Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-03-21
SUPREME COURT CASES
DECISIONS RENDERED BY HIGH
EST TRIBUNAL TO-DAY.
New York Underground Railroad Mat
ter Take Easter Va
cation.

The Supreme Court OF the United States
today affirmed the decision of the circuit
court for the southern district of New York
III the New York underground railroad
cases. The bill in the case was originally
filed for the purpose Of enjoining construc-
ton. but the New York federal court re-
fused to take Jurisdiction in the case on the
ground that no federal question was involv-
ed. and that the position on the part of
the lower court was sustained by today's
opinion.
There were three cases The first was
that of the Underground Railway Company
against the city of New York. the Rapid
Transit commission and constructors en-
gagged in the construction of an under
ground subway and railway in that city, to
enjoin further construction, as well as pay
ment for work done. The compliments
alleged a prior right to the use of the
streets for underground railroad purposes.
By the Chief Justice.
Chief Justice Fuller rendered the opinion
in all the cases, saying in this one: 1T
appeared on the record that complainants
possessed no contract rights which were
impaired or of which they were deprived,
and that the suit did not really and sub
stantially involve dispute or controversy
as to the application or construction OF
the Constitution"
The other two cases are those of Charles
T. Barney and Arabella D. Huntington. both
against the city of w York. the transit
commissioners and others. They involved
the charge that the route of the rapid tran
sit railroad tunnel under Park avenue haG
been diverted and changed from the orig
inal plans. They asked for an injunction.
..e circuit court refused to assume juris-
diction in both cases, and that decision was
affirmed today
The Supreme Court of the United States
today granted the petition of the United
States to intervene in the case OF the state
of Kansas VS.. the state of Colorado involy-
ing the use of the water of the Arkansas
river.
The Supreme Court of the United States
today adjourned for two weeks for the
usual Easter recess.
Indiana Law Unconstitutional.
Justice Holmes delivered the opinion in
the case of James C. Fargo. president Of
the American Express Company agt. Will
liam II. Hart. auditor of the state of In
diana reversing the decree of the circuit
court for the district of Indiana.
The case involved the Indiana law of
1903 providing for the taxation of express
companies, telegraph companies, ETC.. the
operating of which the express company
resisted. on the ground that the erect OF
it was to tax the outside properly OF tne
company. The circuit court upheld the
state authorities. The opinion OF the Su
preme Court was based on the ground that
the system of taxation proposed Is an inter-
ference with interstate commerce
1T involved attempt, said Justice
Holmes ito tax property beyond the juris-
dicton of the state and to throw an I'M
constitutional burden on commerce among
the state"
The chief justice and Justices Brewer anu
Day dissented
Alternating Land Claims.
The court decided that land claim UNI
low hta ali on
ated before the expiration of five years.
The case in which the opinion was rendered
was that of NJ. ]. Fl. Adams VS.. j. Nj.
Church. and it originated in Malhuer coun-
ty. Ore. The opinion was by Justice Day,
who said that the requirement to plant
trees made by the timber culture law
places the entryman under that law on
footing different from that of the entry
man under the homestead law.
Cinnamon to Be Released
In aan opinion by Justice Day the court
reversed the decision of the district court
for the eastern district of New York in
the cases of three Cinnamon who are held
in Brooklyn for deportation under the Chi
nese exclusion laws. The names of the
Cinnamon are, respectively, Tom Hong.
Tom Dock and Lee Kit, all laundrymen,
and they have been in the United States
for from ten to thirty years
They were apprehended warrants
charging them with failure to produce GER
tificates in accordance with the exclusion
law of 1899 as amended in 1893. They
made defense that they were merchants
and while the government asked to have
the effect of the amendment of 1893 con-
strued the court declined to do so, say
ing that owing to the condition of the
record in the case the court had consulted
the testimony. All the witnesses had
stated that the men were engaged in mer-
camille pursuits and that. therefore. were
not subject to deportation. The court is
sued an order to the lower court direct
ing the discharge of the men