20 OONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES-} 787. 72; Holmes v. Jennison et sl., 14 Pet., 504; License Cases, 5 Hoyv., 504; Passenger Cases, 7 How., 283; Nathan v. Louisiana, 8 How., 73; Mager r. Grimm et al., 8 ow:, 490; United States r. Marigold, 9 How., 560; Cowley v. Board of Wardens of Port of Ph1ladelhia, 12 How., 299; The Propeller Genesee Chief et al. r. Fitzhugh et al., 12 How., 443; State of Pennsylvania r. The Wheeling Bridge Company, 13 How., 518; Veazxe et al. v. Moor, 14 How., 568; Smith v. State of Mary and, 18 How., 71; State of Pennsylvama v. The Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Company et al.,.18 How., 421; Smmtt v. Davenport. 22 How., 227; Foster etal. 1-. Davenport et al., 22 How., 244; Conwav et al. v. '1jaylor’s ex., 1 Black, 603; United States r. Hol iday, 3 Wall., 407; Gilman 1·. Philadelphia, 3 Wall., 713; The 1’assaiv Bridges, 3 Wall., 782; Steamship Company r. Port Wardens, 0 Wall., 31; Crandall r. State of Nevada, 6 Wall., 35; Whites Bank 1-. Smith, 7 Wall., 646; Waring 1·. The Mayor, 8 Wall., 110; Paul 11. Virtgcnia, 8 Wall., 168; Thomson ev. Pacific Railroad, 9 Wall., 579; Downham et ai. 1-. Alexan ria Council, 10 Wall., 173; The Clinton Bridge, 10 Wall., 454; The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall., 557; Liverpool Insurance Company ev. Massachusetts, 10 Wall., 566; The Montello, 11 Wall., 411; .x parte McNeil, 13 Wall., 238; State freight-tax, 15 Wall., 232; State tax on railway gross receipts, 15 Wall., 284; Osborn in Mobile, 16 Wall., 479; Railroad Company 1:. Fu ler, 17 Wall., 560; Bartemeyer v. Iowa, 18 Wall., 129; The Delaware railroa tax 18 Wall., 206; Peete v. Morgan, 19 Wall., 581; Railroad Company v. Richmond, 19 Wall., 584; Railroad Company v. Mary- land, 21 Wall., 456; The Lottawanna, 21 Wall., 558, Henderson etal. 1·. he Mayor of the City of New York, 92 U. S., 259; Chy Lung v. breeman et al., 92 U. S., 275; South Carolina 1-. Georgia et al., 93 I'. S., 4; Sherlock et al. 1-. Ailirig, adm., 93 U. S., 99; United States v. Fort?-th ree Gallons of Whisky, etc., 93 U. S., 188; oster v. Master and Wurdens of the Port o New Orleans, 94 U. S., 246.
- To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalizationf and uniform Laws on the subject of
Bankruptcies throughout the United States;' ’Sturgis v. Crowningshield, 4 Wh., 122; ’McMillan v. McNeil, 4 Wh., 209; ’ Farmers and Mechanics’ Bank, Pennsylvania, v. Smith, 6 Wh., 131; 'Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wh., 213;
- Boyle 1-. Zuharie and Turner, 6 Pet., 348; 'Gasaies v. Ballon, 6 Pet., 761; 'Beers et al.
v. Haughton, 9 Pet., 329; ’ Suydam et al. r. Broadnax, 14 Pet., 67; 'Cook r. Moffat et al., 5 How., 295; ‘Dred Scott 2v. Sanford, 19 How., 393. ‘To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and tix the Standard of Weights and Measures; Briscoe r. The Bank of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, ll Pet., 257; Fox v. The State of Ohio, 5 How., 410; United States v. Marigold, 9 How., 560. ‘To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States; Fox v. The State of Ohio, 5 How., 410; United States r. Marigold, 9 How., 560. ’To establish Post Offices and post. Roads; State of Pennsylvania v. The Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Company, 18 How., 421. 'To promote the Progre~ss of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; Grant et al. v. Raymond, 6 Pet., 218; Wheaton et als. r. Peters et als., 8 Pet., 591. ’ ’1`o constitute Tribunals interior to the supreme Court; ‘° To define and punish Piracnes and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of 1 ations; United States 1:. Palmer, 3 Wh., 610; United States 1-. Wiltberger, 5 Wh., 76; United States z-. Smith, 5 Wh., 153; United States v. Pirates, 5 Wh., 184. “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and ater; Brown r. United States, 8 Cr., 110; American Insurance Compan etal. v. Cnnter (356 bales cotton), 1 Pet., 511; Mrs. Alexandefs cotton, 2 Wall., 404; llfiller v. United States, 11 Wall., 268; Trier v. Defrees, 11 Wall., 331; Stewart v. Kahn, 11 Wall., 493; Hamilton v. Dillin, 21 Vail., 73; Laman, ex., v. Browne et al., 92 U. S., 187. "To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer- Term than two Years; _ _ _ Crandall r. State of Nevada, 8 Wall., 35. "To provide and maintain a Navy; United States v. Bevans, 3 Wh., 336; Dynea v. Hooper, 20 How., 65. "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Inws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; Houston v. Moore, 5 Wh., 1; Martin v. Mott, 12 Wh., 19; Luther v. Borden, 7 How., 1; Crandall v. State of Nevada, 6 Wall., 35; Texas v. White, 7 Wall., 700. "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to
