The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation - Part 167
Library

Part 167

[13] Minneapolis & St. L.R. Co. _v._ Bombolis, 241 U.S. 211 (1916), which involved The Federal Employers Liability Act of 1908. The ruling is followed in four other cases in the same volume. _See_ ibid. 241, 261, 485 and 494.

[14] Shields _v._ Thomas, 18 How. 253, 262 (1856).

[15] Parsons _v._ Bedford, 3 Pet. 433, 447 (1830); Barton _v._ Barbour, 104 U.S. 126, 133 (1881).

[16] Clark _v._ Wooster, 119 U.S. 322, 325 (1886); Pease _v._ Rathbun-Jones Eng. Co., 243 U.S. 273, 279 (1917).

[17] Parsons _v._ Bedford, above; Waring _v._ Clarke, 5 How. 441, 460 (1847). _See also_ The "Sarah," 8 Wheat. 390, 391 (1823), and cases there cited.

[18] Labor Board _v._ Jones & Laughlin, 301 U.S. 1, 48 (1937). _See also_ Interstate Commerce Commission _v._ Brimson, 154 U.S. 447, 488 (1894); Yakus _v._ United States, 321 U.S. 414, 447 (1944).

[19] McElrath _v._ United States, 102 U.S. 426, 440 (1880). _See also_ Galloway _v._ United States, 319 U.S. 372, 388 (1943).

[20] Guthrie Nat. Bank _v._ Guthrie, 173 U.S. 528, 534 (1899). _See also_ United States _v._ Realty Co., 163 U.S. 427, 439 (1896); Jefferson City Gaslight Co. _v._ Clark, 95 U.S. 644, 653 (1877).

[21] Luria _v._ United States, 231 U.S. 9, 27 (1913).

[22] Gee Wah Lee _v._ United States, 25 F. (2d) 107 (1928); certiorari denied, 277 U.S. 608 (1928).

[23] Filer & S. Co. _v._ Diamond Iron Works, 270 F. 489 (1921); certiorari denied, 256 U.S. 691 (1921).

[24] Crowell _v._ Benson, 285 U.S. 22, 45 (1932).

[25] In re Wood and Henderson, 210 U.S. 246 (1908).

[26] Auffmordt _v._ Hedden, 137 U.S. 310, 329 (1890).

[27] Walker _v._ New Mexico & S.P.R. Co., 165 U.S. 593, 598 (1897).

[28] Fidelity & D. Co. _v._ United States, 187 U.S. 315, 320 (1902).

[29] Jensen _v._ Continental Life Ins. Co., 28 F. (2d) 545 (1928), certiorari denied, 279 U.S. 842 (1929).

[30] Meeker _v._ Lehigh Valley R. Co., 236 U.S. 434, 439 (1915).

[31] Ex parte Peterson, 253 U.S. 300 (1920).

[32] United States _v._ Louisiana, 339 U.S. 699 (1950).

[33] Scott _v._ Neely, 140 U.S. 106, 109 (1891). _See also_ Bennett _v._ b.u.t.terworth, 11 How. 669 (1850); Hipp _v._ Babin, 19 How. 271, 278 (1857); Lewis _v._ c.o.c.ks, 23 Wall. 466, 470 (1874); Killian _v._ Ebbinghaus, 110 U.S. 568, 573 (1884); Buzard _v._ Houston, 119 U.S. 347, 351 (1886).

[34] Schoenthal _v._ Irving Trust Co., 287 U.S. 92, 94 (1932).

[35] American Mills Co. _v._ American Surety Co., 260 U.S. 360, 364 (1922). _See also_ Stamey _v._ United States, 37 F. (2d) 188 (1929).

[36] Thompson _v._ Central Ohio R. Co., 6 Wall. 134 (1868).

[37] Whitehead _v._ Shattuck, 138 U.S. 146 (1891); Buzard _v._ Houston, 119 U.S. 347 (1886); Greeley _v._ Lowe, 155 U.S. 58, 75 (1894).

