personal injury sustained by the former while -employed in the latter's coal mine in Pennsylvania. In addition to mining coal in Pennsylvania, the defendant was doing business in New York and, conformably to the laws of the latter state, had designated an agent therein upon whom process against it might be served. The summons was served upon this agent. After an unsuccessful effort to have the service set aside as invalid, the defendant answered and the further proceedings resulted in a judgment for the plaintiff, which was affirmed, without opinion, by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court. An appeal to the Court of Appeals was denied, and the defendant sued out this writ of error. A motion to dismiss the writ is made upon the ground that the judgment, if -open to review here, cannot be reviewed upon a writ of error, but only upon a writ of certiorari. [1] Under section 237 of the Judicial Code, as amended September 6, 1916 (39 Stat. 726, c. 448), a final judgment or decree of a state court of last resort in a suit "where is drawn in question the validity of a treaty or statute of, or an authority exercised under the United States, and the decision is against their validity, or where is drawn in question the validity of a statute of, or an authority exercised under any state, on the ground of their being repugnant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States, and the decision is in favor of their validity," may be reviewed in this court upon writ of error; but, if the suit be one "where is drawn in question the validity of a treaty or statute of, or an authority exercised under the United States, and the decision is in favor of their validity, or where is drawn in question the validity of a statute of, or an authority exercised under any state, on the ground of their being repugnant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States, and the decision is against their validity, or where any title, right, privilege, or immunity is claimed under the Constitution, or any treaty or statute of, or commission held or authority exercised under the United States, and the decision is either in favor of or against the title, right, privilege, or immunity especially set up or claimed, by either party, under such Constitution, treaty, statute, commission, or authority," the judgment or decree can be reviewed in this court only upon a writ of certiorari. The difference between the two modes of securing a review, as contemplated by the statute, lies in the fact that a writ of error is granted as of right, while a writ of certiorari is granted or refused in the exercise of a sound discretion. [2] By a timely motion the defendant sought to have the service of the summons set aside upon the ground"that said service is void, in that the defendant's consent to be sued in the state of New York by service upon its aforesaid designated agent, can only be implied with respect to causes of action arising in connection with business the defendant transacts in the state of New York; the plaintiff's cause of action herein did not arise in connection with the business defendant transacts in the state of New York, but is brought to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained in the state of Pennsylvania. An attempt to compel the Court of the state of New York, sitting in Westdefendant to respond to this suit in the Supreme chester county, is an invasion of the defendant's rights under the Constitution of the United States, particularly section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the said Constitution." The motion was overruled and the defendant, having first excepted to the ruling, answered to the merits. All that was drawn in question by the motion was the validity of the service and the power of the court, consistently with the first section of the Fourteenth Amendmentprobably meaning the due process of law clause, to proceed upon that service to a hearing and determination of the case. It did not question the validity of any treaty or statute of, or authority exercised under, the United States. Neither did it challenge the validity of a statute of, or an authority exercised under, any state, on the ground of its being repugnant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States. Challenging the power of the court to proceed to a decision of the merits did not draw in question an authority exercised