Suits for Violation of Interstate Commerce Laws

This is paragraph 8 of section 24. The proceedings which are exclusively to be taken in the commerce court are excepted from the operation of this paragraph. This exception is set out in section 207 of the Judicial Code (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1911, p.216).*

No clause of the Constitution has been responsible for as much legislation in recent years as the commerce clause. It has been used as a clothesline on which to hang everything; and a discussion of the legislation under it is far beyond the purview of this treatise. The best known examples are the statutes regulating carriers in their relation to the public and their employees, anti-trust laws, pure food laws and laws against the "white slave" traffic. The decisions on these various laws are increasingly numerous. A few of the later ones are added in a footnote.25

* The Commerce Court is now abolished. See post, p. 701. 25 (1) Under the interstate commerce act (Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, 24 Stat. 379 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3154]): Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Riverside Mills, 219 U. S. 106, 31 Sup. Ct. 164, 55 L. Ed. 167, 31 L. R. A. (N. S.) 7; Int. Comm. Commission v. Union Pacific R. Co., 222 U. S. 541, 32 Sup. Ct. 108, 56 L. Ed. 308; Railroad Commission of Ohio v. Worthington, 225 U. S. 101, 32 Sup. Ct. 653, 56 L. Ed. 1004. (2) Under the safety appliance act (Act March 2, 1893, c. 196, 27 Stat. 531 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3174]): Southern Railway Co. v. U. S., 222 U. S. 20, 32 Sup. Ct. 2, 56 L. Ed. 72; Pacific Coast Railway Co. v. U. S., 173 Fed. 448, 98 C. C. A. 31. (3) Under the employer's liability act (Act April 22, 1908, c. 149, 35 Stat. 65 [U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1911, p. 1322]): Mondou v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co., 223 U. S. 1, 32 Sup. Ct. 169, 56 L. Ed. 327, 38 L. R. A. (N. S.) 44; Philadelphia, B. & W. R. Co. v. Schubert, 224 U. S. 603, 32 Sup. Ct. 589, 56 L. Ed. 911; Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. Castle, 224 U. S. 541, 32 Supp. Ct. 606, 56 L. Ed. 875. (4) Under the pure food laws: Hipolite Egg Co. v. U. S., 220 U. S. 45, 31 Sup. Ct. 364, 55 L. Ed. 364; Savage v. Jones, 225 U. S. 501, 32 Sup. Ct. 715, 56 L. Ed. 1182; Standard Stock Food Co. v. Wright, 225 U. S. 540, 32 Sup. Ct. 784, 56 L. Ed. 1197. See "Courts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 289; Cent. Dig. § 830.

Suits on Debentures

This is the tenth paragraph of section 24, and is a combination of the jurisdiction heretofore exercised by both the district and circuit courts.

These debentures are issued in connection with the collection of duties, under the circumstances set out in sections 3038-3042 of the Revised Statutes.26

Suits for Injuries on Account of Acts Done under Laws of the United States

This is paragraph 11 of section 24, and is a jurisdiction heretofore conferred on the circuit court.27

Suits under the Civil Rights Amendments and Statutes

These constitute paragraphs 12, 13, 14, and 15 of section 24.

These acts have been the subject of some interesting decisions by the Supreme Court. It has been held that the exclusion of colored men from juries is a violation of these acts, and gives a colored man who is being proceeded against a good ground of exception.28 The mere fact, however, of separating the races, is not a violation of this act, provided equal accommodations are furnished to both. This applies to their separation in public schools or on public conveyances.29 And it has also been held that a statute which does not in terms discriminate against the

26 U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1997-1999.

27 See Crawford v. Johnson, 6 Fed. Cas. 777; Knight v. Shelton (C. C.) 134 Fed. 423. See "Courts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 282, 284; Cent. Dig. §§ 820-838.

28 In re Virginia, 100 U. S. 339, 25 L. Ed. 676; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U. S. 370, 26 L. Ed. 567; Carter v. Texas, 177 U. S. 442, 20 Sup. Ct. 687, 44 L. Ed. 839. See "Civil Rights," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 10; Cent. Dig. § 5; “Constitutional Law," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 221; Cent. Dig. § 724.

29 Davenport v. Cloverport (D. C.) 72 Fed. 689; Cumming v. Board, 175 U. S. 528, 20 Sup. Ct. 197, 44 L. Ed. 262; Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U. S. 537, 16 Sup. Ct. 1138, 41 L. Ed. 256. See "Civil Rights,” Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 5-9; Cent. Dig. §§ 6-10; "Constitutional Law,” Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 215-220; Cent. Dig. §§ 714-720.

colored race or deprive them of the right to vote is not void on that account where that result is merely incidental, and where it does not appear that there is any purpose in the administration of the law to discriminate against them.30

Some of the provisions of the civil rights act of March 1, 1875,31 have been held unconstitutional.32

An interesting discussion of the subject will be found in Brawner v. Irwin 33 and Bailey v. Alabama (a peonage case).34

Suits against National Banking Associations

This is paragraph 16 of section 24. In substance it applies to suits by the United States or its officers, and suits for winding up the affairs of such banks, and suits by such banks against the comptroller of the currency or any receiver appointed by him under the provisions of the national banking act. As to all other suits by or against national banks, the paragraph provides that such a bank shall be deemed a citizen of the state in which it is located.

