In that case there was not drawn in question the validity of a statute or treaty nor the validity of any authority exercised under the State.

The distinction between assailing the validity of a treaty or of a statute and relying upon a specia construction of either is patent and has been the subject of such full discussion by this court that it should not now be considered either doubtful or obscure.

A final decree of a state court sustaining an order of sale of lands made on a hearing which occurred seven days previous to the statutory time limit not reviewable in the Supreme Court of the United States on a writ of error.

It is clear that cases not really involving the validity of some law or authority, but involving the contention only that some action taken under the supposed authority of law has the effect to take property without due process, are not reviewable by writ of error.

A judgment of a State court may be reversed because it takes the property of a person without due process of law, although there is no valid objection to the statute under which the court has acted, when there has not been due notice of the proceedings.

But it is elementary that this court is without authority to review and revise the construction affixed to a state statute as to a state matter by the court of last resort of the State.

[CITATION] SOLUM. SAME v. MONARCH ELEVATOR CO. SAME v. DULUTH ELEVATOR CO.

[HTML] A Brief Survey of the Jurisdiction and Practice of the Courts of the United …