The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1874-06-20
Rock Island Illinois, Saturday, June 30, 1874.

within the jurisdiction of the United States;
that 1t comprehends every right, privilege
OF immunity secured by the Constitution,
ana any one OF the amendments, and that
| the corporation Is a person representing
ana acting for all the members of which
1t Is composed, and for the rights, priv
| lleges and lmmunities secured to them as
such
Now, if it be admitted that this is the
true construction of the act of April 20,
1871, and 1t 1t be conceded further, that
the State was prosecuting an action of debt
tor penalty, which could not be enforced
without causing the company to be subject
ed to the deprivation of rights, privileges
or immunities secured by the Constitution,
the question is, whether the cause could be
removed from the Circuit Court of Sanga-
mon county so as to authorize this court to
take jurisdiction.
The reason alleged is that the act of the
Legislature under which the penalty is
sought to be enforced, impaired the obll-
CATION of the contract which the State
made with the company by its charter. IF
this were so, has Congress authorized the
transfer of cause from the State to the
Federal court in such a contingency? 1t
must satisfactorily appear that this has
been done
There can be no doubt that Congress can
vest any jurisdiction authorized by the
Constitution in the Federal court, either
originally or by transfer from the State
courts. But prior to the act of April 20,
1871, that clause of the Constitution which
prohibits State from passing any law
lmpairing the obligation of contracts when
involved in suit pending in a State court,
and the decision of the court was in favor
OF the validity Of the law, could only be
construed by the Federal courts by writ
OF error under the 25th section of the
Judiciary act. Has the act of April 20,
1871, changed this? If so, it must ap-
pear by express words or by necessary i'm
plicati0n.
The first section of the act of 1871 de-
clares that the person doing the injury un-
der color OF the State law, shall be liable
to an action at law, suit in equity or other
proper proceedings for redress"
1t will be observed that then the words
action at law and suit in equity are
omitted, and the language is such pro
ceeding to be prosecuted in the several
District and Circuit Courts of the United
States. There can be no doubt that the
action at law and suit in equity referred to-
are original actions and suits, to be
commenced in the District or Circuit
Court And 1t would seem not an unfair
construction to hold that the words "other
proper proceeding should follow the prin-
cipal words used, and should also be re-
ferred to any other original proceeding
than such as might be properly termed an
action at law or suit in equity. And when
they were prosecuted in the District or
Circuit Court, they were to be subject to
the same right of appeal, review upon err
ror, and other remedies in like cases pro-
vided under the act of April 9, 1866, and
other remedial laws in their nature appli-
cable in such cases. Now the argument
) is, because in some of the statutes here re-
) ferred to, provision is made, under certain
t circumstances named in each case, for the
transfer OF causes from the State to the
? Federal court, that this cause can be trans
: terred. We are not prepared to admit the
conclusion; on the contrary, we think if
I the FIRST section of the act of 1871 was in
tended to authorize the transfer, more ex-
e phcit language would have been used
e Undoubtedly that section in the cases
| named intended to confer on the District
[ VI ClfSult COulLS Dut
+ full effect can be given to the section by
Y applying the words used to original actions
at law, suits in equity, or other proper pro-
: ceeding. And like cases may vel
r mean cases originally brought in such
e courts, viz. the District and Circuit Court.
of the United States.
. The case is not. then, within the rule al
: ready stated. The transfer of the case to
!, words, or by necessary implication. w
:, think, therefore, this court has no iuris
= diction of the cause
e In the Morgan county cases, which hat
e been certified up by the court in obedi
ence to the requirements of the writ of Ger
e tiOrdri, the court also quashed the writ
IS and ordered the record of proceedings t
be returned to the State court.
What steps the railroad attorneys wi
next take remains to be seen, They may
we believe. take the cases to the Suprem
r Court Of the United States on writ Of er
TOR, for review, and it is not impossibl
l. that this will be done.