CONGEESS. (CouBT OF CLAIMS AND CIECUIT COTJBTS.) 



191 



amount, where the same can be liquidated, including 

 any facts bearing upon the question whether there has 

 been delay or laches in presenting such claim or ap- 

 plying for such grant, gift, or bounty, and any facts 

 bearing upon the question whether the bar of any 

 statute of limitation should be removed, or which shall 

 be claimed to excuse the claimant for not having re- 

 sorted to any established legal remedy. 



SEC. 15. If the Government of the United States 

 shall put in issue the right of the plaintiff to recover, 

 the court may, in its discretion, allow costs to the 

 prevailing party from the time of joining such issue. 

 Such costs, however, shall include only what is actu- 

 ally incurred for witnesses and for summoning the 

 same and fees paid to the clerk of the court. 



SEC. 16. That all laws and parts of laws inconsistent 

 with this act are hereby repealed. 



The bill was approved by the President the 

 same day. 



Jan. 13, 1887, the House passed a measure 

 regulating the jurisdiction of the circuit courts 

 of the United States, which, in substantially 

 the same form, had been passed by the House 

 in the three preceding Congresses. Mr. Cul- 

 berson, of Texas, said, in explanation of the 

 measure : " The object of the bill is to diminish 

 the jurisdiction of the circuit courts and the 

 Supreme Court of the United States, to pro- 

 mote the convenience of the people, and to 

 lessen the burden and expense of litigation. 

 The methods employed by the bill are, first, to 

 raise the minimum amount giving the circuit 

 courts jurisdiction from $500 to $2,000. In 

 the second place, we propose to take away 

 from the circuit courts of the United States all 

 jurisdiction of controversies between the as- 

 signees of promissory notes and the makers 

 thereof, unless suit could have been maintained 

 in such courts had no assignment been made. 

 In the next place, the bill proposes to take 

 away wholly from the circuit courts the juris- 

 diction now exercised by them over contro- 

 versies in which one of the parties is a corpora- 

 tion organized under the laws of one State and 

 doing business in another State. We propose 

 to provide that the circuit courts shall have no 

 jurisdiction over controversies of that sort; 

 that whenever a corporation organized under 

 the laws of one State shall carry on its busi- 

 ness in another State, the corporation shall, for 

 judicial purposes, be considered as a citizen of 

 the State in which it is carrying on business. 



u There is another provision in the bill in re- 

 lation to the removal of causes from State to 

 Federal courts. The provisions of the bill take 

 away all right on the part of the plaintiff in a 

 suit to remove his cause from a State to a 

 Federal court after he has elected the forum in 

 which to bring suit. The bill further provides 

 that wherever the cause of action arises under 

 the Constitution of the United States, or a 

 law or treaty thereof, the defendant who is 

 sued in a State court upon such a cause of ac- 

 tion may remove the cause to a Federal court, 

 provided lie shall make it appear to the court 

 in which the case is pending that his defense 

 depends upon a proper construction of the 

 Constitution of the United States, or some law 

 or treaty thereof. 



" The bill does not propose to repeal the act 

 of 1867, which authorized either the plaintiff 

 or the defendant in a suit pending in a State 

 court to remove the cause from that court into 

 a Federal court upon the ground of prejudice. 

 That act is re-enacted, with a provision to this 

 effect : that the plaintiff or the defendant, be- 

 fore he can remove the cause from the State to 

 the Federal court, must satisfy the judge or 

 court having jurisdiction of the cause of the 

 truth of the matters alleged in his application 

 for removal. 



" This embodies, substantially, all the changes 

 in the act. The effect of these changes I beg 

 to refer to for a moment. The minimum juris- 

 diction of $500 was placed in the original ju- 

 diciary act in 1789, and it has been the law 

 ever since. The population of the country 

 then was 4,000,000, and now it is over 54,- 

 000,000. The amount of business of the coun- 

 try in the courts then and now sustain no com- 

 parison whatever. 



"The next proposition is to deny the right 

 of an assignee of a promissory note to bring 

 suit in a Federal court. That was the law 

 from 1789 until 1875. For ninety years the 

 assignee of a promissory note, or any other 

 chose in action, could not bring suit in a Fed- 

 eral court, unless a suit could have been main- 

 tained had no assignment been made. 



" The increase of jurisdiction of the circuit 

 courts of the United States, from that change 

 of law in 1875, has multiplied the business in 

 that court enormously, while it diminishes the 

 business in the circuit courts, which are over- 

 loaded everywhere now. It also diminishes 

 the business in the Supreme Court of the Unit- 

 ed States, which is three years behind on its 

 docket. 



'' The withdrawal of the right to remove 

 causes from State to Federal courts in the 

 manner provided in this bill, after the plaintiff 

 has selected his forum, will largely diminish 

 the business in the circuit courts of the United 

 States, and also the business in the Supreme 

 Court of the United Stated in cases over 

 $5,000. 



" The other proposition is to take away from 

 the circuit courts of the United States jurisdic- 

 tion over controversies between corporations 

 created by the laws of a State and which go 

 into other States and open offices and carry on 

 business. For judicial purposes we make such 

 corporations citizens of that State, and compel 

 them to sue in the forum or in the courts of 

 the State in which they carry on their busi- 

 ness. Over one third of the business now in 

 circuit courts of the United States and in the 

 Supreme Court of the United States springs 

 from this very jurisdiction to which I call your 

 attention. 



"And we deprive such corporation of the 

 right to transfer that case or change it from a 

 State to a Federal court. 



" There is another provision in the bill to 

 which I wish to call attention, and that is, it 



