Per Curiam.
Affirmed with costs upon the authority of: (1) Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. Padgett, 236 U.S. 668" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1915-03-22" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/seaboard-air-line-railway-v-padgett-98399?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="98399">236 U. S. 668, 673; Central Ver*687mont Ry. Co. v. White, 238 U.S. 507" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1915-06-21" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/central-vermont-railway-co-v-white-98527?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="98527">238 U. S. 507, 509; (2) Illinois Central R. R. Co. v. Skaggs, 240 U.S. 66" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1916-01-31" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/illinois-central-railroad-v-skaggs-98637?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="98637">240 U. S. 66, 70; Spokane & Inland Empire R. R. Co. v. Campbell, 241 U.S. 497" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1916-06-12" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/spokane--inland-empire-railroad-v-campbell-2442451?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="2442451">241 U. S. 497, 509; (3) Southern Ry. Co. v. Bennett, 233 U.S. 80" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1914-04-06" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/southern-railway-carolina-division-v-bennett-98141?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="98141">233 U. S. 80, 86; Louisville & Nashville R. R. Co. v. Holloway, 246 U.S. 525" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1918-04-15" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/louisville--nashville-railroad-v-holloway-99148?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="99148">246 U. S. 525, 529.
Mr. F. L. Willcox and Mr. Thomas W. Davis, with whom Mr. Henry E. Davis was.on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. R. E. Whiting, with whom Mr. D. Gordon Baker and Mr. Felix E. Alley were on the brief, for respondent.