This paragraph combines the former district and circuit court jurisdiction given by the Revised Statutes with the qualifying clause as to citizenship taken from the acts of July 12, 1882,35 and August 13, 1888.36

30 Williams v. Mississippi, 170 U. S. 213, 18 Sup. Ct. 583, 42 L. Ed. 1012. See, in general, Civil Rights Cases, 109 U. S. 3, 3 Sup. Ct. 18, 27 L. Ed. 835. See "Elections," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 12; Cent. Dig. § 8.

31 U. S. Rev. St. § 1977 et seq. (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1259 et seq.)

32 Civil Rights Cases, 109 U. S. 3, 3 Sup. Ct. 18, 27 L. Ed. 835. See "Civil Rights," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 1; Cent. Dig. §§ 1, 2; "Constitutional Law," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 209; Cent. Dig. § 678.

33 (C. C.) 169 Fed. 964. See "Civil Rights," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 1, 13; Cent. Dig. §§ 1, 2, 11, 12; "Courts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 282. 34 219 U. S. 219, 31 Sup. Ct. 145, 55 L. Ed. 191. See "Constitutional Law," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 83; Cent. Dig. §§ 150-1511⁄2. 35 U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3457.

36 U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 514. HUGHES FED.PR.(2D ED.)-6

Until these acts, the district court had jurisdiction of suits by or against national banks, regardless of either the question of citizenship or of the amount involved. Suits between a national bank and a citizen of its own state can no longer be brought in the federal courts, unless there is some other ground of jurisdiction involved in the suit, such as the existence of a federal question. If the court would have jurisdiction of the cause of action provided the national bank was a state bank, it would still have jurisdiction, but these cases would go into the district court on the ground of diversity of citizenship or the existence of a federal question; these grounds being discussed in another connection.39

Suits by Aliens for Tort, and Suits against Consuls or Vice Consuls

Jurisdiction of these cases is conferred on the district court by the seventeenth and eighteenth paragraphs of section 24. They are maintainable against a consul under these provisions, though the consul may be a citizen of the United States appointed as consul by some foreign power.40

37 Kennedy v. Gibson, 8 Wall. 498, 19 L. Ed. 476. See "Banks and Banking," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 275; Cent. Dig. §§ 1056-1066; "Courts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 282.

(C. C.) 25 Fed. 209; Union See "Banks and Banking,"

38 National Bank of Jefferson v. Fore Nat. Bank v. Miller (C. C.) 15 Fed. 703. Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 275; Cent. Dig. §§ 1056–1066.

39 Leather Manufacturers' Nat. Bank v. Cooper, 120 U. S. 778, 7 Sup. Ct. 777, 30 L. Ed. 816; Huff v. Union National Bank (C. C.) 173 Fed. 333; International Trust Co. v. Weeks, 203 U. S. 364, 27 Sup. Ct. 69, 51 L. Ed. 224; post, p. 240. See "Banks and Banking,” Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 275; Cent. Dig. §§ 1056–1066.

40 Baiz, In re, 135 U. S. 403, 10 Sup. Ct. 854, 34 L. Ed. 222. See, in general, Iasigi v. Van De Carr, 166 U. S. 391, 17 Sup. Ct. 595, 41 L. Ed. 1045; Börs v. Preston, 111 U. S. 261, 4 Sup. Ct. 407, 28 L. Ed. 419. See "Ambassadors and Consuls," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 8; Cent. Dig. §§ 23-25; "Courts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 301, 518; Cent. Dig. § 842.

CHAPTER V

THE DISTRICT COURT (Continued)-BANKRUPTCY

31. Bankruptcy-Jurisdiction Over.

32.

Same-History of the Legislation.

33. Same Policy of the Legislation.

35.

34. Constitutionality of Bankrupt Legislation. Same-Effect of Federal on State Legislation. The Bankruptcy Courts.

36.

40. Acts of Bankruptcy-Definition and Enumeration.

41. Same Transfers to Hinder, Delay, and Defraud Creditors. 42.

Same-Illegal Preferences.

43. Same-Suffering Preferences by Legal Process.

44. Same-Assignment as an Act of Bankruptcy.

45.

Same-Admission of Insolvency in Writing.

46. Time of Filing Petition.

BANKRUPTCY-JURISDICTION OVER

31. The district court is the principal tribunal exercising supervision over matters of bankruptcy.

SAME HISTORY OF THE LEGISLATION

32. Several United States bankruptcy statutes have been in force at different intervals, varying somewhat in their nature according to the exigencies of the period. The present statute on the subject was put into force by the act of July 1, 1898.1

1 U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3418.