Scharrenberg v. Dollar S. S. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the First Division of the Northern District of California; Maurice T. Dooling, Judge. Action by Paul Scharrenberg against the Dollar Steamship Company and others. Judgment for defendants on demurrer, and plaintiff brings error.
Read the full summary
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the First Division of the Northern District of California; Maurice T. Dooling, Judge. Action by Paul Scharrenberg against the Dollar Steamship Company and others. Judgment for defendants on demurrer, and plaintiff brings error. This was an action by a private party to recover penalties for knowingly assisting, encouraging, and soliciting the migration and importation of contract laborers into the United States in violation of the Act of Congress of February 20, 1907, as amended by the Act of March 26, 1910, commonly known as the…
1Opinion of the CourtRudkin, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). No doubt, as contended by the plaintiff in error, the public and private vessels of every nation while on the high seas, and without the territorial limits of any state, are subject to the jurisdiction of the state to which they belong, and are in many respects considered a part of its territory. Crapo v. Kelly, 16 Wall. 610, 21 L. Ed. 430; Wilson v. McNamee, 102 U. S. 572, 26 L. Ed. 234. But it does not follow from this that a merchant vessel flying the American flag is a part of the United States within the meaning of the immigration laws, or that a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Church of the Holy Trinity v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Crapo v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Wilson v. McNameeSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- United States ex rel. Andersen v. BurkeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern Alabama · 1899
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Tatsukichi Kuwabara v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1919