under the state, for, as this court has said, the power to hear and determine cases is not the kind of authority to which the statute refers. Bethell v. Demaret, 10 Wall. 537, 540, 19 L. Ed. 1007; French v. Taylor, 199 U. S. 274, 277, 26 Sup. Ct. 76, 50 L. Ed. 189. It follows that the judgment cannot be reviewed upon writ of error. If a review was desired it should have been sought under that clause of the certiorari provision which reads, "or where any title, right, privilege, or immunity is claimed under the Constitution," etc. Writ of error dismissed. MEMORANDUM DECISIONS Disposed of at October Term, 1917 No. 28. The CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, plaintiff in error, v. The STATE OF KANSAS ex rel. S. M. BREWSTER, Attorney General, etc., et al. Nov. 5, 1917. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas. For opinion below, see State v. Sessions, 95 Kan. 272, 147 Pac. 789. Mr. Paul E. Walker, of Topeka, Kan., for plaintiff in error. Mr. S. M. Brewster, Atty. Gen., and Messrs. James P. Colemaa and F. P. Lindsay, both of Topeka, Kan., for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company v. Arkansas, 235 U. S. 350, 35 Sup. Ct. 99, 59 L. Ed. 265. No. 55. Jose SANCHEZ y Armijo, plaintiff in error, v. The STATE OF NEW MEXICO. Nov. 5, 1917. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico. Mr. T. B. Catron, of Santa Fé, N. M., for plaintiff in error. Dismissed with costs, on motion of counsel for the plaintiff in error. No. 280. R. V. MOORE, plaintiff in error, v. Walter C. TAYLOR, Commissioner of Insurance of the State of North Dakota, et al. Nov. 5, 1917. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota. Mr. Aubrey Lawrence, of Fargo, N. D. (Messrs. Lawrence & Murphy, of Fargo, N. D., of counsel), for plaintiff in error. Mr. Wm. Langer, Atty. Gen., and Mr. Harrison A. Bronson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) Equitable Life Assurance Society v. Brown, 187 U. S. 308, 314, 23 Sup. Ct. 123, 47 L. Ed. 190, Consolidated Turnpike Co. v. Norfolk, etc., Ry. Co., 228 U. S. 596, 600, 33 Sup. Ct. 605, 57 L. Ed. 982, and Manhattan Life Ins. Co. v. Cohen, 234 U. S. 123, 137, 34 Sup. Ct. 874, 58 L. Ed. 1245; (2) Butler v. Pennsylvania, 10 How. 402, 415, 416, 13 L. Ed. 472, Newton v. Commissioners, 100 U. S. 548, 559, 25 L. Ed. 710, Taylor v. Beckham, 178 U. S. 548, 20 Sup. Ct. 1009, 44 L. Ed. 1187, and Wilson v. North Carolina, 169 U. S. 586, 18 Sup. Ct. 435, 42 L. Ed. 865; (3) Railroad Co. v. County of Otoe, 16 Wall. 667, 676, 21 L. Ed. 375, Kies v. Lowrey, 199 U. S. 233, 26 Sup. Ct. 27, 50 L. Ed. 167, Stewart v. Kansas City, 239 U. S. 14, 36 Sup. Ct. 15, 60 L. Ed. 120, and Heim v. MeCall, 239 U. S. 175, 36 Sup. Ct. 78, 60 L. Ed. 206, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 287. No. 357. WELLS FARGO & COMPANY et al., appellants, v. Clarence C. CALDWELL, Attorney General, etc., et al. Nov. 5, 1917. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of South Dakota. Messrs. C. O. Bailey, of Sioux Falls, S. D., and Branch P. Kerfoot, of New York City, for appellants. Mr. Clarence C. Caldwell, Atty. Gen., and Mr. P. W. Dougherty, of Pierre, S. D., for appellees. Dismissed, per stipulation, and mandate granted. No. 445. Bob TERRELL, petitioner, v. The UNITED STATES. Nov. 5, 1917. Mr. Guy H. Sigler, of Ardmore, Okl., for petitioner. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied. No. 516. CORRUGATED BAR COMPANY, petitioner, v. TRUSSED CONCRETE STEEL COMPANY. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see 242 Fed. 933. Messrs. James A. Carr, and T. Percy Carr, both of St. Louis, Mo., for petitioner. Messrs. Fred L. Chappell and Otis A. Earl, both of Kalamazoo, Mich., for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied. No. 560. Edward W. BLUM, petitioner, v. The BUMILLER-REMELIN COMPANY. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see 241 Fed. 954. Mr. George B. Parkinson, of South Lincoln, Mass., for petitioner. Messrs. Sturtevant & Mason and Mr. Charles L. Sturtevant, all of Washington, D. C., for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied. No. 617. LIVERPOOL & LONDON & GLOBE INSURANCE COMPANY (Ltd.), appellant, v. James J. BAILEY, Secretary of State of the State of Louisiana. Nov. 5, 1917. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Mr. J. Zach. Spearing, of New Orleans, La., for appellant. Dismissed with costs, on motion of counsel for the appellant. IFORNIA LAND COMPANY. Nov. 5, 1917. No. 655. F. F. DOANE, petitioner, v. CAL For opinion below, see 243 Fed. 67. Mr. G. R. Freeman, of Corona, Cal., for petitioner. Mr. Alfred A. Fraser, of Boise, Idaho, for respond ent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied. No. 686. The CITY OF CHICAGO, petitioner, v. WHITE TRANSPORTATION COMPANY. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see 243 Fed. 358. Mr. Samuel A. Ettelson, Corp. Counsel, and Mr. Chester E. Cleveland, Asst. Corp. Counsel, both of Chicago, Ill., for petitioner. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied. No. 688. WOO VEY, petitioner, V. The UNITED STATES. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see 242 Fed. 838. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied. No. 689. S. D. BARRETT, petitioner, v. The VIRGINIAN RAILWAY COMPANY. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see 244 Fed. 397. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit granted. No. 695. Theodore DENDINGER, petitioner, v. Arthur L. BEAR, tutor, etc. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see Bear v. Dendinger. 141 La. 927, 75 South. 845. Messrs. J. D. Dresner and Henry Mooney, both of New Or leans, La., for petitioner. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana denied. No. 699. Harry MILLER et al., petitioners, v. The UNITED STATES. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see 242 Fed. 907. Mr. George F. Deiser, of Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioners. Mr. John W. Davis, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., and Mr. Charels Warren, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the United States. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied. No. 706. The PORT OF PORTLAND, peti tioner, v. Wilhelm WILHELMSEN. Nov. 5, 1917. Messrs. Joseph N. Teal, Wirt Minor, A. B. Winfree and William A. Johnson, all of Portland, Or., William C. McCullough, of Cleveland, Ohio, and Rogers MacVeagh, of Portland, Or., for petitioner. Mr. William C. Bristol, of Portland, Or., for respondent.__Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied. No. 708. James Howard SANNER, petitioner, v. The WESTERN MARYLAND RAILWAY COMPANY. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see Western Maryland Ry. Co. v. Sanner, 130 Md. 581, 101 Atl. 587. Mr. William C. Sullivan, of Washington, D. C. (Messrs. William Milnes Maloy and George Moore Brady, both of Baltimore, Md., of counsel), for petitioner. Messrs. George R. Gaither and George P. Bagby, both of Baltimore, Md., for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of the State of Maryland denied. No. 710. SUNDH ELECTRIC COMPANY, petitioner, v. CUTLER-HAMMER MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see 244 Fed. 163. Mr. W. Clyde Jones, of Chicago, Ill., for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied. all of Boston, Mass., for petitioners. Mr. Samuel Sigilman, of Boston, Mass., for respondents. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of the State of Massachusetts denied. No. 719. The PLANTERS' STEAMSHIP COMPANY, petitioner, v. ROLF SEEBERG SHIP CHANDLERY COMPANY et al. Nov. 5, 1917. Mr. John D. Grace, of New Orleans, La., for petitioner. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied. No. 720. The LIBERAL ELEVATOR COMPANY, petitioner, v. The WICHITA MILL & ELEVATOR COMPANY. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see Wichita Mill & Elevator Co. v. Liberal Elevator Co., 243 Fed. 99. Messrs. E. F. Colladay, of Washington, D. C., and C. M. Williams, of Hutchinson, Kan., for petitioner. Messrs. Chester I. Long and Austin M. Cowan, both of Wichita, Kan., for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied. No. 730. UNITED METALS SELLING COMPANY, petitioner, v. Edward B. PRYOR et al. 243 Fed. 91. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see Mr. John A. Garver, of New York City, for petitioner. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied. No. 731. N. B. K. PETTINGILL, petitioner, v. Walter McK. JONES. Nov. 5, 1917. Fed. 269. Mr. N. B. K. Pettingill, of Tampa, For opinion below, see Jones v. Pettingill, 245 Fla., in pro. per. Messrs. Rounds, Hatch, Dillingham & Debevoise, of New York City (Messrs. Francis E. Neagle, of New York City, and Woodward Emery, of Boston, Mass., of counsel), for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied. No. 732. Ella GETKIN, petitioner, v. The PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY. Nov. 5, 1917. Messrs. William M. Hargest and William M. Hain, both of Harrisburg, Pa., for petitioner. