[171] Inman S. S. Co. _v._ Tinker, 94 U. S., 238 (1876). [172] Packet Co. _v._ Keokuk, 95 U. S., 80 (1877). [173] Transportation Co. _v._ Wheeling, 99 U. S., 273 (1878). [174] Lottery Cases, 188 U. S., 321 (1903). [175] _Id._ [176] 26 Statutes at Large, 209. [177] Northern Securities Company _v._ United States, 193 U. S., 197 (1904). [178] Beef-Trust case, Swift and Co. _v._ U. S., 196 U. S., 375. [179] Danbury Hatters’ Case, Loewe _v._ Lawler, 208 U. S., 274; see also Pullman Car Company, 64 Fed. Reporter, 724. [180] _In re_ Neagle, 135 U. S., 1 (1889). [181] _In re_ Debs, 158 U. S., 564 (1895). [182] The Addystone Pipe & Steel Company _v._ United States, 175 U. S., 211 (1899). [183] The Shreveport Case, (Houston, East and West Texas Railway Co. _v._ United States; Texas and Pacific Railway Co. _v._ United States) 234 U. S., 342 (1914). NOTE.—Cases further illustrating prohibition of a business or activity by operation of laws passed under the commerce clause: United States _v._ Holliday, 3 Wallace, 407 (1866); Buttfield _v._ Stranahan, 192 U. S., 470 (1904); U. S. _v._ Del. & Hudson Ry., 213 U. S., 366 (1909); Hope _v._ U. S., 227 U. S., 308 (1913). Cases illustrating exercise of the power over commerce given by the clause and exercising jurisdiction over commerce claimed to be intrastate but forming as it were a link in the chain of interstate commerce: Lord _v._ S. S. Co., 102 U. S., 541 (1880); Wilmington Transportation Co. _v._ California Railroad Commission, 236 U. S., 151 (1915); Hanley _v._ Kansas City Southern Ry., 187 U. S., 617 (1903). It will be well to read the dissenting opinions in any of these cases as these usually emphasize the power of the State over commerce. [184] Art. i., 10: 1. [185] McCrackin _v._ Hayward, 2 Howard, 608 (1844). [186] Woodruff _v._ Trapnall, 10 Howard, 190 (1850). [187] Woodruff _v._ Trapnall, 10 Howard, 190 (1850). [188] Murray _v._ Charleston, 96 U. S., 432 (1877). [189] _Idem._ [190] Salt Company _v._ East Saginaw, 13 Wallace, 373 (1871). [191] Fisk _v._ Jefferson Police Jury, 116, U. S., 131 (1885). [192] Trustees of Dartmouth College _v._ Woodward, 4 Wheaton, 518 (1819). [193] Case of the conjunction of Washington and Jefferson Colleges, Pennsylvania College Cases, 13 Wallace, 190 (1871). [194] Boyd _v._ Alabama, 94 U. S., 645. [195] Beer Company _v._ Massachusetts, 97 U. S., 25 (1877). [196] Douglas _v._ Kentucky, 168 U. S., 488 (1897). [197] Douglas _v._ Kentucky, _supra_; New Orleans Gas Co. _v._ Louisiana Light Co., 115 U. S., 650 (1885). [198] See the cases cited in New Orleans Gas Co. _v._ Louisiana, _supra_. [199] Georgia R. R. and Banking Co. _v._ Smith, 128 U. S., 174 (1888); East Hartford _v._ Hartford Bridge Co., 10 Howard, 511 (1850). But a judgment (judicial decision) is not a contract in the meaning of the Constitution. Morley _v._ L. S. & M. S. R. R., 146 U. S., 162 (1892).