[1519] Cornell v. Coyne, 192 U.S. 418, 428 (1904); Turpin & Bro. v. Burgess, 117 U.S. 504, 507 (1886).
[1520] Spalding & Bros. v. Edwards, 262 U.S. 66 (1923).
[1521] Thompson v. United States, 142 U.S. 471 (1892).
[1522] Peck & Co. v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 165 (1918); National Paper & Type Co. v. Bowers, 266 U.S. 373 (1924).
[1523] Fairbank v. United States, 181 U.S. 283 (1901).
[1524] United States v. Hvoslef, 237 U.S. 1 (1915).
[1525] Thames & Mersey Ins. Co. v. United States, 237 U.S. 19 (1915).
[1526] Pace v. Burgess, 92 U.S. 372 (1876); Turpin & Bro. v. Burgess, 117 U.S. 504, 505 (1886).
[1527] Louisiana Public Service Comm'n. v. Texas & N.O.R. Co., 284 U.S. 125, 131 (1931); Pennsylvania v. Wheeling & Belmont Bridge Co., 18 How. 421, 433 (1856); South Carolina v. Georgia, 93 U.S. 4 (1876). In Williams v. United States, 255 U.S. 336 (1921) the argument that an act of Congress which prohibited interstate transportation of liquor into States whose laws prohibited manufacture or sale of liquor for beverage purposes was repugnant to this clause was rejected as plainly wanting in merit.
[1528] Louisiana Public Service Comm'n. v. Texas & N.O.R. Co., 284 U.S. 125, 132 (1931).