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, State of Pennsylvania, denied. No. 736. GLOBE STEAMSHIP COMPANY, claimant, etc., petitioner, v. Henry MOSS. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see 245 Fed. 54. No. 711. SUNDH ELECTRIC COMPANY, Messrs. Harvey D. Goulder and Thomas H. Garpetitioner, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPAry, both of Cleveland, Ohio, and Wm. B. Cady, NY. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see 244 of Detroit, Mich., for petitioner. Petition for Fed. 163. Messrs. Frederick P. Fish and a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Charles Neave, both of Boston, Mass., and Al Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied. bert G. Davis, of Schenectady, N. Y., for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied. No. 716. George ORLOV et al., petitioners, ▼. Abraham ARONSON et al., etc. Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see Aronson v. Orlov, 116 N. E. 951. Messrs. George R. Nutter, Edward F. McClennen, and Jacob J. Kaplan, No. 737. William BAULCH, petitioner, v. The STRATHLEVEN STEAMSHIP COMPANY (Ltd.). Nov. 5, 1917. For opinion below, see Strathleven Steamship Co. v. Baulch, 244 Fed. 412. Mr. Robert H. Talley, of Richmond, Va., for petitioner. Mr. Floyd Hughes, of Norfolk, Va., for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied. No. 45. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPA-1 Railway Co. v. King, 222 U. S. 222, 32 Sup. NY, plaintiff in error, v. C. S. COOK, admin- Ct. 79, 56 L. Ed. 173; Seaboard Air Line Railistrator of W. M. Poteat, deceased. Nov. 9, way v. Padgett, 236 U. S. 668, 35 Sup. Ct. 481, 1917. In error to the United States Circuit 59 L. Ed. 777; Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. For v. Whitacre, 242 U. S. 169, 37 Sup. Ct. 33, 61 opinion below, see 226 Fed. 1, 141 C. C. A. 115. L. Ed. 228. Mr. Robert B. Tunstall, of Norfolk, Va., for plaintiff in error. Mr. Harry Wooding, Jr., of Danville, Va., for defendant in error. Dismissed with costs, on motion of counsel for the plaintiff in error. No. 34. The UNITED STATES of America for the Use of T. H. KESSLER & COMPANY, plaintiff in error, v. TITLE GUARANTY & SURETY COMPANY. Nov. 12, 1917. In error to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. For opinion below, see 218 Fed. 67, 134 C. C. A. 19. Mr. James A. Baker, of Houston, Tex., for plaintiff in error. Mr. Lewis R. Bryan, of Houston, Tex., for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of Illinois Surety Company v. Peeler, 240 U. S. 214, 36 Sup. Ct. 321, 60 L. Ed. 609, and cause remanded to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Texas. No. 35. E. O. ELLISON, plaintiff in error, v. CITY OF LA MOURE et al.; and No. 36. David LLOYD, plaintiff in error, CITY OF LA MOURE et al. Nov. 12, 1917. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota. For opinions below, see 30 N. D. 43, 151 N. W. 988; 30 N. D. 52, 151 N. W. 991. Mr. S. E. Ellsworth, of Jamestown, N. D., for plaintiffs in error. PER CURIAM. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of Kansas City Star Co. v. Julian, 215 U. S. 589, 30 Sup. Ct. 406, 54 L. Ed. 340; McCorquodale v. Texas, 211 U. S. 432, 437, 29 Sup. Ct. 146, 53 L. Ed. 269; St. Louis & San Francisco Ry. Co. v. Shepherd, 240 U. S. 240, 241, 36 Sup. Ct. 274, 60 L. Ed. 622. No. 150. Eugene W. MORAN, plaintiff in error, v. CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY. Nov. 12, 1917. In error to the Court of Errors and Appeals of the State of New Jersey. For opinion below, see 88 N. J. Law, 730, 96 Atl. 1023. Messrs. Frank M. Hardenbrook and Charles M. Egan, both of Jersey City, N. J., for plaintiff in error. Messrs. George Holmes, of New York City, and Edwards & Smith, of Jersey City, N. J. (Mr. Charles E. Miller, of Jersey City, N. J., of counsel), for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R. Co. v. Harrington, 241 U. S. 177, 36 Sup. Ct. 517, 60 L. Ed. 941; Lehigh Valley R. R. Co. v. Barlow, 244 U. S. 183, 37 Sup. Ct. 515, 61 L. Ed. 1070. No. 350. Helen BELL, as administratrix of George Bell, deceased, plaintiff in error, v. The CHESAPEAKE & OHIO RAILWAY COMPANY. Nov. 12, 1917. In