, 1875-04-17

them ,eforq The rieht Of tetnora1 /. perfected howis
!'aso f"r the petitioner to eo''i'y *i'b tho conal-
Vi " ony nj, @ ao.srr t. ran be srrn /. Tia, In ,ri.c of
hs wos'l. r H. i!rl ssftos: f & sha tls na and po
law 10 ng Of ths iNtiltnn and hon until the cptr is
in sts ro,,, ii c1rct erehy eris,n1 slo.o words o OF
e ,'a ana d. hr. 1as oax1 III r, owe,
A ats presented r. t1 Tt. b. b"n, bhna n snt Which
they wer. duly fled 10 vacation.
fld:r rrsviosln laua, Z, some n:sances The Ccria
of tAo ssaie courl wonld no. give copies u ths
act !us,ses rtteft fcnty In case nf thtis 1rftrn
I" furnish COPY of t.e resoIa oitrr te'ler Of tho
M a s . ssy oyfsred Hne r. by T.. c.af M TJ
sail t,rta n1tst fe power IN the state Cpnrt y lie.
serninc whether the inlon a'!d tnn1 src ruftch.,
md whether tie rase - removable Icr tho alatue
;sas + ss, ,s.,; s I'M: r: j.; sAss
hS .ste M az ot ~ e ,e ''as G,a1 to
WIFI VA, iac. s'' Tat va eS .o ,'ae'. ns'aes
tormes stetntc. II nc s,.sr o''ft m Gose !" proceed
i'nitel s.a!c.. a-e loush =. w;. t%tnrany, n's-
Crorns, l,.scIl Q. and nut.,rea rittd In tiptc
cases aad Eoe. Thla statute gitea ths Circuit cnars
rari 10 iEo State Court In anr cauAs 1saura,e uner
ie ac, and therefore to Tho Federal c2nr: the rIy 10
ttsrmne xhs:hs, M ~ ,e ssi1 j. rTrs. .sss
when tie Hats Court refuses u at. Int liz Slate
court may omit e tIaee On tho seccrd IL: refusal
10 object in issuns writ Of eers!orar the koe effect
of which fl 10 brtng the record to the Fedora! Court
~ ,sesy e,s % ny esfsa r. hy 'ae cstx pd:E
power to tho Circuit Court Of thu Elcd States to ro
ikl the stnts Cunr 70 act By writ q al1n... 9TH
stat1te ircH ssys Ia to mike rcurn Of the rtc,rd.
Tho tafth section cunta!ns provisions which srs ncs
II IN tru6 that IL practice under tTsvios lawr. when
cAso cao io the Federal Court Ly removal from, ibo
tatc Court uoti ,na could 10 u,ad1 10 t.na, a, re-
mali the cue, but the!r decision trprnl"l general
hs H. boh ~ 10 ho W sn .p
inanIng Ut cases. II did not Intend the tu ahnt.d be
dismissed or rc1nnndol on account 1t irrtgulaftties
3uradction Of tie cause. ucrs thc only Thing 10 which
objection IL now nade Is "a 10 thn character If the
st aud &c sant appqttse9 %horn q ts e ssnt 4,
maao agatnat tho sutsicitncy VI the lohd
1t said we
rnrAr 1uE sTA1E COURTS WITH nlsnksrzc7
In int allowing thet 10 pass Upon te undcr the
statute, We would treat Them diarcsEec.tuliy
II we dIsreaarcl and oretrucd ttr Action "a il il
admitted We would Lave tho right todo III proper
What might bo The ctec. Of thu record Ct tho s.ts
Court being flied In thd Federal Court Before shn
Tho care It Is not necessary consider There possibly
might Le question whether the case would ie Id
every respecs before tic Federal Court prior to Its
Il .nsy IL admitted theEe are difficulties in .ny view
70 may tate of ~ ars of t'e esse hut e aFc At
haa bad tie opi'ortuntty 10 pass upon tho sppeatun
alono confer the right Of removal when il is nd
ted that tho aeion or tionasion Of tho Stale Court
II tho petitioner hsA brought hnsclf and Ia within
tho terms Of The !aw aud tie right Of removal ia
record duly fled in tho Federal Court tsnl sI,vcal ail
given when requislte) tlio act Of removal hus taken
liz. Crawford aud Mr.. Mcdonald appeared for
plaintiff aud lii. Walker aul Alr. Campbell for
de{cndapta.