by the state court are consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment, we can go no further. The only question for us is, whether a State could authorize the course of proceedings adopted, if that course were prescribed by its constitution in express terms.

When the question is narrowed to its proper form the answer does not need much discussion. The nature of the classes excluded was not such as was likely to affect the conduct of the members as jurymen, or to make them act otherwise than those who were drawn would act. The exclusion was not the result of race or class prejudice. It does not even appear that any of the defendants belonged to any of the excluded classes. The ground of omission no doubt was that pointed out by the state court, that the business of the persons omitted was such that either they would have been entitled to claim exemption or that probably they would have been excused. Even when persons liable to jury duty under the state laws are excluded it is no ground for challenge to the array, if a sufficient number of unexceptionable persons are present. People v. Jewett, 3 Wend. 314.

But if the state law itself should exclude certain classes on the bona fide ground that it was for the good of the community that their regular work should not be interrupted, there is nothing in the Fourteenth Amendment to prevent it. The exemption of lawyers, ministers of the gospel, doctors, and engineers of railroad trains, in short substantially the exemption complained of, is of old standing and not uncommon in the United States. It could not be denied that the State properly could have excluded these classes had it seen fit, and that undeniable proposition ends the case.

Judgment affirmed.

201 U. S.

Opinions Per Curiam, Etc.

OPINIONS PER CURIAM, ETC., FROM FEBRUARY 27, TO APRIL 16, 1906.

No. -, Original. Ex parte: IN THE MATTER OF COLUMBIA GEORGE AND TOY TOY, PETITIONERS. March 5, 1906. Motion for leave to file petition for a writ of habeas corpus denied. Mr. A. E. Crane and Mr. F. T. Woodburn for petitioners.

No. 30. VALENTINE HUBER, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. JENNINGS-HEYWOOD OIL SYNDICATE ET AL. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana. Submitted March 1, 1906. Decided March 5, 1906. Per Curiam. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Capital City Dairy Company v. Ohio, 183 U. S. 238; Brown v. New Jersey, 175 U. S. 172; Chapin v. Fye, 179 U. S. 127; Turner v. Richardson, 180 U. S. 87; Mutual Life Insurance Company v. McGrew, 188 U. S. 291, 308; Texas and Pacific Railway Company v. Southern Pacific Company, 137 U. S. 48. Mr. Branch K. Miller, Mr. James L. Dorman and Mr. D. Caffery, Jr., for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Gilbert L. Dupré for the defendants in error.

No. 218. THE PEOPLE'S NATIONAL BANK OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA., ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. JAMES H. SAVILLE ET AL. Appeal from the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. Argued, and petition for certiorari submitted, March 16, 1906. Decided March 19, 1906. Per Curiam. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Paving Company v. Mulford, 100 U. S. 147; Gibson v. Shufeldt, 122 U. S. 27; Walter v. Northeastern Railroad Company, 147 U. S. 370; Chamberlin v. Browning, 177 U. S. 605; Hale v. Allinson, 188 U. S. 56. Application for writ of certiorari denied. Mr. D. W. Baker for appellants VOL. CCI-41

Decisions on Petitions for Writs of Certiorari.

201 U. S.

and petitioners. Mr. Fulton Lewis and Mr. John Ridout for appellees and respondents.

No. 69. THE SKANEATELES PAPER COMPANY ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. THE CITY OF SYRACUSE. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of New York. Argued for plaintiffs in error April 10, 1906. Decided April 16, 1906. Per Curiam. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Chicago &c. Railway Company v. McGuire, 196 U. S. 128; Scudder v. Comptroller of New York, 175 U. S. 32; Eastern Building &c. Association v. Welling, 181 U. S. 47. Mr. Martin Conboy, Mr. John W. Griggs, Mr. Arthur J. Baldwin and Mr. Charles W. Tooke for plaintiffs in error. Mr. Charles L. Stone and Mr. Walter W. Magee for defendant in error.

No. 219. J. N. SEALE, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE STATE OF GEORGIA. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Georgia. Argued for plaintiff in error April 11, 1906. Decided April 16, 1906. Per Curiam. Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Oxley Stave Company v. Butler County, 166 U. S. 648; Harding v. Illinois, 196 U. S. 78; Marvin v. Trout, 199 U. S. 212; Caro v. Davidson, 197 U. S. 197. Mr. J. J. Strickland for plaintiff in error. Mr. John C. Hart for defendant in error.

Decisions on Petitions for Writs of Certiorari from February 27 to April 16, 1906.

No. 602. ALBERT K. HISCOCK, TRUSTEE, ETC., PETITIONER, v. JACOB M. MERTENS. March 5, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted. Mr. Will B. Crowley for petitioner. Mr. Dorr Raymond Cobb for respondent.

201 U. S.

Decisions on Petitions for Writs of Certiorari.

No. 431. FANNIE D. GALBRAITH, PETITIONER, v. ILLINOIS STEEL COMPANY. March 5, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied. Mr. Adams A. Goodrich for petitioner. Mr. William Duff Haynie for respondent.

No. 575. HONG WING, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES; No. 576. WONG DING CHONG, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES; No. 577. DANG MING, PETITIONER, V. THE UNITED STATES; No. 578. WONG WAH, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES; and No. 579. LAM LOY, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES. March 5, 1906. Petitions for writs of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied. Mr. Francis J. Wing for petitioners. The Attorney General and The Solicitor General for respondent.

No. 580. T. N. BARNSDALL, PETITIONER, v. THOMAS S. WALTEMEYER. March 5, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied. Mr. Charles S. Thomas and Mr. W. H. Bryant for petitioner. Mr. T. Webster Hoyt for respondent.

No. 598. TAYLOR KNOLL, PETITIONER, V. THE UNITED STATES. March 5, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia denied. Mr. John C. Gittings for petitioner. The Attorney General and The Solicitor General for respondent.

No. 600. THE ETNA INDEMNITY COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. CITY OF HAVERHILL. March 5, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for

Decisions on Petitions for Writs of Certiorari. 201 U. S.

the First Circuit denied. Mr. T. Tileston Wells for petitioner. Mr. John J. Winn for respondent.

No. 601. THE TOWN OF FLETCHER, PETITIONER, v. SAMUEL G. HICKMAN. March 5, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied. Mr. Robert W. Bonynge and Mr. Halsted L. Ritter for petitioner. Mr. Thomas K. Skinker for respondent.

No. 613. LIVERPOOL, BRAZIL AND RIVER PLATE STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY, LIMITED, ET AL., PETITIONERS, V. THE STEAMSHIP EAGLE POINT, ETC. March 12, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied. Mr. Harrington Putnam, Mr. Charles C. Burlingham, Mr. H. G. Ward and Mr. George H. Emerson for petitioners. Mr. Wilhelmus Mynderse for respondent.

No. 610. EDWIN S. HARTWELL LUMBER COMPANY, PETITIONER, V. THE UNITED STATES; and No. 611. JOHN SPRY LUMBER COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES. March 19, 1906. Petitions for writs of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied. Mr. Jacob Newman, Mr. Salmon O. Levinson and Mr. Benjamin V. Becker for petitioners. The Attorney General and The Solicitor General for respondent.

No. 619. NATIONAL SALT COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. GEORGE S. INGRAHAM. March 19, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the