The semi-weekly messenger., 1907-08-27

transfer cases TO the leueTa CouIus
IS what is complained OF as n nun
Of the railroads. A considerable
number OF papers appear TO be labor
ing rnder the impression that theec
states forbid the railroads TO appear
TO the federal courts. under penaity
Of losing their rights 20 do business
within the state. so that the raiiroao
would have to Get Justice In the stato
courts or not st all. Some OF the
most prominent papers in New NTH
and other cities seem 10
be under this impression. and quite
denounce the laws In sfrone
termS This ks n misapprchension.
What these state laws condemn IL
the common railway practice or
transferring civil cases TO tho federal
courts at once. without waiting for
the decision OF anv state COURT
whereas the proper course undd
these laws Ia TO appeal the caFes
nm through the state courts. appeal
ing. II desirable. from the states SUI
premc court--The Literary Digest
II is with great diffidence that we
take issue with publication OF such
well-established authority as The Lit
erary Digest: but we think IL Is wrong
in the statement as 10 the court pro-
cedure 1t has made in the extract from
il quoted above. II says the proper
course in cases such as those which
have recently been instituted in this
and some other states Of the south
in reference To- the railway rat" leSis-
lation of those states is TO appeal the
| cases up through the state courts,
appealing, If desired, from the state SUI
preme courts to the United States su-
preme court" that 'That is condemned
is the common railway practice or
| transferring civil cases u the federal
court at once. without waiting for the
decision of any state court"
In these propositions The Literary
Digest, in our opinion, has mistaken
the law. The law of the land-and II
is both state and federal law-provides
that where foreign corporation or
nonresident person is sued in a state
court the defendant has the right pIA
der certain restrictions TO remove u
case to the federal court. II such party
is sued in a state court he cannot re-
move the case TO the federal court
unless certain regulations are complied
with. If the case is not removed to the
federal court, but is allowed to take
it's course through the state courts
there is no appeal from the decision
of the state supreme court to the su-
preme court of the United States un-
less there is some federal question in
yolved If there is no federal question
involved the defendant who fails 10
apply for removal within the time pre-
scribed by law loses his right to have
the case removed and he is bound by,
the decision of the state court OF -
resort. Whether or not there ID amy
federal question involved the defend
ant. If he is a nonresident of the state
in which the suit is brought and II the
amount involved is over two thousand
dollars, has the right TO remove the
case if he makes the motion in time
but if he does not do so he loses the
right to have the case taken to the
federal supreme court, unless there Is
some federal question involved.
In a case of the latter kind the short
est way to final determination of the
. Ipoint at issue is by suit brought orig
o. inally In the federal court, because u
e does away with the appeal from the
= state superior court TO state supreme
y court and from that TO the federal
: supreme court, and it substitutes there
e for. trial in the federal circuit court
= and an appeal direct TO the suprep
court of the United States
We think it is plain that The Liter
ary Digest, in its attempt TO correc'
$ errors on this point into which 1t says
certain papers have fallen. has itsen
= made an error as TO the proced1f On
= the state and federal courts.