r.MTKD STATKS (F AMKKICA. 



Of the total imports of 1896. American vc 

 carried 15'? per cunt., sll7.-21ili.074 in value, while 

 foreign vessels earn. ,VJ1. and s::.V>:'.5.i'7'.i 



went" by land in vehicles. Of the exports. American 

 vessels 'carried | '. or s-5 per eent.. foreign 



B $751,083,000, and land vehicles SGI. 131. 125. 



I! ail roads. Tliere were 181,621 miles of rail- 

 roads in operation at the end of 18!)"), an increase 

 during the year of 1,628 miles. The capital stoek 

 of all lines "was $5.1*2.121.999: the funded debt, 

 $5,640.94-2.567: the total share and loan capital, 

 including unfunded debt. $11,241,569,658; ti 

 of railroad and equipment, $9.861.102,973. The 

 gross earning in 1895 were $261.640,598 from pas- 

 sengers and s74::.7*4.451 from freight; from all 

 sources. sl.o9:-!.139.6i>5. The net earnings were 

 $323.196.454. out of which s239.944.229 interest 

 was paid on bonds and S81.375.774 in dividends on 

 stock. There were 597,421.362 passengers carried, 

 and 696.761.171 tons of freight, the average haul 

 being 122 miles, and the average journey per pas- 

 senger 24 miles. 



Judiciary. The result of the work of the United 

 States Supreme Court for the year is given below. 

 There is but one term of the court each year, begin- 

 ning on the second Monday of October. The total 

 number of cases on the docket for the terra begin- 

 ning in October. 1895, was 1,033, and of this num- 

 ber 494 were disposed of during the term. The 

 number actually considered by the court was 374, 

 of which 196 we're argued orally and 178 submitted 

 on printed arguments. The establishment of the 

 Circuit Court of Appeals, whose decisions are final 

 in a large class of cases, will probably have the ef- 

 fect in a short time to reduce the number of cases 

 that may of right be carried to the Supreme Court ; 

 so that that court will have no more on its docket 

 at the beginning of each session than can be dis- 

 posed of during the term. Among the cases of 

 general interest decided were the following : 



Stanford. In United States i-s. Stanford, decided 

 March 2. 1896, the United States sought to establish 

 a claim against the estate of Leland Stanford, of 

 California, for $15,237.000. It was claimed that by 

 the Constitution and laws of California, which pro- 

 vided that a stockholder in a railroad corporation was 

 liable for its debts in proportion to the stock owned, 

 the estate of Stanford was liable to the United 

 States in proportion to the stock owned and held 

 by him in the Central Pacific Railroad Company 

 for its debts to the United States on account of 

 bonds issued in aid of its construction. The court 

 decided against the United States, holding that it 

 was not a part of the contract between the United 

 States and the corporation receiving the subsidy 

 bonds that the stockholders should be personally 

 liable for the principal and interest of these bonds. 



Bounty on Sugar. United States vs. Realty 

 Company, and United States i-s. Gay, were decided 

 May 25. 1896. These suits were originally brought 

 in the Circuit Court of Louisiana, where judgments 

 were rendered against the United States. The 

 tariff act of Oct. 1, 1890, authorized the payment of 

 a bounty on sugar, and bounties were paid in ac- 

 cordance therewith until Aug. 28. 1894. when the 

 Wilson bill, repealing the bounty and prohibiting 

 any further payments, went into" effect. The case 

 of the Realty Company was a test case under the 

 appropriation made in the Sundry Civil Appropria- 

 tion act of March 2. 1895, in behalf of those who 

 had fully complied with the provisions of the Mc- 

 Kinley act and were by its terms entitled to receive 

 their money on Aug. 2 s . 1*94. but whose warrants 

 were stopped by the statutory prohibition that went 

 into effect on that day. The case of Gay was a test 

 case under another provision granting a bounty of 

 T% of a cent per pound on sugar made between Aug. 



::d June 30. 1*95. by tho>e pr ducen who 

 had complied with the provisions of the bouni 

 of 1890. by taking the preliminary step> to ob1 

 license, and would have be< ; n entitled to n-c.-jve one 

 if the law had not been repealed. The sum of 

 $5,000.000 was appropriated for the payment of 

 claims of this description. Comptroller Howler, of 

 the Treasury Department, refused to allow claims 

 of either class, holding that the bounty acts were 

 unconstitutional, basing his action on the deeision 

 of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia 

 in the case of United States >-jr r>-l. Miles Planting 

 and Manufacturing Company vs. Carlisle. The 

 were fully argued before the Supreme Court. April 

 22-24. 1896, by Assistant Attorney-General Whitney 

 and Solicitor-General Conrad for the Government, 

 and Joseph H. Choate. of Xew Vork, ex-Senator Man- 

 derson, of Nebraska, and Hon. Thomas J. Semmes, 

 of Louisiana, for the claimants. The court held 

 that the acts of Congress making provision for the 

 payment of such claims were valid, without refer- 

 ence to the question of the validity of the original 

 act providing for the payment of bounties to manu- 

 facturers of sugar. It is within the constitutional 

 power of Congress to determine whether claims on 

 the public Treasury are founded upon moral and 

 honorable obligations and upon principles of right 

 and justice ; and when it has decided such ques- 

 tions in the affirmative and appropriated money for 

 the payment of such claims, its decision can rarely, 

 if ever, be the subject of review by the judicial 

 branch of the Government. There was some dis- 

 appointment that the court did not decide the 

 direct question whether bounties were allowable 

 under the Constitution. It is impossible, from the 

 opinion delivered, to know what the decision would 

 be upon that point. 



Interstate Commerce. Brown vs. Walker, de- 

 cided March 23, 1896, involved the question 

 whether Brown, a railroad official, who had been 

 subpoenaed as a witness before the grand jury in a 

 matter of a charge of violation of the Intel-state 

 Commerce act, was compelled to testify. Brown, who 

 was auditor of the road, refused to answer inter- 

 rogatories, on the ground that the answers might 

 tend to criminate him. The Constitution (Fifth 

 Amendment) declares that no person shall be com- 

 pelled in any criminal case to be a witness against 

 himself, but'the act of Feb. 11. 1893, affords immu- 

 nity against prosecution for the offense to which 

 the" question related. It was held that the witness 

 was compellable to answer. Justices Shiras. Gray, 

 White, and Field dissented. This decision is of 

 great importance, as it gives the Interstate Com- 

 merce Commission power to get testimony without 

 which the law could not be enforced. 



Long and Short Haul. Cincinnati. Xew Orleans 

 and Texas Pacific Railway Company, et al. vs. In- 

 terstate Commerce Commission, was decided March 

 30, 1896. The effect of this decision was to fortify 

 the la wand the authority of the commission. A very 

 important feature of the decision was the opinion 

 that a railroad wholly within a State is amenable 

 to the Interstate Commerce act when such road be- 

 comes a party to an arrangement for the continu- 

 ous carriage "of interstate traffic, and carries goods 

 under through bills of lading issued by another 

 common carrier, and participates in through rates 

 and charges. It thereby becomes part of a contin- 

 uous line, and consequently subject to the authority 

 of the commission. This makes practically almost 

 every line of railroad amenable to the law. 



Rates. Texas and Pacific Railroad Company vs. 

 Interstate Commerce Commission involved the 

 question whether, under the Interstate Commerce 

 act. freight shipped from a foreign country on a 

 through bill of lading can be shipped from the sea- 



