CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Continued.

11. Tax on Movables; Tank Cars. State may tax movables
of foreign corporation, regularly employed therein, although
devoted to interstate commerce. Union Tank Line Co. v.

Wright..

12. Id. Valuation. Need not be limited to mere worth of
articles taken separately, but may include intangible value
due to organic relation to whole system. Id.

13. Id. Methods. Where tangibles constitute part of going
concern operating in many States, and absolute accuracy im-
possible, court has sustained methods producing results
approximately correct, e. g., mileage basis in case of tel-
egraph company and average amount of property habit-
ually brought in by car company. Id.

14. Id. If plan is arbitrary and valuation excessive, it vi-
olates commerce clause. Id.

15. Id. Where company owning tank cars was assessed for
those running in and out of Georgia, without regard to their
value, upon a track-mileage basis, held, that rule adopted
had no necessary relation to real value in Georgia, and that
tax was void. Id.

16. What Constitutes Interstate Commerce; Pipe Lines. While
piping of gas from State to State, and sale to independent
local gas companies, is interstate commerce, the retailing by
latter to consumers is intrastate commerce; and in such case,
regulation of rates of local companies has indirect effect upon
interstate business of the transporting company-at least
when latter is in hands of receivers who have not become
bound by contracts with former; and such receivers may not
complain that rates fixed for local companies are confiscatory
or burdensome to interstate business, even though that
business consists exclusively in selling gas to such local com-
panies. Public Utilities Comm. v. Landon .....

17. Id. Actual Movement Determinative. Movement of
rough lumber to place in same State, to be manufactured,
in expectation that products will be marketed and shipped
outside State, not interstate commerce. Arkadelphia Co. v.
St. Louis S. W. Ry. . . . .

18. Id. Intent. Whether a shipment at a given time was
interstate is a question of fact, and not dependent on mere
intention. Southern Pac. Co. v. Arizona..

PAGE

275

236

134

472

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Continued.

III. Contract Clause.

1. Street Railways. Grantee of franchise takes risk of judi-
cial interpretation allowing city to build another road in
same streets, and inevitable damage is not a taking of prop-
erty. United Railroads v. San Francisco...

2. Oyster Bed Grant; Sewage. Grant under Virginia law con-
strued as subject to right of State to authorize discharge of
municipal sewage, polluting the oysters. Darling v. New-
port News..

PAGE

517

540

3. Judgments; Interest. When legislature may stop further
running of interest on judgments based on county warrants.
Missouri & Arkansas Lumber Co. v. Sebastian County...... 170

IV. Excise Taxes.

1. Plenary Power of Congress. To levy excise taxes, uniform
throughout the United States, at its discretion.
States v. Doremus...

United

86

2. Means Available; Motive. Where the provisions of law
have reasonable relation to power, fact that they may have
been impelled by motive, or may accomplish purpose, other
than raising of revenue, cannot invalidate them; nor can fact
that they affect business subject to regulation by state police
power. Id.

3. Id. Narcotic Drug Act. Provisions of § 2 of act have
reasonable relation to the enforcement of tax provided by
§ 1, which is clearly unobjectionable. Id. Webb v. United
States.

V. Full Faith and Credit.

1. Not denied where Supreme Court of Missouri, following
state practice, refused to consider sister state judgment ren-
dered 6 months after judgment of Missouri trial court and
not pleaded or put in evidence. Hartford Life Ins. Co. v.
Johnson.

2. Quære: Whether charter granted insurance company by
resolution of state legislature is a public act or record within
meaning of clause? Id.

96

490

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Continued.

VI. War Power; Espionage Act; Army Regulations.

1. Protecting Draft. Conspiracy to circulate among men
called for military service a circular tending to influence
them to obstruct draft, followed by overt acts, is within
power of Congress to punish, and is punishable under Es-
pionage Act, although unsuccessful. Schenck v. United

States..

PAGE

47

Frohwerk v. United States

204

2. Id. So of attempt to obstruct recruiting by spoken
words. Debs v. United States...

211

See infra, VIII.

3. Prostitution. Congress may make regulations to protect
men composing army against prostitution, and leave details
to Secretary of War. Mc Kinley v. United States..

397

VII. Privileges and Immunities.

1. State law making amount of annual tax for privilege of
doing railroad construction work depend on whether person
taxed has his chief office in State, discriminates against
citizens of other States. Chalker v. Birmingham & N. W.
Ry...

