Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/182

 168 FEDERAL REPORTER. �Btate by process of law, Le cannot, while there, be called to answer in another action, Parker v. Hotchkiss, 1 Wall. Jr. 269; The Juneau Bank v. McSpedan, 5 Biss. 64. The motion will be denied. ���HoYT and otbers v. WsiaHi. �{Ovreuit Court, D. Colorado. October 14, 1880.) �1. RemotaI/— JuKiSDiCTioK— Pleading.— Want of jurisdiction must bo pleaded, where an objection to tbie removal of s cause is made upon tbat ground, and mch defect ig not apparent upon the face of the record in the state court, or the petition for removal. �S. Bame-tSame— CoNVKTANCE BT Pabty TO SuiT.— A Jo»a.^conveyance of the property in controversy, by a party to the suit, for the express' purpose of conferring jurisdiction upon the federal court, will fumish no ground for remanding a cause to a state court. �Petition to Eemand. �, for plaintiffs. �, for defendant. �Hallett, L. J. In cases removed from a court of the state, if there is in the record, either in the state court or in the petition for rpmoval, anything showing want of jurisdiction ia this court, the party objecting to the removal may rely upon that by motion to bave the cause remanded. If, taking the facts appearing in the record and petition to be true, this court has jurisdiction, the party objecting to the jurisdiction must ma-ke bis objection by plea to the jurisdiction, — that is, he must allege the facts in a manner in which issue may be joined, and according to the course and practice of the court, so that they may be properly determined, — and it has been determined by the supreme court that the method of doing that is by plea to the jurisdiction, and in that way only, Upon such a plea we know what course is to be pursued; we know how to consider it, how to ascertain its sufiSciency, and bow, if issue be joined upon it, to reach a conclusion as to the matter of fact. ����