Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/669

 EX PABTE HODGHTON 657 �more general character. It can hardly be supposed that con- gress intended to grant unlimited authority to a corporation to fix any compensation it might see fit for the use of the bridge, because it would then be in the power of the corpora- tion to do indirectly -what it has not intended should be done. The bridge company could charge such tolls that no irailway Company could use the bridge unless it should be a stock- holder, and thereby receive in dividends what it might pay out for tolls. The bridge was to be an enterprise of great public importance, and it is reasonable to suppose that coii- gress intended carefully to guard the public interests Which ■were coricerned. ���Ex parte Houghtoh. • {District Court, D. Vermont. Juiie 14, 1881.) �1. Chimes — State Court— Jdribdiction. �A State court has no jurisdiction over the offence of passing coun- terfeited national bank bills. �2. Same — Habbas Cohpdb— Federal Court — Juribdiction. �A writ of Jiabeas corpus f rom a federal court is the proper remedy, where one is restrained of his liberty by a stale court for the commis- sion of such an ofEence. — [Ed. �Motion for Diseharge on Habeas Corpus. �Wm. Q. Shaw, for relator. �WHEBiiBB, D. J. This is a motion by the relator for a discharge, on habeas corpus, from imprisonment in a prison of the state, under sentence of a court of the stato for pass- ing counterfeited national bank bills, on the ground that the state court had no jurisdiction over this offence, and that the imprisonment is contrary to the constitution and laws of the United States. �The constitution of the United States provides : �" Article VI. This constitution, and the laws of the United States which ahall be made in pursuance thereof, * # * shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any- thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the cOntrary notwith- standing." �V.7,no.6 4:2 •Re-reported, 8 i<eo. S9f. ��� �