Year: 1868

THE CHICAGO AND ROCK ISLAND CONTROVERSY


The case of Hatch agt. the Chicago and Rock
Island Railroad Company, which sent by Judge Car
dozo TO the United States Circuit Court has been for
time past before the latter Court motion TO return
TO the Circuit Court and on a motion TO dissolve the In
junction Plaintiffs counsel having finished opening
argument TO remand Saturday, the 7th nst defend
ants counsel replied Saturday the l4 inst arguing
injunction being dissolved Counsel defended strongly
the conduct OF the directors oI the ROAD ana sara
ton, and not individuals Counsel then went into
statement of some OF the main points in the case already
familiar the public The bill complains that the Direc
tors have got, by pretense AO0oVO ana such Is the
counsel that this is not case involving more than the
sum $780, and therefore, not removable 10 this Court
1t material point under the acts of lsG667, that
plaintiff appeared TO defend in the State Court and
therefore. waived right OF removal The authorities
cited by opposing counsel when examined thoroughly,
will not sustain that point corporation may have
property in state other than the In which 1t
CORPORATION in tie State Where the property exists, but
that fact does not bar the corporation from good legal
claim 70 be an alien corporation ana an apper@nce 10y
an agent OF the corporation in an action against
the corporation IN me state where sucn Ptopy @


on for removal 70 the Federal courts In this case at
an appearance had not elapsed COunsel Or pantln SQ
tey had an affidavit that We had appeared and yet that
afFdayit is not produced. defendant may defend lls
rights i'm many ways in State court before the time for
h fun appearance has elapsed ana especially when only
REQUIRED 10 appear by agent without detrment 10 ms
ribt 70 removal 10 Federal court. II the interests of
defendants series OF suits are distinct ana separate
defendant
as 10 the other defendant IS continued in the state
court The in this case is whether the corpora
zion had power 20 do certain acts ana judgment IN
tLs Court can be final without making parties
I'm the state courts parties 70 this SUIT. Ihe
ouestion OF whether the Corporation is trustee OF
Hatch bound such not TO do certain thngs, s he


and there is force in the aIg-
,ent of opposing counsel that he really represents the
rorpora0n seeking restrain the acts OF its trustees


he idea thar because the servant Of corporation or
company has an office residence IN certain state the
corporation company shall be forced 10 defend IN snch
state although citizen OF another state Is not TO be en-


tcrtaiued. We have the night TO removal on the
ground that this corporation Is the only suDst9n'
lial defendant. This case was removed under the
act 1906 but could have been removed under the act
Of 1867 DY simple Bling OF petition for its removal II
there controversy in suit the whole suit may be
moved into the Federal Courts one OF the parties to the
controversy citizen OF state other than the State In


hcD the suit brought The object OF this Is 10 protect


stranger from the operation OF possible local partaity
for his opponent several papers and adayits were then
lie. Case still on.