Decree. 254 U.S. STATE OF MINNESOTA v. STATE OF IN EQUITY. No. 13, Original. Motion for appointment of commission submitted October 5, 1920.-Decree entered October 11, 1920. Interlocutory decree defining boundary and appointing commissioners to locate and designate it, etc. See Minnesota v. Wisconsin, 252 U. S. 273, THIS cause came on to be heard by this court, on the motions and suggestions of counsel for the respective parties, for the appointment of a commission to run, locate and designate the boundary line between the State of Minnesota and the State of Wisconsin, as indicated in the opinion of this court, delivered on the 8th day of March A. D. 1920, [252 U. S. 273], and thereupon and on consideration thereof It is ordered, adjudged, and decreed as follows: 1. That the true boundary line between the complainant and the defendant in and through Lower St. Louis Bay, Upper St. Louis Bay, and the St. Louis River, from Upper St. Louis Bay to the "Falls" in the said river, is as hereinafter specified. 2. That said boundary line must be ascertained upon a consideration of the situation existing in 1846 and accurately described by the Meade chart, more specifically hereinafter referred to. 3. That said boundary line runs from a point midway between Rice's Point and Connor's Point through the middle of Lower St. Louis Bay to and with the deep channel leading to Upper St. Louis Bay and to a point therein immediately south of the southern extremity of Grassy Point, thence westward along the most direct course through water not less than eight feet deep eastward of Fisherman's Island, as indicated by the red trace A-B-C on Minnesota's Exhibit No. 1 (said Exhibit 1 being the Meade chart offered and received in evidence in this suit and now a part of the record), approximately one mile to the deep channel and immediately west of the bar therein, thence with such channel north and west of Big Island up stream to the "Falls." 4. A commission, consisting of Samuel S. Gannett, of Washington, D. C.; William B. Patton, of Duluth, Minnesota; and John G. D. Mack, of Madison, Wisconsin, competent persons, is here and now appointed by the court to run, locate, and designate the boundary line between said States along that portion of said bay and river heretofore described in this decree, and to locate said boundary line by proper monuments, courses, and distances, as fixed by the court in this decree. 5. Before entering upon the discharge of their duties each of said commissioners shall be duly sworn to perform faithfully, impartially, and without prejudice or bias, the duties herein imposed, said oaths to be taken before the clerk of this court or before the clerk of any district court of the United States or before an officer authorized by law to administer an oath in the State of Minnesota or the State of Wisconsin, and returned with their report. Said commission is authorized and empowered to make examination of the territory in question and to adopt all ordinary and legitimate methods of survey in the designation of the true location of said boundary line fixed by the decree, to examine and consider carefully the opinion of this court delivered on March 8, 1920, the said Minnesota's Exhibit 1, being the Meade chart, or a certified copy thereof; and said commission shall do all other matters necessary to enable it to discharge its duties and to obtain the end to be accomplished conformably to this decree. 6. It is further ordered that should any vacancy or vacancies occur in said board of commissioners by reason of death, refusal to act, or inability to perform the duties required by this decree, the Chief Justice of this court is thereby authorized and empowered to appoint another commissioner or commissioners to supply such vacancy or vacancies, the Chief Justice acting upon such information in the premises as may be satisfactory to him. 7. It is further ordered that said commissioners proceed with all convenient dispatch to discharge their duties conformably to this decree. 8. It is further ordered that the clerk of this court shall forward at once to the governor of each of said States of Minnesota and Wisconsin and to each of the commissioners hereby appointed a copy of this decree and of the opinion of this court delivered herein March 8, 1920, duly authenticated. 9. Said commissioners shall make a report of their proceedings under this decree as soon as practicable on or before the 1st day of May, 1921, and shall return with their report an itemized statement of services performed and expenses incurred by them in the performance of their duties. 10. All other matters are reserved until the coming in of said report or until such time as matters pertaining to this cause shall be properly presented to this court for its consideration. Opinion of the Court. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY v. SPEIGHT. CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 241. Argued October 12, 1920.—Decided October 25, 1920. The transmission of a telegram between two States is interstate commerce as a matter of fact, and the fact must be tested by the actual transaction. P. 18. In transmitting a message from one point to another in the same State, a telegraph company, following its habitual practice and employing its established system of wires, relays, etc., sent it into another State and back to the point of destination, this being in the circumstances quicker, and more convenient and economical for the company, than to send over wires wholly within the first State. In an action to recover for mental anguish caused by a mistake in the message, wherein the right of recovery hung on the alleged intrastate character of the message, held: (1) That the message was interstate, irrespective of the motive of the defendant company in routing it outside the first State or of the necessity for so doing, and (2), if a motive to evade the jurisdiction of that State were material, it was error to lay the burden on the defendant company of disproving it. Mr. Rush Taggart, with whom Mr. Francis R. Stark, Mr. Walter E. Daniel, Mr. Charles W. Tillett and Mr. Thomas C. Guthrie were on the brief, for petitioner. No brief filed for respondent. MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the court. This is a suit brought in a state court by the respondent against the petitioner, the Telegraph Company, to re Opinion of the Court. 254 U.S. cover for mental suffering caused by a mistake in delivering a telegraphic message. The message handed to the defendant was "Father died this morning. Funeral tomorrow, 10:10 a. m.," and was dated January 24. As delivered to the plaintiff on January 24 it was dated January 23 and thus caused her to fail to attend the funeral which otherwise she would have done. The message was from Greenville, North Carolina, to Rosemary in the same State, and was transmitted from Greenville through Richmond, Virginia, and Norfolk, to Roanoke Rapids, the delivery point for Rosemary. This seems to have been the route ordinarily used by the Company for years, and the Company defends on the ground that the message was sent in interstate commerce, and that therefore a suit could not be maintained for mental suffering alone. Southern Express Co. v. Byers, 240 U. S. 612. The jury found that the message was sent out of North Carolina into Virginia for the purpose of fraudulently evading liability under the law of North Carolina and gave the plaintiff a verdict. The presiding judge then set the verdict aside "as a matter of law" and ordered a non-suit. But on appeal the Supreme Court of the State set aside the non-suit and directed that a judgment be entered on the verdict. We are of opinion that the judge presiding at the trial was right and that the Supreme Court was wrong. Even if there had been any duty on the part of the Telegraph Company to confine the transmission to North Carolina, it did not do so. The transmission of a message through two States is interstate commerce as a matter of fact. Hanley v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co., 187 U. S. 617. The fact must be tested by the actual transaction. Kirmeyer v. Kansas, 236 U. S. 568, 572. As the line was arranged and had been arranged for many years, ever since Roanoke Rapids had been an independent office, Richmond was the relay point from |