Page images
PDF
EPUB

229 U. S.

Opinion of the Court.

ceived from the Postmaster of New York a communication to the effect that the provisions of said statute would be enforced forthwith without awaiting the decision of this court on the appeal which had been argued on December 2 and 3, 1912, and had not yet been decided.

That The Solicitor General of the United States had accepted service of the motion.

The appellant prayed the court to grant herein an order restraining the defendants or their successors in office, as the case may be, and all persons acting through or under them, until the decision of this court herein, from enforcing or attempting to enforce the provisions of said statute, and particularly restraining them from denying to appellant and other newspaper publishers the privileges of the mail by reason of the failure or neglect of appellant and such other publishers to comply with the provisions of said law and file the statements required thereby.

PER CURIAM. On consideration of the motion for a restraining order of the appellees herein,

It is now here ordered by the court that the motion be, and the same is hereby, granted.

229 U.S.

Opinions Per Curiam, Etc.

OPINIONS PER CURIAM, ETC., FROM MARCH 11, 1913, TO JUNE 16, 1913.

No. 189. EDWIN J. BROWN, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Washington. Argued by the plaintiff in error, and submitted for the defendant in error March 14, 1913. Decided March 17, 1913. Per Curiam. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction, on the authority of Kansas City Star Co. v. Julian, 215 U. S. 590, last paragraph; Rogers v. Jones, 214 U. S. 204. Mr. Edwin J. Brown pro se. Mr. W. V. Tanner for the defendant in

error.

No.- Original. Ex parte: IN THE MATTER OF CHARLES F. WILCOX, PETITIONER. Submitted March 24, 1913. Decided April 7, 1913. Motion for leave to file petition for a writ of mandamus and for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Mr. Chas. F. Wilcox pro se.

No. 234. THE ST. LOUIS SOUTHWESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. A. W. BURCKETT. In error to the District Court of the Parish of Caddo, State of Louisiana. Submitted by the plaintiff in error April 21, 1913. Decided April 28, 1913. Per Curiam. Judgment reversed with costs, and case remanded for further proceedings upon the authority of Railroad Co. v. Hefley, 158 U. S. 98; Texas & Pacific Ry. v. Mugg, 202 U. S. 242; United States v. Miller, 223 U. S. 599; Ill. Central R. R. v. Henderson Elevator Co., 226 U. S. 441.

Mr. Taliaferro

Opinions Per Curiam, Etc.

229 U. S.

Alexander, Mr. S. H. West, Mr. C. C. Collins and Mr. Roy T. Britton for the plaintiff in error. No appearance for the defendant in error.

No. 911. THE UNITED STATES EX REL. SALI ZIMMERSPITZ, APPELLANT, v. P. L. PRENTIS ET AL. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. Submitted April 11, 1913. Decided April 28, 1913. Per Curiam. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Lampasas v. Bell, 180 U. S. 276, 282; American Sugar Refining Co. v. United States, 211 U. S. 155, 161. Mr. Benjamin C. Bachrach for the appellant. The Attorney General and Mr. Assistant Attorney General Harr for the appellees.

No. 223. MARION A. MORSE, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. SIDNEY A. BROWN, SHERIFF OF NEW LONDON COUNTY, CONN. In error to the Supreme Court of Errors of the State of Connecticut. Submitted April 17, 1913. Decided April 28, 1913. Per Curiam. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Anderson v. Connecticut, 226 U. S. 603. Mr. Donald G. Perkins and Mr. Chas. W. Comstock for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Chas. B. Whittlesey for the defendant in error.

No. 321. CHARLES WILSON, ARRESTED UNDER THE NAME OF CHARLES WILLARD, APPELLANT, v. THE UNITED STATES. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. Motion to dismiss submitted April 28, 1913. Decided May 5, 1913.

229 U.S.

Opinions Per Curiam, Etc.

Per Curiam. Appeal dismissed upon the authority of Johnson v. Hoy, 227 U. S. 245. Mr. Elijah N. Zoline for the appellant. The Attorney General and Mr. Assistant Attorney General Harr for the appellee.

No. 2. COLORADO & NORTHWESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE UNITED STATES. In error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Colorado. Submitted October 21, 1912. Decided May 5, 1913. Per Curiam. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction on the authority of Union Trust Co. of St. Louis v. Westhus, 228 U. S. 519. (See United States v. The Colorado & N. W. R. R. Co., 157 Fed. Rep. 321; S. C., 209 U. S. 544.) Mr. E. E. Whitted for the plaintiff in error. The Attorney General, Mr. Assistant to the Attorney General Fowler and Mr. Henry E. Colton for the defendant in error.

No. 238. S. D. HARPER, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. GRANT VICTOR, UNITED STATES Marshal, ETC. In error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Oklahoma. Submitted April 18, 1913. Decided May 5, 1913. Per Curiam. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction on the authority of Fisher v. Baker, 203 U. S. 174, 182, and cases cited, and cause remanded to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Oklahoma. Mr. Jas. S. Davenport for the plaintiff in error. The Attorney General and Mr. Assistant Attorney General Adkins for the defendant in error.

No. 253. THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. ATLANTA JOURNAL COMPANY ET AL. In error to the

« PreviousContinue »