crime having been committed within the State, on property not belonging to, or under the jurisdiction of, the United States. On a writ of habeas corpus from a Circuit Court of the United States it was contended that petitioners were seeking to arrest the deceased for felony under the laws of the United States and that he met his death while attempting to escape, and as therefore the homicide was committed by petitioners in the discharge of their duties, the state court was without jurisdiction. On the hearing there was a conflict of evidence as to whether deceased had surrendered or not, and it was conceded that if he were not a fleeing felon the ground for Federal interposition failed. Held, that

VOL. CC-1

(1)

« ForrigeFortsett »