The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1874-11-11

Mr., Ratcheior Oh behalf III the Plaintiff
followed, mplntanl,,g tl,e same views as
Coy. Graham.
Hoy. Graham eaptinied !, uraing that
the Courts ofthe general Goser5neiit are
of limited iurIsdetio,n They derive tlear
authority frnni Congress; that corpora
lions. operating inn state other Than that
state whiel, created them, are snl9jectslof
\ THAT State. The Judgment asked II one de-
claring tile contract between The defelsl-
ants void The cniise cannot be removed
oi. the part Of the defendants. Wherever
1 the callse goes, The whole must 60 ~
i there can be no separate judgment ~ u
lone. The g,,daaDspn ofthe action IL, that
! the one party was incapableof making the
lease. and the other Of taking II.
Hon. ". N. III. Smith followed for the
Plaintiff, and urged that hoth parties were
Interested inn decision by this Court.
That the Act of 'GB was amended by tlsal
81 '67. whiellfequires an affidavit OF pref
udice for the renewal Of THE cause by q
| nonresident. When two defendants were
united 50 ID Interest as to present d sepa~
rate decision, ONE cannot remove. Cited
the ease ~ Harnr " i4ockhart II Wallace.
Tlsis case Is not separsb.v' IT mast pro-
coed against bntli defendants. st is
brought ~ the plaintiirin his behalf and
! that uf others, who commended that The
lease was ultra uires, aud sought to re-
strain both defendants. There could not
be separate suits against them. III i
cause row pending before the Supreme
I Court 81 North Carolina on asiniilaF cause
III action, against the Rs ID Rail Road,
4 the Court required the n. q. II. n. tote
made party before fnal decision could
De rendered. If the lpase was declared
| vnid, il affected both parties. The decree
must IL unit Igthe cise goes into lie
Federal Court Oh behalf Of the II u ID HI.
II. snI that Court declares the lease
/ void ~ 10 the lessor, and this Court declare
/ II valid Is u the lessee. which decree
would he binding? The ease cannot pro-
rred Ii the y q ALT i not party. The
Interests nf lie defendants are naked. and
the Court cannot separate them. All par.
ties inllst l,e hefure tile Court. re trans
ferred 10 lie Federal Court. tile MGR R
CO will not he there. Allihr defendants
must lie MN residents. otherwise the case
cannot be Removed. HE cited the Sew
| ing Machine csssp. Is WALLACE.
Mr.. j. B. lsatcI.elor also for plaintiff
contended tllatfhe Constitution ssflhe u.
/ :. Grated the supreme Court alone; lie
circuiI Court was created ~ Artaf Com
grc-s. aud has concurrent jurisdiction
with the state Cnuris. ThisnNtire eannot
IL granted without affecting the rights ~
plaintiff. lie rad the prayer oftl,e con,-
plant showing that relief Is prayed against
bath corporations. Both eompanies will
be affected by tue drcIee, II il II trans-
ferresl A. To lie Richmond 4 Dansille n.
4. and kept here asts the -. G. X. n.
and Tie Courts differ In their Judgments,
/ wllcl, i 10 BE- oLsyrd. twill be ilnpas-
sible 70 make tinal adjudication By eith-
7 81 Court.
Nj. Asl.e. on part u defendants, ooii-
tended II TINT Corporations were clti>
izcils end. that affidavit fir removal was
| uul necessary and Sid. that severance
euali e. made without prjadice. That
tile Federal Courts did pos nigari tie eit-
izensllp 81 the separate corporatprS. but
II tile principal osiiccaf The company n
selE re read and commented upon The
Il Acts os 80 and Of 81 and 81, and urged
that petition allure WIS necessary under
Two former Acts sor the removal Of ne
easse, and The Act of'0i was only an adj
dllian t0nnd not releRl of sHld Acts.
aud only applied to certain cases. This
petition vas filed Under The Act af 90 and
Il not II ~. Acl ii 'C6 allows citizen IT
INC sta.e. when joined with one Of an-
other 10 rca.uve his cause hy petition. Act
of ~ aenl.s the right citesi and cnm-
nrnlcd in the Sewing Machine CASE. and
urged That that decision was made under
the Net IL IL and That Tile Act ofg8 Il sill
III fun,e, froprio riyore Ash the sever
anee. IL commended that the eal PARTIES Il
tile action are entitled % claim II. though
lalned with tomllml paFtlss--that tile
joinder 10 this ease 4 nu indispensable
I fpr tile purposes u the action Or far ju,lg.
n,ent. That tile y. e Il X isM mere uoni-
! inal defendant, and DE ease ean he drci.
del without prejudice II II. The prayer
IL the petition i TINT he lease he surren.
densd 1T the instance 81 one of tte corpo.
rators.
/ Judge Marshall followed for the defend,
ants insisted uron the tight OF removal
under the Act ofcongrcss. He conteided
that tile esre came under Ire Act 81 "a
and nai oslD7-refeis 20 The laws laid down
| III y Wallace IL regard 70 the Sewing
Machine rase-lhe Jurisdiction If the clr.
calt rvvrt dcpcndson the Juris,liction d
Congress. Courts maale by Statute. have
aueIt iurfxsflnstnn only na II pnnfssrraI bv