Eagle River review. [volume] (Eagle River, Wis.) 1890-1927, 1908-01-24
DECISION Is BLOW
TO STATE RIGHTS
FEDERAL JUDGE KNOCKS OUT
RAILWAY LAW PASSED BY MIS-
SOURI, LEGISLATURE.
ROADS CAN TRANSFER SUITS.
Mcpherson Says Act FORGETTING Charters
for Changing Litigation to U. S.
Courts Is Unconstitutional.
AGAINST SUPREME LAW OF LAND.

KANSAS CITY, Mo-, Jan. 2O.-Judge
Smith Mcpherson, in the United States
district court here today, declared void
and unconstitutional the statute passed
| by the Missouri Legislature in 1907 for
bidding foreign corporations from trans
ferring suits brought against them from
the state to the federal courts upon pain
| of forfeitures Of the charters. The APP
| plication of the Rock Island, Santa Re,
the st. Louis, Kansas City & Colorado,
the Milwaukee & st. Paul and the Chica-
| go & Alton Railway companies for an
injunction to prevent John Il. Swan
ger, secretary of state, from enforcing
the law was granted by the court.
Decision of Judge Mcpherson.
The decision in part follows:
This court is mindful Of the criticism
by many laymen, as we'll as by many
! lawyers, to the effect that United States
courts have no right, nor even the pow
er, to decree the invalidity of state
statutes. The argument, or, rather the
talk is, that the people know what they
need and that their representatives IN
| Legislatures assembled alone should de-
termine what statutes we must have.
"It is alleged in this case that the com
| plainant is about removing a case, and
the secretary of state will follow that by
revoking it's rights to do business. The
defendant contends that this in effect is
an action against the state, in violation
of the eleventh amendment to the con
stitution. The complainant contends
that the act of 1907 impairs it's con-
tract with the state, and denies it the
equal protection of the laws if enforced"
Judge Mcpherson in his decision goes
| into the law of the case at great length
and quotes freely from previous deci-
| sions to sustain his position.
Cites Wisconsin Case.
Officers of the state" continued
I Judge Mcpherson, in his decision, too
often decry the power Of the nation.
State rights is their shibboleth," he add
| ed. "The most attractive argument to
some lawyers of recent days is that the
| state courts alone in the first instance
should pass upon the question as to
the validity of state statutes, with the
right of the defended party to carry
| the case for final decree to the supreme
court of the United States. Such argu-
| ments are plausible, ares convincing to
| many good people, but are so dangerous
| as to amount to heresy. 1t is the ex-
| IRENE of state rights in a new FORM"
| Judge Mcpherson cited decision of
the Wisconsin state supreme court which
| upheld a state statute under which an
insurance companys charter had been
court.
In this case, however,, he says, the
company had no property in the state,
and had made no investments therein.
In the case at bar" he said, "a license
to do business is not the question. Each
of the companies invested millions of
! dollars, and it is now in the state and
cannot remove. To prevent it from do
ing business, means appropriating its
property or destroying it without making
| any compensation therefor"
| In concluding Judge Mcpherson holds
as follows:
The Missouri statute Of 1907 is void, be-
| cause it allows resident company to sue
in the federal court, # there is federal
| resident company.
Regardless of the last preceding statement
the Statute Is void because it seeks to take
from the complainant its right to bring or
remove a case to the United States court,
which right is given by the constitution, and
| the act of Congress, which by Article 8 of
! the constitution is declared to be the ''su-
| preme law of the land, anything in the con
stitution, or laws Of any state to the CON
trary notwithstanding.
The Statute is void because it is an effort
| to not only impair but to repudiate the
| contract of the state made with the company
by which it was induced to come into the
state making investments in large sums.
and was authorized to do state business
but now declaring that it shall not do such
| business, thereby rendering it insolvent, and
ticking from the people along Its line the
|
the company will surrender under coercion
rights given it by the national constitution
and valid enactments of Congress.
Provisions of Missouri Law.
The Missouri law upon which today's
decision is based provides, specifically,
that if any foreign or nonresident rail
way corporation, created and existing I'M
der the laws of any other state, and do
ing railway business from one point in
| the state to another point within the
state, shall, without the written con-
sent of the other party, remove a case
from the state court to a United States
court, or shall without said written con-
sent institute any suit against a citi-
zen of the state, in any federal court,
then the secretary of state shall revoke
| the license to do business, from one
| point within the state to any other with
| in the state. And doing such business
shall subject it to a penalty not less
than $4,000 and not more than $4,000
for each offense.