allowing taxation of national bank shares applicable to territories; Harrison v. Vines, 46 Tex. 21, refusing injunction to restrain collection of tax on national bank shares; Union Bank v. Richmond, 94 Va. 319, 26 S. E. 822, allowing taxation without deducting value of capital exempt from taxation; Pacific Nat. Bank v. Pierce Co., 20 Wash. 684, 56 Pac. 939, holding taxation without deducting value of shares held by bank, not discrimination; Austin v. Alderman, 7 Wall. 699, 19 L. Ed. 226, refusing to declare State statute void, party not being deprived of any right; Thomson v. Pacific R. R. Co., 9 Wall. 590, 19 L. Ed. 798, holding mere employment of corporation in government service not exempting it from taxation; dissenting opinion in Farrington v. Tennessee, 95 U S. 694, 24 L. Ed. 563, majority holding shares in hands of stockholders not liable to additional taxation; Bank of Redemption v. Boston, 125 U. S. 68, 31 L. Ed. 693, 8 Sup. Ct. 776, holding rule of State taxation unaffected by exemption of savings banks; Owensboro Nat. Bank v. Owensboro, 173 U. S. 681, 43 L. Ed. 857, 19 Sup. Ct. 542, holding State act imposing tax on national bank franchise, invalid; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Poe, 61 Fed. 461, holding market value of shares not equivalent to value of tangible property; Baldwin v. City Council, 53 Ala. 439, holding incorporated city without power to tax national bank shares; First Nat. Bank v. Smith, 65 Ill. 57, holding State law taxing national bank shares at location of bank constitutional; Citizens' Bank v. Bouny, 32 La. Ann. 242, assuming that exemption in charter of capital stock does not extend to shares; dissenting opinion in Stetson v. Bangor, 56 Me. 289, majority holding national bank shares not taxable except by strict conformity with act of Congress; Smith v. First Nat. Bank, 17 Mich. 480, holding State tax on capital stock of national bank invalid; Wetherbee v. Baker, 35 N. J. Eq. 506, holding subscriptions to capital stock a trust fund for payment of debts; Pittsburg v. First Nat. Bank, 55 Pa. St. 51, holding act authorizing Pittsburg to tax bank not applicable to national banks; Wells v. Green Bay etc. Co., 90 Wis. 452, 64 N. W. 72, holding each of incorporators entitled to proportionate share of capital stock.

Distinguished in Farrington v. Tennessee, 95 U. S. 687, 24 L. Ed. 560, holding additional tax of shares in hands of stockholders violating obligation of contract; Tennessee v. Whitworth, 117 U. S. 136, 29 L. Ed. 832, 6 Sup. Ct. 647, holding exemption of capital stock from taxation extends to shares; National Commercial Bank v. Mayor etc. of Mobile, 62 Ala. 295, 34 Am. Rep. 21, and Sumter Co. v. National Bank of Gainesville, 62 Ala. 468, 34 Am. Rep. 32, both restraining collection of tax imposed upon national bank shares in gross; Wright v. Stilz, 27 Ind. 340, holding, under existing State law, national bank shares not subject to taxation; State v. Garton, 32 Ind. 4, 2 Am. Rep. 318, holding Congress without power to levy tax on State official bonds.

Taxation of surplus capital of national banks. Note, 22 Am. Rep. 431.

State taxation of national banks. Note, 69 Am. St. Rep. 45, 48, 49. Power of States to tax shares, capital stock, real estate and other property of national banks. Note, 96 Am. Dec. 292, 294.

State taxation of Federal bonds and obligations. Note, 4 Ann. Cas. 937.

Taxation of shares of stock and capital stock or property of corporation as constituting double taxation. Note, 7 Ann. Cas. 1195. State tax on national banks. Note, 45 L. R. A. 757.

Tax on capital stock of corporations. Note, 58 L. R. A. 589. Constitutional equality as to corporate taxation. Note, 60 L. R. A. 367.

4 Wall. 259-262, 18 L. Ed. 334, GRAHAM v. UNITED STATES.

Mexican law made formal delivery of possession by magistrate and witnesses essential, after execution of grant, for investiture of title,

Approved in United States v. Elder, 177 U. S. 117, 44 L. Ed. 695, 20 Sup. Ct. 542, holding indorsement by Governor on petition of direction to prefect to ascertain whether land applied for had an owner and to cause delivery of land referred to did not constitute grant; Bouldin v. Phelps, 12 Sawy. 308, 30 Fed. 558, holding no title vested there was delivery of possession.

Survey of land by surveyor-general, after confirmation of Mexican grant in California, must conform to record of proceedings by magistrate upon delivery of juridical possession under Mexican law.

