Per Curiam:
The appeal herein is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Moffitt v. Kelly, 218 U.S. 400" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1910-11-28" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/moffitt-v-kelly-97307?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="97307">218 U. S. 400, 404, 405; Nickel v. Cole, 256 U.S. 222" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1921-04-25" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/nickel-v-cole-99794?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="99794">256 U. S. 222, 226; Iowa Central Ry. *527Co. v. Iowa, 160 U.S. 389" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1896-01-06" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/iowa-central-railway-co-v-iowa-94332?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="94332">160 U. S. 389, 393; Castillo v. McConnico, 168 U.S. 674" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1898-01-03" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/castillo-v-mcconnico-94793?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="94793">168 U. S. 674, 683; Lombard v. West Chicago Park Commissioners, 181 U.S. 33" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1901-04-08" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/lombard-v-west-chicago-park-commissioners-95442?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="95442">181 U. S. 33, 42, 43; French v. Taylor, 199 U.S. 274" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1905-11-27" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/french-v-taylor-96343?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="96343">199 U. S. 274, 277; Rawlins v. Georgia, 201 U.S. 638" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1906-04-16" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/rawlins-v-georgia-96456?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="96456">201 U. S. 638, 639, 640; Hannis Distilling Co. v. Baltimore, 216 U.S. 285" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1910-02-21" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/hannis-distilling-co-v-mayor-and-city-council-of-baltimore-97171?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="97171">216 U. S. 285, 294; De Bearn v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 233 U.S. 24" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1914-04-06" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/de-bearn-v-safe-deposit--trust-co-of-baltimore-98134?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="98134">233 U. S. 24, 34; McDonald v. Oregon Navigation Co., 233 U.S. 665" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1914-05-25" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/mcdonald-v-oregon-railroad--navigation-co-98191?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="98191">233 U. S. 665, 669, 670; St. Louis Land Co. v. Kansas City, 241 U.S. 419" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1916-06-05" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/st-louis--kansas-city-land-co-v-kansas-city-98757?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="98757">241 U. S. 419, 427; Hebert v. Louisiana, 272 U.S. 312" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1926-11-01" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/hebert-v-louisiana-100929?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="100929">272 U. S. 312, 316, 317; Sandel v. South Carolina, 269 U.S. 532" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1925-10-26" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/sandel-v-south-carolina-8145789?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="8145789">269 U. S. 532; Boyd v. Smythe, 270 U.S. 635" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1926-04-12" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/boyd-v-smythe-8145845?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="8145845">270 U. S. 635.
Mr. John A. Sibley, with whom Messrs. Marion Smith and Herman Swift were on the brief, for appellant.
Messrs. George M. Napier, Attorney General of Georgia, Orville A. Park, and John A. Smith were on the brief for appellee.