International Mercantile Marine Co. v. Stranahan
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
At Law. The plaintiffs in these suits are steamship owners In the North Atlantic trade; the International Mercantile Marine Company operating the American and Red Star lines, and the Oceanic Steam Navigation Company the White Star line. Defendant is the collector of customs at this port. The actions are brought to recover, as illegally exacted, various sums of $100 each, paid defendant as a condition of procuring clearance for certain of plaintiffs’ ships.
Read the full summary
At Law. The plaintiffs in these suits are steamship owners In the North Atlantic trade; the International Mercantile Marine Company operating the American and Red Star lines, and the Oceanic Steam Navigation Company the White Star line. Defendant is the collector of customs at this port. The actions are brought to recover, as illegally exacted, various sums of $100 each, paid defendant as a condition of procuring clearance for certain of plaintiffs’ ships. Defendant’s justification for such exaction is section 9 of the immigration act of March 3, 1903 (32 Stat. 1213, c. 1012 [U. S. Comp. St.…
1Opinion of the Court
HOUGH,
District Judge (after stating the facts as above). To declare unconstitutional, especially in a court of first instance, an act of Congress, is an,exercise óf judicial power warranted (in cases where no great and immediate financial loss is- threatening) only when the unconstitutionality exists beyond a rational doubt. The practice of which the statute under consideration is an instance — i: e., using a refusal of clearance as a means of. extorting settlement of governmental claims — is nearly as old as the -tlrlion (Rev. St. § 4206 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 2843]), and has for 20 years…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Lawton v. SteeleSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Den Ex Dem. Murray v. Hoboken Land & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Buttfield v. StranahanSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- United States v. Sing Tuck or King Do & Thirty-OneSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- United States v. Lee HuenDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1902
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Hamburg-American Steam Packet Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1918
- Lloyd Royal Belge Societe Anonyme v. EltingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
- Hubbard v. LoweDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1915
- In Re Community Power & Light Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1940
- State ex rel. Pincock v. FranklinUtah Supreme Court · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.