‘THOMAS H. HULBERT, Plff. in Err.,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO.
(See S. C. Reporter’s ed. 275-281.)
1. Error to state court— Federal ques¬
tion— liow raised— The mere claim of a right under the Constitution of the United States in the objections filed to the confirma¬ tion of an assessment for a public improve¬ ment, which was never afterwards brought to the attention of the trial court or the supreme court of the state, is not sufficient to sustain a writ of error from the Supreme Court of the United States to the state court.
2. Error to state court — Federal ques¬
tion — liow raised. — Statements in the writ of error and the petition for citation are insufficient to show that a Federal question
was raised and decided by a state court which will sustain a writ of error from the Supreme Court of the United States.
3. Error to state court — Federal ques¬
tion— how raised. — The fact that the chief justice of the highest state court allowed a writ of error from the Supreme Court of the United States does not help out the failure of the record to show that a Federal question was raised and decided.
4. Error to state court — Federal ques¬
tion — how raised. — Federal questions
which the highest state courc is, by its set¬ tled practice, justified in disregarding, either because not assigned, or because not noticed or relied upon in the brief or argument of counsel, will not serve as the basis for a writ of error from the Supreme Court of the United States.
[No. 248.]