Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/768

 BBOWNBLL V. T. & B. R. 00, 761 �asked if he receîved an answer to that letter from the commis- sioner, to which he replied that he did; and in reply to the interrogatory where it was, he said it was in court in the hands of bis counsel. Immediate request was made by the plaintifïs of his counsel to produce the letter, which he refused to do, and the plaintiiïs gave evidence of its contents, subject to the objection of the defendants, which is the foundation of the last assignment of error. When the paper in question is in court, and in the possession of the opposite party, the notice to produce may be given at the trial, and, if so given, is in season to allow paroi evidence of its contenta. Dwyev v. Collins, 7 Exch. 638, (639;) 1 Taylor's Ev. (6th Ed.) 449, § 426; 1 Greenl. Ev. (13th Ed.) 561. �Tested by these several considerations, it is clear that the rul- ings of the court below are correct, and that there are no errors in the record. �Judgment afflrmed. ���Beownell V. Troy & Boston Eailboad Co. �{Circuit Court, D. Ver mont. May, 1880.) �JUKISDICTION — FORBIGN COKFOnATION — SBRVICB OF PkOCEBS — QbN. �St. Vt. c. 28, § 118.— Section 118, e. 28, of the General Btatutes of Vermont, provided that the lessee of a railroad within the state, re- Biding eut of the state, should appoint one person resident in the state, upon whom service of every kind of process Icnown to the laws of the state might at any time be made ; and that aU such service upon the person go appointed should be a legal service upon the lessee. Hdd, that service upon the agent of the non-resident lessee of a railroad within the state, appointed in accordance with the terras of this sec- tion, and served in the manner provided by the laws of the state for the service of such process, would sufflce to vest the circuit court for the district of Vermont with jurisdiction of an action against such non-resident lessee. �Ex parte SchoUenherger, 96 U. 8. followed. Bame — Samk — Samb — Samk — Stipulation. — It was not necessary, un- der the terms of this section, that the non-resident lessee should flrst file an express stipulation agreeing that service within the state should be good, in order to vest such court with jurisdiction. �Motion to dismiss suit for want of jurisdiction. ����