error to the Court of Appeals of the State of Kentucky. For opinion below, see 161 Ky. 466, 170 S. W. 1180. Mr. Allan D. Cole, of Maysville, Ky. (Messrs. W. T. Cole, of Greenup, Ky., and H. W. Cole, of Maysville, Ky., of counsel), for plaintiff in error. Messrs. E. L._ Worthington, W. D. Cochran, and Lewright Browning, all of Maysville, Ky., for defendant in error. No. 366. William A. TROGLER et al., appellants, v. The UNITED STATES et al. Nov. 12, 1917. Appeal from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. For opinion below, see United States v. Trogler, 237 Fed. 181, 150 C. C. A. 327. Mr. Edwin H. Park, of Denver Colo., for appellants. Mr. Archibald A. Lee, of Denver, Colo., for appellees E. M. Dorsey and H. S. Dorsey. PER CURIAM. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of: 1. Whitney v. Dick, 202 U. S. 132, 135, 26 Sup. Ct. 584, 50 L. Ed. 963; McClellan v. Carland, 217 U. S. 268, 278, 30 Sup. Ct. 501, 54 L. E. 762. 2 Smith v. Indiana, 191 U. S. 138, 148-150, 24 Sup. Ct. 51, 48 L. Ed. 125; McCandless v. Pratt, 211 U. S. 437, 440, 29 Sup. Ct. 144, 53 L. Ed. 271. No. 542. Alberto SANDOVAL et al., petitioners, v. Ida C. PFEUFFER et al. Nov. 12, 1917. For opinion below, see 237 Fed. 1020, 150 C. C. A. 669. Antonio, Tex., for petitioners. Messrs. S. J. Mr. Don A. Bliss, of San Marcus W. Davis, all of San Antonio, Tex., for Brooks, Wm. Aubrey, Guinn & McNeill, and respondents. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied. No. 612. Charles M. SIMPSON, petitioner, V. The UNITED STATES. Nov. 12, 1917. For opinion below, see 241 Fed. 841. Mr. George H. Eichelberger, of Cleveland, Ohio (Messrs. Mathews, Orgill & Maschke, of Cleveland, Ohio, of counsel), for petitioner. Mr. John W. Davis, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., and Mr. Edwin S. Wertz, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the United States. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied. No. 721. GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY STATES of America. COMPANY, petitioner, V. The UNITED opinion below, see 244 Fed. 406. Nov. 12, 1917. For Messrs. E. of Seattle, Wash., and Charles S. Albert, of C. Lindley, of St. Paul, Minn., F. V. Brown, Spokane, Wash., for petitioner. Mr. John W. Davis, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., and Mr. William L. Frierson, Atty. Gen., for the United States. rari to the United States Circuit Court of ApPetition for a writ of certiopeals for the Ninth Circuit denied. No. 725. J. E. BALDWIN, petitioner, v. The UNITED STATES of America. Nov. 12, 1917. A. 643. Mr. A. S. Baskett, of Dallas, Tex., for For opinion below, see 238 Fed. 793, 151 C. C. petitioner. Mr. John W. Davis, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., for the United States. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied. No. 726. The PEOPLE OF PORTO RICO, petitioner, v. Eduardo WYS. Nov. 12, 1917. Mr. Howard L. Kern, Atty. Gen., and Messrs. Samuel T. Ansell and Edward S. Bailey, both PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed with of Washington, D. C., for the People of Porto costs upon the authority of Chicago Junction | Rico. Mr. Rafael R. Rivera Zayas, of San Juan, Porto Rico, for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Porto Rico denied. tiffs in error. Mr. Samuel T. Ansell, of Washington, D. C., for the United States. Dismissed pursuant to the tenth rule. No. 727. The PEOPLE OF PORTO RICO, No. 42. AMERICAN RADIATOR COMPApetitioner, v. Aniceto BERRIOS. Nov. 12, NY, plaintiff in error, v. John F. ROGGE, ad1917. Messrs. Howard L. Kern, Samuel T. ministrator of the estate of John F. Rogge, Jr., Ansell, and Edward S. Bailey, all of Washing-deceased. Nov. 19, 1917. In error to the Suton, D. C., for the People of Porto Rico. preme Court of the State of New Jersey. For Messrs. R. Martinez Nadal, Manuel F. Rossy, opinion below, see 86 N. J. Law, 436, 92 Atl. and Juan B. Soto, all of San Juan, Porto Rico, 85, judgment affirmed 87 N. J. Law, 314, 93 for respondent. Petition for a writ of certio- Atl. 1083. Mr. John Franklin Fort, of Newark, rari to the Supreme Court of Porto Rico de- N. J., for plaintiff in error. Mr. John K. Engnied. lish, of Elizabeth, N. J., for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of Haire v. Rice, 204 U. S. 291, 27 Sup. Ct. 281, 51 L. Ed. 490; Thomas v. Iowa, 209 U. S. 258, 28 Sup. Ct. 487, 52 L. Ed. 782; Appleby v. Buffalo, 221 U. S. 524, 529, 31 Sup. Ct. 699, 55 L. Ed. 838. No. 729. Clemente RAMIREZ, petitioner, v. The PEOPLE OF PORTO RICO. Nov. 12, 1917. Mr. Carroll G. Walter, of New York City, for petitioner. Messrs. Samuel T. Ansell and Edward S. Bailey, both of Washington, D. C., for the People of Porto Rico. