Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/151

 EATON V. 8T, LOUIS, ETC., MINING & SMELTING CO. 189 �allow a new neeessary party defendant, of different citizen- ship from the plaintiff, to corne in by voluntary appearance now in this suit in this court. �If time for the Eichmond Company to appear is not allowed, the suit will be remanded to the state court, with costs. ���Eaton v. St. Louis Shakspeab Mining & Smeltinq Co. anii �others. �[ViTcmt Court, E. D. Musoun. March 28, 1881.) �1. C0RPORAT10N&— JTmiSDicTioii— CrnzENBHip. �A corporation is, for jurisdictional purposes, to be regarded as a citizen of the state under the laws of wblch it is organized. �2. FoKKiON Corporations — Service of Pbocbss. �Where, by the local law, a foreign corporation is amenable to.suit in the courts of the state, service being made upon an agent vitfain the state, the federal courts may be regarded as courts of the state, and may take jurisdiction upon such service as would be good in a state court. �3. Bamb— JuRiSDicTioir. �A federal court has no jurisdiction over a foreign corporation, in the absence of local law conferring jurisdiction on the state courts, though the corporation does business through an agent and hae on office within the district where the court is held. �4. Bamb— Construction of Statute. �Under the Revised Btatutes of Missouri, which provide (section 3489) that " a summons shall be executed, except as otherwise pro- videdbylaw: * * « /ouriA, where defendant is a corporation or joint-stock company, organized under the laws of any other state or country, and having an office or doing business in this state, by deliv- ering a copy of the writ and petition to any offlcer or agent of such corporation or Company in charge of any office or place of business ; or, if it have no office or place of business, then to any offlcer or ae;ent or employe in any county where guch service may be obtained." Held, that as the St. Louis court of appeals has decided, in a case now before the supreme court of the state, that the above statute does not enlarge the jurisdiction of the state courts, nor authorize suits in p^rsonam therein against foreign corporations in cases not com- ing within the laws previously in force, but simply providesa substi- tute for consttuctive notice in a proceeding against such corpora- ��� �