Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1898-07-01

the appellant had no agents within this
State upon whom the service of summons
could have been made. The first onten
ton is sufficiently answered, if the allie
of the complaint are taken as
true, by the fact that the appellant was !
the owner of the mining claims named in
the alleged conveyance set up. If. as con-
tended by appellant, the alleged convey I
ance is in fact a mortgage rpon property,
then it is sufficiently shown tn 'reby that
the appellant was lOaning money upon
property situated within this State, and
such acts constitute doing business
within the meaning of said statute
The ccoud claim of the appellant raises .
for the first time in this our the appli-
cation of the Act of 1889, supra. Under l
Section $3.50, Gen. Statutes of 1885. the ser
vice of summons must be made by the
Sheriff of the county where the defendant
is found, or by his deputy, or by any citi-
zen of the United States over twenty-0ne !
years of age. When the service has been
made by the Sheriff or deputy, it must be
returned with a certificate or affidavit of
its service and of the service of the copy
of the complaint. The succeeding section
of the same Act requires. among other
matters, that in case the suit be against a
foreign corporation doing business in
this State. service of may be
made upon an agent, cashier, secretary,
president, or other head thereof. Section
3052 of the same Act provides, that when
the person on whom the service is made
resides out of the State, or being a corpo-
ration. cannot he served as provided in
the preceding section, and the facts shall
appear Ivy affidavit to the satisfaction of
the court or judge thereof, and in like
manner certain other matters are shown.
then an order shall be made for service of
summons by publication. The method
of procedure marked out bv the proyis-
ions Of these sections has been in force
since 1869, and remained unchanged until
The passage of the Act of 1889. supra, Civ
ing an additional mode or manner of
serving process npOn foreign corpora
tons as defined in that act. Under the
provisions of the Act of 1869. courts of
This State could acquire jurisdiction over
foreign corporations doing business in
the State by following the statutory rules
for service of by publication,
where no agent or other officer was found
in the State upon whom service could be
maGt; hut The power of the court, in ca
se> OF default, was limited. under well
seltlr,i rules. which require no citations
in their support to render judgments IN
rem. Under these statutes foreign cOrpO-
49, ,s-l $1,000 ,,4, H. S++, -.,.-
act business anccommlt wrongs against
its citizens for which the only remedy
was a personal action for damages. anC
before service could be made upon the
agent or other officer named in the stat.
ute, such agent or officer, could withdraw
from the jurisdiction of the State anC
leave the injured person practically with,
out remedy. The Act of 1889 construed
with the provisions of the Act of lS6!
was evidently intended to cure his de
feet.
Without entering into any discussion
as to the power of the legislature to pas.
the Act of 1889, regard for the rights o
property and person require that sucl
Act should be strictly complied with be
fore the courts assume jurisdiction. TIL,
statute of 1889, under which the service O
summons was made in the case at bal
, authorized such service upon the Secre
tary of State, in the event of the failure O
the appellant to appoint and keep an a
gent within this State upon whom sucl
service could be made, and such fact
should be affirmatively shown by tn
record.
Works Courts and their Jurisdic
: ton, p. 291.
Miller, Administrator VS.. The Nor
! folk & w. r. Co. Al Fed Rep. 4Sl,
, Jennings VS.. Grafton, 9S. w. 4O6.
r The requirements of the Act of 1889 ar
in effect, that every foreign corporatio,
doing business or owning property with
in this State shall appoint and keep i
the State an agent upon whom all legs
process may be served. and IN case c
their failure to comply with these re
quirements, then service of process ma
be made upon the Secretary of STATE
r Applying the strict letter of the rule t
the case at bar, has such showing bee
made by the record as to confer jurisdi(
ton over the appellant? The recor
shows that the appellant is a foreign col
s poration doing business in this State.
= further shows by certificate of the retur
n of the Sheriff, that process was dull
s served upon the Secretary of State.
further shows that there were no agent
: Of the appellant, as required by the sta
n ute, within Ormsby County, and any a
tempt of the Sheriff to show by his Gel
tificate that there were no agents Of til