The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-07-07
Memorial Addresses by Various Mem
bers of the Bar Association. Large
Numbers Of the Lawyers of the
State Present. The Open
inu Events.
inq Events.


vices which were held in honor of
members of the association who had
passed away since the last annual
meeting.
An address in memory of Col. H.
c. Jones was delivered by Col. 1fllett,
one in honor of Vhares T., Warren
was spoken by E. S. Simmons. a
acter of Hon. w. a. Dunn by Judge
McRae, while Mcssrs l.. S. Overnan,
$. III. Isler, G. b. Watson, f. II. Bus
bee, w. S. OBJ. Robinson and others
followed Col Tillett in his address on
Col. Jones. Memorial speeches were
delivered by Col Davidson, kopc elias
and others on Mr.. Warren and by Hon.
John e. Woodward and Lieutenant
Governor Winston on Mr. Dunn.
Among the features of the night
session was an excellent address by
Chief Justice Hill of Arkansas.
JUDGE PRITCHARD'S ADDRESS.
Judge Pritchard's address this
morning commanded the rapt attcn-
ton and deep inteles OF all present.
In speaking of the relations of the fed
eral and state courts and in adVoca =
ing a federal divorce law, he said liz
part:
There has been more or less con-
troversy as to the jurisdiction of the.
Federal courts, but the whole subject
is regulated by statutes which have
received the careful consideration OF
the highest courts of the land, as
result their jurisdiction is we'll defined,
except as to some questions which Ire
yet to be determined. These questions
are of the utmost importance, ana
upon their proper solution depend in
a large measure the peace and welfare
of the American people.
'In order to determine the jurisdic-
ton of the United States courts Ger
tain questions relating to the same
must be made to appear III the record
at the time suit is instituted: tlrSs.
it must aftirmatively appear that there
is a diversity of citizenship, that is 10
say that all of the parties arrayed on
one side of the controversy must be
residents and citizens of a State other
than the State where the action origi-
mated. 1t must appear that either ali
of the plaintiffs or all of the defend
ants are residents and citizens of the
State where the action is brought, or
that all of the plaintiffs must be resi-
dents and citizens of the State where
the action is instituted and all the de-
PENDANTS residents and citizens of the
State other than where the suit is
brought or vice versa. 1t must also
Ceeds the sum of two thousand dollars
exclusive of interest and cost before
the United States courts can assume
jurisdiction. OF course there are
many instances wherein the United
States courts have jurisdiction to
which [ will not refer on this occa-
sion, inasmuch, as | do not desire 10
tax your patience with discussion of
such length as would be necessary to
+l,n firn
of the courts jurisdiction, hence it
will ONLY be my purpose to discuss in
a general way those matters with
which We most frequently come in
contact.
1.-THE Federal courts will also take
jurisdiction of certain controversies III
stituted in the State courts upon a
proper showing. First cases where
there is diversity of citizenship ana
the jurisdictional amount IS involved
1t frequently occurs II cases OF talS
kind that suit is instituted against sew
eraI defendants, some of whom are
residents and citizens of states other
than where the action is commenced.
When the question of remoVabil1ty de-
pendS as to whether there IS Separ-
ate controversy, and if it should be
made to appear that there IS Such
controversy, then that portion OF the
suit which is Instituted against the
nonresident defendants can be re-
moved to the Federal courts ana tried
separately and independently OF the
cause of action against the local de-
PENDANTS, otherwise the petition for re-
moval will be denied. The second class
of cases instituted in the State court
removable to the United States courts
for trial are those wherein the non
resident defendants or any OF them
upon proper application make it ap-
near to the court that they cannot OBJ.
tain a fair and impartial trial of the
cause in the State Court on account
of prejudice and local influence. There
is this distinction between cases which
are sought to be removed on account
of diverse citizenship and those sought
TO be removed on account of prejudice
and local influence; viz: where it is
sought to remove a case on account
of diverse citizenship the application
to remove the same must be made