The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-01-21
MAY TRANSFER
STATE SUITS
Decision Made by Judge
Mcpherson.
AN IMPORTANT RULING
Holds That Missouri Laws Are
Mil and Void.
Rock Island Railroad Upheld In rts
Contention Thst II LIZ Deased
Rights Guaranteea ~
Eleventh Amendment.


Smith Mcpherson, in the United States
District Court here today. declared void
and unconstitutional tffe statute pass
ed by the Missouri Legislature In
1907. forbidding foreign corporations
from transferring suits brought
against them from the state to the
Federal Courts upon pain of forfeits
OF the charters.
The application OF the Rock rsiand.
Santa Fe. the st. Louis, Kansas City
and Colorado. the Milwaukee and st.
Paul. and the Chicago and Allan RAIN
way Companies for an injunction tn
prevent John e. swanger. Secretary Of
State. from enforcing the law. was
granted by the court.
The Missouri Law OF which toaay,s
decision 10 based. provides, spacincaf-
~. that II any foreign or non-residenf
railway corporation. created and exist
ing under the laws OF any other state.
and doing railway business from any
point In the State to another point
within the State, shall, without the
written consent of the other party re-
move case from the State Court to
q United States Court, or shall With
out said written consent institute any
suit against a citizen OF the State, IN
any Federal Court. then the Secretary
of State shall revoke the license to do
business from one point in the State to
carrying passengers or freight. And
doing such business shall subject IL
to penalty of not less than $4,000 and
not more than $4,000 for each Of
Tense. And such disability shall con-
tinue for I'VE years.
II Is alleged In this case that com-
pIainant Is about removing a case and
the secretary viii follow that BY re-
volkinR Its right TO do business. The
defendant contends that this In effect
is In action against the state In vso-
lation Of the Eleventh Amendment 20
the Consultation. The complainant
contends that the act Of 1907 impairm
its contract with the State and denies
Il the equal protectien al the laws Il
enforced. Judge McPherh6n III his de-
cision goes into the Law OF the case
at great length and quotes freely from
previous decisions to sustain IFS po-
sition.
The decision in part follows:
This court is mindful OF the crlti-.
cism by many laymen as well as by
many lawyers to the effect that United
States Courts have no right. nor even
the power. to decree the inwalidity OF
State statutes. The argument. or
rather the talk. Is that the people know
what they need and that their repre-
sentatives in Legislature assembled
alone should determine what statutes
mined and evidenced by Legislative en-
actment, that the courts should not
Interfere by decree aud thereby thwart
the Legislative will. In other words,
that II is well to limit the powers Of
executives and courts. but a written
constitution restraining Legislative
bodies is all wrong and that Great
Britain has the model government.
ofacers Of the state. continued Judge
Mcpherson ''too often decry the power
of the nation.
state rights is their shibholeth" he
added The most attractive argument
to some lawyers = recent days IL that
the state courts alone In. the first In
stance should pass upon the question:
as to the validity Of State statutes. with
he right OF the defendant party to
carry the case for final decree TO the
Supreme Court of the United States
Such arguments are plausible. are con-
vincinR to many good people, but are
so dangerous as to amount TO a heresy.
1t is the extreme OF state fiBhtA IN
new form"
an the case at bar" he says. -
Itcanse 10 do business Is not the guess
tion. Each Of the companies invested
millions of dollars, and Il 10 now "
the State and cannot be removed. To
prevent IL from doing business means
appropriating its property or destroy
as, tberefor. II was invited to come
info the Stale and was told by the
Jawa In force that II should have the
same and like standing as resident
companies with benefits as great ana
with burdens no greater After these
Investments had been made, and which
cannot be withdrawn. II Is declared ~
that no kind OF litigation
shall be carried on by II IN any court
other than the state courts. but ieav-
tns 70 the railway corporations organ
ICED under the laws of the state tns
rtsrht 10 go to the national courts with
its litigation of all kinds arising an
der the laws or legislation OF the Unit
ed States ...,... 80.
dor its LAYS may sue or be sued IN any
court state or national. IL there -
Federal question. but a foreign corpor-
alton doing business as compeeitoFs
nnnst M ALI times be subject 20 the
stste courts: or IL 1t ventures into 3
nationaI court, then all investors lose
all" ~s.pt...,,,.
In concluding Judge
holds as follows: -
.aTbe Missouri statute Of 1907 is void
hocause Il allows q resident company
~ s,Ie in the Federal Court. IL there =
a Federal question and denies that right
TO a nonresident company.
.Regardless Of the last preceding
statement. the statute Is void because
A seeks to take from the complainant
It's right to bring OF remove a Ease to
the United States Court. which right IS
given by the Constitution and the act
OF Congress which, by Article s OF the
Constitution Is declared to be the su-
preme law of the land, anything in the
Constitution or laws of any State -