[38] Clark _v._ Smith, 13 Pet. 195 (1839); Holland _v._ Challen, 110 U.S. 15 (1884); Reynolds _v._ Crawfordsville First Nat. Bank, 112 U.S.

405 (1884); Chapman _v._ Brewer, 114 U.S. 158 (1885); c.u.mmings _v._ Merchants Nat. Bank, 101 U.S. 153, 157 (1880); United States _v._ Landram, 118 U.S. 81 (1886); More _v._ Steinbach, 127 U.S. 70 (1888).

_Cf._ Re Simons, 247 U.S. 231 (1918).

[39] Ex parte Skinner & Eddy Corp., 265 U.S. 86, 96 (1924).

[40] Vicksburg & M.R. Co. _v._ Putnam, 118 U.S. 545, 553 (1886); United States _v._ Reading Railroad, 123 U.S. 113, 114 (1887).

[41] 118 U.S. 545; where are cited Carver _v._ Jackson ex dem. Astor et al., 4 Pet. 1, 80 (1830); Magniac _v._ Thompson, 7 Pet. 348, 390 (1833); Mitch.e.l.l _v._ Harmony, 13 How. 115, 131 (1852); Transportation Line _v._ Hope, 95 U.S. 297, 302 (1877).

[42] Games _v._ Dunn, 14 Pet. 322, 327 (1840).

[43] Sparf _v._ United States, 156 U.S. 51, 99-100 (1895); Pleasants _v._ Fant, 22 Wall. 116, 121 (1875); Randall _v._ Baltimore & Ohio R.R.

Co., 109 U.S. 478, 482 (1883); Meehan _v._ Valentine, 145 U.S. 611, 625 (1892); Coughran _v._ Bigelow, 164 U.S. 301 (1896).

[44] Treat Mfg. Co. _v._ Standard Steel & Iron Co., 157 U.S. 674 (1895); Randall _v._ Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co., 109 U.S. 478, 482 (1883) and cases there cited.

[45] Capital Traction Co. _v._ Hof, 174 U.S. 1, 13 (1899).

[46] Arkansas Land & Cattle Co. _v._ Mann, 130 U.S. 69, 74 (1889).

[47] Dimick _v._ Schiedt, 293 U.S. 474, 476-478 (1935).

[48] 228 U.S. 364 (1913).

[49] _See_ Austin Wakeman Scott, Fundamentals of Procedure in Actions at Law (1922), 103 and articles there cited.

[50] Baltimore & C. Line _v._ Redman, 295 U.S. 654 (1935).

[51] Ibid. 661.

[52] Lyon _v._ Mutual Benefit a.s.sn., 305 U.S. 484 (1939).

[53] 28 U.S.C.A. -- 724.

[54] Galloway _v._ United States, 319 U.S. 372 (1943).

[55] Ibid. 397. As a matter of fact, the case being a claim against the United States need not have been tried by a jury except for the allowance of Congress.

[56] Henderson's Distilled Spirits, 14 Wall. 44, 53 (1872). _See also_ Rogers _v._ United States, 141 U.S. 548, 554 (1891); Parsons _v._ Armor, 3 Pet. 413 (1830); Campbell _v._ Boyreau, 21 How. 223 (1859).

[57] Baylis _v._ Travelers' Ins. Co., 113 U.S. 316, 321 (1885), holding it error for a judge, in absence of any waiver, to find the facts and render judgment thereon.

[58] Duignan _v._ United States, 274 U.S. 195, 198 (1927), holding jury trial waived by an appearance and partic.i.p.ation in the trial without demanding a jury.

[59] Hodges _v._ Easton, 106 U.S. 408, 412 (1883).

[60] Aetna Insurance Co. _v._ Kennedy, 301 U.S. 389 (1937).

[61] _See_ Justices of the Sup. Ct. _v._ United States ex rel. Murray, 9 Wall. 274 (1870); Chicago, B. & Q.R. Co. _v._ Chicago, 166 U.S. 226, 242 (1897).