Cincinnati, Portsmouth, Big Sandy and Pomeroy Packet Co. v. Bay

Citations

• 200 U.S. 179
• 26 S. Ct. 208
• 50 L. Ed. 428
• 1906 U.S. LEXIS 1466

Syllabus

<p>Where it appears from the record of a case in a state court that a Federal question was raised, and, in the absence of an opinion, it appears from a certificate made part of the record that it was not raised too late under the local procedure, and that it was necessarily considered and decided by the highest coürt of the State, this court has jurisdiction to review the judgment on writ of error.</p> <p>A contract is not to be assumed to contemplate unlawful results unless a'' fair construction requires it; and where a-contract relates to commerce between points within a State, both on a boundary river, it will not be construed as falling within the prohibitions of the Sherman act because the vessels affected by the contract sail over soil belonging to-the other State while passing between the intrastate points.</p> <p>Even if there is some interference with interstate commerce, a contract is not necessarily void under the Sherman act if such interference is insignificant and merely incidental and not the dominant purpose; the contract will be construed as a domestic contract and its validity determined by the local law.</p> <p>A contract for sale of vessels, even if they are engaged in interstate commerce, is not necessarily void because the vendors agree, as is ordinary-in case of sale of a business and its good will, to withdraw from business for a specified period.</p>