Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 17.pdf/527

 502

THE GREEN BAG

of the carrier, and that the bill of lading was after ward delivered apparently as a mere matter of form; that the condition relied on was in small type, and that the bill itself was received only by a clerk of the shipper and was immediately hypothecated. Under these circumstances it is decided that the special agreement was not modi fied by the bill of lading. CARRIERS. (INJURY TO PASSENGER STANDING ON PLATFORM — CONTRIBUTORY NEGLI GENCE) MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT. Under Michigan Comp. Laws, § 6303, declaring that if a passenger is injured while on the plat form of a car, in violation of the regulations of the railroad company, the latter shall not be liable, provided room and seats inside were sufficient for the accommodation of passengers, it is held by a divided court in Morgan v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Ry. Co., 101 Northwestern Reporter, 836, that where all seats were occupied and a passenger became faint from conditions existing as a result of the company's negligence, and because of inability to get to a window to relieve his faintness, he sought to get fresh air on the platform, he was not guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law. The force of this decision as a precedent, especially in other states, is somewhat weakened by the fact that three of the six judges dissented.

not, therefore, by any of the acts charged in the indictment, be defrauded. It will be remembered that the cork was being furnished to a company which had received the contract to supply lifepreservers for use upon certain vessels, and this firm had notified the Nonpareil Cork Works that the blocks of cork previously furnished were not of sufficient weight to comply with the United States regulations, and the weighted blocks were then sent with directions that one weighted block should be used in each life-preserver to bring it up to the required weight. The court holds that this was a conspiracy to deceive the officers of the government in their execution of a duty by secur ing their unwitting approval of what the law con demned.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. (CITIZENS — EX CLUSION OF PERSON OF CHINESE DECENT) U. S. SUPREME COURT. A case which will no doubt attract a great deal of attention is that of United States v. Ju Toy, 25 Supreme Court Reporter, 644. Defendant claimed to have been born in the United States, and to be returning from a visit to China, when he was detained by the immigration officers at San Fran cisco. A hearing was had under the rules of the Department of Commerce and Labor, and Ju Toy was ordered deported. A writ of habeas corpus was issued by the United States District Court, and a referee to whom the matter was -referred reported that the petitioner was born in the United CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD UNITED States and was a citizen thereof. The govern STATES. (ESSENTIALS OF OFFENSE) ment appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals, U. S. D. C. N. J. which court certified to the United States Supreme The disclosures which followed the burning of Court questions, first, as to whether the District the excursion boat, General Shewn, resulted in the Court should have granted the writ of habeas indictment of the officers of the Nonpareil Cork corpus; second, whether it should have directed Works for conspiracy to defraud the United a new or further hearing upon evidence to be States, in that they caused a half pound iron bar presented; and, third, whether it should have to be placed in blocks of cork to be used in making treated the finding and action of the executive life-preservers for use on vessels navigating the officers of the Department of Commerce and waters of the United States, in order that the Labor upon the question of citizenship as final preservers might fulfill the regulations of the and conclusive. The majority of the court, by United States government as to the weight and Mr. Justice Holmes, upon the authority of U. S. pass the inspection of the United States officers, v. Sing Tuck 194 U. S. 161, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 621. in accordance with section 4400 of the Revised holds that habeas corpus should not be granted Statutes. The indictments were demurred to, and when the petition alleges nothing but citizenship the demurrers overruled. The federal judge held as making the detention unlawful; and, further, that conspiracy to defraud the United States is that the decision of the executive officers is no not limited in its application to conspiracies to less conclusive on the federal courts in such pro deprive the United States of money or property, ceedings when citizenship is the ground on which as was contended by the defendants. It was the right of entry is claimed, than when the ground further claimed that the life-preservers to be made is that of domicile and the belonging to a class from the cork which had been weighted with iron excepted from the exclusion acts, citing Yamataya were not to be sold to the United States but to v. Fisher, 189 U. S. 86, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 6n, U. S. another party, and that the United States could rel Turner v. Williams, 194 U.S. 279, 24 Sup. Ct.