Approved in Veve Y. Diaz v. Sanchez, 226 U. S. 236, 57 L. Ed. 202, 33 Sup. Ct. 36, where mortgage purports to convey land within certain bounds, after-acquired title to part of land enures to benefit of vendee; United States v. Pico, 5 Wall. 539, 18 L. Ed. 696, holding record of delivery of juridical possession conclusive of land granted; Van Reynegan v. Bolton, 95 U. S. 35, 24 L. Ed. 352, holding boundaries established in delivery of juridical possession control United States officers in surveying; United States v. Southern Pacific R. R. Co., 14 Sawy. 642, 45 Fed. 611, holding juridical possession of itself controlling as to lands granted; Foss v. Hinkell, 91 Cal. 199, 27 Pac. 646, holding only lands granted by Mexican government within boundaries fixed by juridical possession; Stoneroad v. Stoneroad, 4 N. M. 64, 12 Pac. 741, holding United States government officers bound by proceedings of Mexican government dclivering juridical possession.

4 Wall. 262-270, 18 L. Ed. 330, BROWN v. BASS.

Title of one holding under grant of receiver of insolvent bank, for a long time, is unaffected by dismissal for want of jurisdiction of action in which receiver was appointed, where bank elected to hold receiver liable. Approved in Brown v. Johnson, 154 U. S. 551, 18 L. Ed. 333, 14 Sup. Ct. 1197, following rule.

4 Wall, 270-275, 18 L. Ed. 350, MITCHELL v. BURLINGTON.

Provision in city charter authorizing it to borrow money for public purposes is a valid power. Under it, a city may aid a corporation in construction of railroad by issuing bonds or subscribing for and purchasing its stock. Approved in Northern etc. R. R. Co. v. Roberts, 42 Fed. 749, holding conveyance of land to aid construction of railroad valid; Evansville v. Woodbury, 60 Fed. 720, 9 C. C. A. 244, holding within power of city to issue bonds for money borrowed; Ex parte Selma etc. R. R. Co., 45 Ala. 730, 6 Am. Rep. 730, and Leavenworth Co. v. Miller, 7 Kan. 506, 12 Am. Rep. 440, both holding legislature may authorize county to subscribe for stock in railroad company; Commissioners v. Rather, 48 Ala. 445, ordering commissioners to assess tax for aid of construction of railroad; Nashville etc. R. R. Co. v. Tennessee, 8 Heisk. 788, holding proceedings authorizing issue of bonds not open to collateral attack for irregularities; Danville v. Sutherlin, 20 Gratt. 581, holding town council has authority under charter to contract debts and issue certificates; dissenting opinion in Brenham v. German-American Bank, 144 U. S. 191, 36 L. Ed. 397, 12 Sup. Ct. 566, majority holding power in charter to borrow money not including power to issue negotiable bonds.

Modified in Brenham v. German-American Bank, 144 U. S. 183, 187, 189, 36 L. Ed. 394, 396, 397, 12 Sup. Ct. 563, 564, 565, holding power to borrow money not including power to issue negotiable bonds; Green v. Dyersburg, 2 Flipp. 492, Fed. Cas. 5756, holding power to subscribe for stock does not imply power to issue bonds; Lehman v. San Diego, 83 Fed. 671, 27 C. C. A. 668, holding power to borrow not conferring power to issue negotiable bonds; Hackett v. Ottawa, 11 Fed. Cas. 146, holding bonds to aid a quasi corporation invalid.

Constitutionality of statute authorizing cities to subscribe to stock of or make donations to corporations. Note, 59 Am. Dec. 788. Municipal bonds and defenses thereto. Note, 98 Am. Dec. 666, 667. Implied power of municipality to issue bonds. Note, Ann. Cas. 1913E, 37.

Money borrowed by municipal corporation to aid in construction of plank road is borrowed for a public purpose if such road runs from, extends to, or passes through limits of corporation.

Approved in Commercial Bank v. Iola, 2 Dill. 361, 9 Kan. 701, Fed. Cas. 3061, holding bonds void issued to aid bridge manufacturing works. Public purposes for which money may be appropriated or raised by taxation. Note, 14 L. R. A. 478.

Supreme Court will follow decision of State court interpreting Constitution and laws of State in force at time bonds were issued. If bonds valid then subsequent decisions of State courts will not invalidate them. Approved in Burgess v. Seligman, 107 U. S. 34, 27 L. Ed. 365, 2 Sup. Ct. 22, Wade v. Travis Co., 174 U. S. 509, 19 Sup. Ct. 719, Talcott v. Pine Grove, 1 Flipp. 129, Fed. Cas. 13,735, and German Ins. Co. v. Manning, 78 Fed. 903, 909, all following decision of State court in force at time rights accrued; Thompson v. Perrine, 106 U. S. 591, 27 L. Ed. 299, 1 Sup. Ct. 566, refusing to follow decision of State court holding legislature without power to validate bonds.