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Porto Rico denied. No. 741. H. Bradley DAVIDSON et al., petitioners, v. The E. F. BROOKS COMPANY. Nov. 12, 1917. Mr. John C. Gittings, of Washington, D. C., for petitioners. Messrs. Henry F. Woodward and Daniel Thew Wright, both of Washington, D. C.. for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia denied. No. 742. HARTFORD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, petitioner, v. Nannie M. JOHNSON. Nov. 12, 1917. For opinion below, see Johnson v. Hartford Life Ins. Co., 197 S. W. 132. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri granted. No. 743. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, petitioner, v. Thomas YOUNG. Nov. 12, 1917. Messrs. L. E. Jeffries, of Washington, D. C., Benjamin Lindsey Abney, of Columbia, S. C., and J. E. McDonald, of Winnsboro, S. C., for petitioner. Messrs. J. Fraser Lyon, of Columbia, S. C., and J. Harry Foster, of Rock Hill, S. C., for respondent. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the State of South Carolina denied. No. 745. Morgan O. LLEWELLYN et al., petitioners, v. The STATE OF NEW MEXICO. Nov. 12, 1917. For opinion below, see State v. Llewellyn, 167 Pac. 414. Messrs. Francis C. Wilson, of Santa Fé, N. M., and S. P. Weisiger, of El Paso, Tex., for petitioners. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico denied. No. 64. The UNITED STATES of America ex rel. David BOWLEGS, a minor, etc., plaintiff in error, v. Franklin K. LANE, Secretary of the Interior. Nov. 15, 1917. In error to the court of appeals of the District of Columbia. Mr. James W. McNeill, of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff in error. Dismissed with costs, on motion of counsel for the plaintiff in error. No. 46. The GERMANIA REFINING COMPANY et al., plaintiffs in error, v. Oramel B. FULLER, Auditor General, et al. Nov. 19, 1917. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Michigan. For opinion below, see 184 Mich. 618, 151 N. W. 605. Mr. Charles D. Chamberlin, of Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. Grant Fellows, of Hudson, Mich., for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of American Refrigerator Transit Co. v. Hall, 174 U. S. 70, 19 Sup. Ct. 599, 43 L. Ed. 899; Union Refrigerator Transit Co. v. Lynch, 177 U. S. 149, 20 Sup. Ct. 631, 44 L. Ed. 708. No. 47. CHICAGO CAR HEATING COMPANY, appellant, v. GOLD CAR HEATING & LIGHTING COMPANY. Nov. 19, 1917. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. Mr. Otto Raymond Barnett, of Chicago, Ill., for appellant. Messrs. William A. Redding, of New York City, Edward Rector, of Chicago, Ill., and Arthur C. Fraser, of New York City, for appellee. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of Green v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co., 205 U. S. 530, 27 Sup. Ct. 595, 51 L. Ed. 916; W. S. Tyler Co. v. Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co., 236 U. Š. 723, 35 Sup. Ct. 458, 59 L. Ed. 808. No. 49. Francis Stephen MEDCRAF, appellant, v. Robert T. HODGE, as Sheriff of King County, Washington. Nov. 19, 1917. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Washington. Messrs. Samuel H. Piles and W. B. Stratton, both of Seattle, Wash., for appellant. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of Ex parte Royall, 117 U. S. 241, 251, 6 Sup. Ct. 734, 29 L. Ed. 868; In re Frederich, petitioner, 149 U. S. 70, 77, 13 Sup. Ct. 793, 37 L. Ed. 653; Markuson v. Boucher, 175 U. S. 184, 20 Sup. Ct. 76, 44 L. Ed. 124; Urquhart v. Brown, 205 U. S. 179, 27 Sup. Ct. 459, 51 L. Ed. 760; Frank v. Mangum, 237 U. S. 309, 328, 329, 35 Sup. Ct. 582, 59 L. Ed. 969. No. 65. Thomas D. AITKEN et al., plain- No. 59. BELLOWS FALLS POWER COMtiffs in error, v. The UNITED STATES of PANY, plaintiff in error, v. The COMMONAmerica. Nov. 15, 1917. In error to the WEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. Nov. 19, Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands. Mr. 1917. In error to the Supreme Judicial Court C. L Bouve, of Washington, D. C., for plain-of the State of Massachusetts. For opinion be |