2. Citizen of another State who would be liable for larger
tax, if valid, may question its validity without first tendering
lower tax. Id.

VIII. First Amendment; Freedom of Speech and Press;
Espionage Act.

Words ordinarily within freedom of speech or press may be
prohibited when of such a nature and used in such circum-
stances as to create danger that they will bring about evils
which Congress has right to prevent, such as obstruction to
the draft. Schenck v. United States

Frohwerk v. United States

Debs v. United States..

IX. Fourth Amendment; Unreasonable Seizure.

Incriminating documents seized under search warrant di-
rected against a Socialist headquarters, held admissible in ev-
idence, consistently with Fourth and Fifth Amendments, in

522

47

204

211

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Continued.

PAGE

criminal prosecution against general secretary of a Socialist
party, who had charge of office. Schenck v. United States.. 47

X. Fifth Amendment; Self-incrimination. See IX, supra.

XI. Fourteenth Amendment.

(1) General.

1. Presumption, that discrimination in state law is on ad-
equate ground. Middleton v. Texas Power & Light Co..... 152
2. Tests of Reasonableness. Effect of legislative judgment
and opinion of state courts as upholding reasonableness of
state regulation. Perley v. North Carolina..

3. What is State Action. Advisory statement issued by state
official, not controlling official conduct, not of such legisla-
tive character as can impair rights under commerce and due
process clauses. Standard Scale Co. v. Farrell..

(2) Notice and Hearing. See 21, infra.

510

571

4. Tax Assessment. When assessment for local improvement
made in accordance with fixed rule prescribed by legislative
act, property owner not entitled to be heard in advance on
question of benefits. Withnell v. Ruecking Constr. Co...... 63
(3) Liberty and Property; Police Power. See II, 16, supra.
5. Food Regulations; Disclosure of Ingredients. Right to se-
crecy as to compounds and processes is subject to right of
State to require that nature of product be set forth; and it
is consistent with due process to require that labels on pro-
prietary compound syrups shall state percentage of in-
gredients. Corn Products Refg. Co. v. Eddy..

6. Intoxicating Liquor. One who acquires liquor after ap-
proval and before effective date of state law making its
possession unlawful is not deprived by the law of property
without due process. Barbour v. Georgia..

7. Id. Quære: Whether law would be constitutional as ap-
plied to one who acquired liquor before enactment? Id.

427

454

8. Judgments; Interest. When legislature may stop further
running of interest on judgments based on county warrants.
Missouri & Arkansas Lumber Co. v. Sebastian County...... 170

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Continued.

9. Sewage; Oyster Beds. Private rights in beds under tidal
waters subject to right of State to use them for disposal of
sewage. Darling v. Newport News..

PAGE

541

10. Protecting Watersheds. State may require removal of
timber refuse from vicinity of watershed of municipal water
supply, to prevent danger by fire. Perley v. North Carolina 510
11. Workmen's Compensation Law. Imposing liability on
employer for injuries to employees, irrespective of fault,
and limiting compensation in reasonable substitution for
prior law-not deprivation of liberty without due process.
Middleton v. Texas Power & Light Co...

12. Billboards; Regulation and Taxation. City ordinance
regulating size, and exacting permit fee, within police power.
St. Louis Poster Adv. Co. v. St. Louis...

13. Id. Making billboards safe against wind and fire may
not exempt them from power of restriction or prohibition.
Id.

14. Id. Aesthetic Considerations. Such regulations may not
improperly include incidental and relatively trifling require-
ments founded in part on æsthetic reasons, such as re-
quirement of conformity to building line. Id.

15. Id. Tax imposed by city on billboards for purpose of
discouraging them, not objectionable. Id.

It is no

16. Id. Land Ownership; Preexisting Contracts.
answer to such ordinance, that billboards are on land be-
longing to their owner, or that owner has contracted to
maintain advertisements upon them, or that size allowed
is too small for standard posters. Id.

152

269

17. Local Improvement Assessment. The method of assessing
part of cost according to frontage, as provided in St. Louis
charter, sustained. Withnell v. Ruecking Constr. Co... ..... 63
18. Id. The system of area assessment provided by St.
Louis charter is not per se obnoxious to Fourteenth Amend-
ment, and becomes so in its application only when results
are arbitrary or grossly unequal. Id.

19. Foreign Corporations; Tax on Movables. Where plan in
valuing tangible property, (part of going concern operating