Conclusiveness upon Federal courts of construction given to statute by State court subsequent to accrual of rights involved. Note, 17 Ann. Cas. 1213.

Questions of State law as to which State court decisions must be followed in actions originating in, or removed to, Federal courts. Note, 40 L. R. A. (N. S.) 408.

4 Wall. 275-277, 18 L. Ed. 353, LARNED v. BURLINGTON.

Legislature has power to authorize municipal corporation to furnish aid by taking stock, borrowing money to pay for it and levy tax to pay loan in the construction of public improvement; hence the holder of bonds issued under city ordinance authorizing loan, to be invested in stock of plank-road company, may recover on such bonds against city issuing them.

Approved in German Ins. Co. v. Manning, 78 Fed. 903, holding city may, under legislative authority, issue bonds negotiable in form; Leavenworth Co. v. Miller, 7 Kan. 506, 12 Am. Rep. 440, holding valid statutes authorizing issuing of bonds in aid of railroads.

Impairment of obligation of contracts by decisions. Note, 14 Am.
Rep. 288.

Municipal bonds and defenses thereto. Note, 98 Am. Dec. 667.
Public purposes for which money may be appropriated or raised
by taxation. Note, 14 L. R. A. 478.

Miscellaneous. Miscited in Hibbits v. Jack, 97 Ind. 577, to point that decision of State court became a rule of property.

4 Wall. 277-332, 18 L. Ed. 356, CUMMINGS v. MISSOURI.

Original States possessed all attributes of sovereignty and still retain them, save as surrendered to the Union, and new States, upon admission,

become invested with same rights, among them the right to determine qualifications for office and the exercise of private callings within their respective jurisdictions.

Approved in dissenting opinion in Taylor and Marshall v. Beckham (No. 1), 178 U. S. 599, 44 L. Ed. 1208, 20 Sup. Ct. 1014, majority holding State decision against claimant to office of Governor does not deprive him of property so as to give Supreme Court jurisdiction on error; dissenting opinion in Attorney-General v. Abbott, 121 Mich. 562, 80 N. W. 380, majority holding woman chosen by electors as prosecuting attorney is ineligible to hold the office; Calhoun v. Calhoun, 2 S. C. 301, holding acceptance of Constitution by Congress does not validate its void provisions.

Missouri test-oath act, excluding certain persons from practicing certain professions for past acts of rebellion, inflicts punishment for past acts and is contrary to constitutional provision prohibiting States passing bills of pains and penalties.

Approved in Johannessen v. United States, 225 U. S. 242, 56 L. Ed. 1072, 32 Sup. Ct. 613, act authorizing cancellation of naturalization certificate fraudulently obtained is not void as ex post facto; Davis v. Berry, 216 Fed. 419, act requiring performance of operation of vasectomy on criminals twice convicted of felony is invalid as "bill of attainder" providing punishment for past offenses by legislative act; United States v. Ross, 5 App. D. C. 252, holder of plumbing license under former regulations has not vested right to pursue calling without taking out new license under later regulations; Toncray v. Budge, 14 Idaho, 641, 95 Pac. 32, statute authorizing election board upon contest to inquire into eligibility of candidate is valid, where final determination of eligibility is left to courts; State v. McElhinney, 241 Mo. 606, 145 S. W. 1142, right of attorney to practice law cannot be taken away by arbitrary act of court, but only upon judicial hearing; Pierce v. Carskadon, 16 Wall. 239, 21 L. Ed. 278, holding statute denying nonresidents right to appear and defend, unless taking prescribed oath, unconstitutional; In re Yung Sing Hee, 13 Sawy. 485, 486, 36 Fed. 439, 440, holding act excluding citizen Chinese from returning to United States bill of attainder; State v. Buckley, 54 Ala. 619, holding impeachment of judge under Alabama Constitution criminal proceeding; In re Peyton, 12 Kan. 406, holding proceeding to disbar attorney criminal proceeding; Commonwealth v. Jones, 10 Bush, 732, 735, 736, holding deprivation of right of office for dueling under statute, punishment; State v. Grant, 79 Mo. 129, 49 Am. Rep. 226, holding deprivation of civil rights is punishment; State v. Walbridge, 119 Mo. 390, 41 Am. St. Rep. 667, 24 S. W. 458, holding deprivation of civil right for past conduct is punishment; Green v. Shumway, 39 N. Y. 423, holding void statute prescribing test oath for voters; Fox v. Territory, 2 Wash. Ter. 300, 5 Pac. 604, 605,