within-its; ;lhnits; for it may be assull)ed that it will eXEll't its 'pc>'We1's during the whole of its cOl'porate existence, or so long as it is:profi,table to do so. It does ,there just what it would do if it had teceiYl'ldltli charter from that state. It seems to the court that a corporation or a corpQration of: the United States. holding such close relations with the business and people of another state, may. within interpretation of the act of 1887, be d.eemed an "inhabitaJa,t "of: I the fla,tter state for all purppsell of jUJ,'isdiction in personam by the cmutsheld lit Qorporationis, and,while its cor", porate existence Illsta, U',lustrema,in, ,lit" citizen" only of the state which gave it life. ',' ; " It is, ordered, .andadjudged that motions to dismiss, so Caras they ,question the jurjsdiction of, this court )to in against the several defendant, corpora as inhabitants, of, ,dil>trict, within the ,mfilaning Qf.the aboV;6 .aot ,of cOQgress, be,B.J;ldthe same are hereby: ,oVerruled.
i' . - ' . __,
PAO. ,R. Oo.;,CaZ.
, ''''.' ,
'In:tqtllty·· SUit bftlieunfted States ligainstthe CentralJ»aci6c Railroad ChmpaoYo'the S'?titliern Plicifle CompaiIyj and the Western Union Telegraph COmpany. Heard on. pleas and'motions to dismiss; Overruled. '.Atty. gen. Miller'and Oharles H. Alarich,for the United St,at;es. OJi,arlesH. Tweed,J. Hubley .4"shtrm. HarveyS. B<J:Qwn. for the Cen. l'ac1qc, Railroad, Compa,9-Y and the Sontb.ern Pacific " , WagerSwavne and Bush Western Union Telegraph Company. . ,
'; !.'} ,
Circuit Justice. The qtiestions'presented,ln this CRse do not fer'iil any material respect from thosedisp08edofin the case of U. B. v. Railroad; 00.,' 49 Fed. Rep. 297. For the reasons given in the ,opinion in that adjqdged thaUhepl6l\8. and, IQotions to dismiss. sotar'13. quelltion jurisdiction of this to proceed pel'sonatnagainst the lIeve.ral defendant co,rporatlons. ,as inhabItants of thiS state and distriot,. be/and the same are overruled. ' ". '
,'." t. .
CHENEY V. BACON.
(0&rcUU. Court of .Appea18, Eighth. Cirtnrito
UPBAL-AsSIGNMENTS. OF ElIROR,
. :.Where the B8signment'oferror is based on an allegation of fact whioh the rdCord 'W /:Ie: the Ileeree will beaftlrmed. '.
Nebraf!!ka", , for Affirmed.,,: l P9lMt48
the·.Circuit .court of the. United States for the District of ...., ' . ' : PrentissD; OheDe)" and Annette Cheney forcolllplainant.
Oheney, ,for appellants. Samuel P. DavidsGn,rfor appellee., , .:ijefQre CMioPWEiLL, Qjrcqjt J qdge, .,ll:nd Judges.
CALDWELL, Circuit Judge. This is a suit in equity, commenced by the complainant, Bacon, against the respondents, Cheney and wife, to compel the specific performance of a contract to convey a quarter section of land in"J'ohnson oounty, Neb. The' suit w8sbegun in the. state court, and removed to the circuit court by the respondents. The contract was byrCheney on the,2d day of March, 1880. It recites that he contracts, bargains, and agrees to sell the land (describing it) to the complainantat the price of$1,120, and that$200 of haa been paid, is 1'0' b(3 .p8id .in 10 aunual installments, each for. $92 andinte'rest,for which notes :were executed, whi.chare described inthe contract. . 'Q:p6n the payment of the purchase money and interest. in the time and manner provided, the respondent was to execute a deed conveying the 'land to the complainant. . The contract stipulated !'tbat no assignment of the premises or of this contract shall be valid unless with the Written9pnsent of the first party, and by indorsement of the assignment hereon." It was declared that time was the essence of the con.. that "no court 'shall relieve. the said second party from a failure to compl.rstrictly and literally with contractj" and, upon the failure to comply strictly: with his under the contract, IllJ. :his;J,ights thereund,er were to be forfeited. The bill alleges payment of money in the Rmaand manner J:>y the contract, and prays that the respondents be required to execute and deliver to complainant a deed ·for the The court below.entered a decree to the prayer of the bill. The proof the purchase money was paid, as alleged in the bill, and that the complainIl.Dt has been in possession of the land for a long time, and has made valimpr9;vements " thereon., ' ,The .answer, set - ;only this u.p , , , --1 ',1 ," ',, ." '.. ' . . . '.Chis. ,defWlIiant, .f!1rther answering, ayers the. fact tQ be thE! (l9mplaill8nt.:sOld a,n. S.fe.rred tb. e.. ts ,of ,poss.e.ssion to... the. land bill of §ompjaipt on Of 22d. day of · ., v.49F. no. 5'-20 '..J .. , .. , . . " ·
, 'j ,';.,.: ..