Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/156

 144 fjsdEbal bbporteb. �Similar statutes have from time to time been enacted wH'^ reference to foreign insurance companiea, but, in general terms, applying to all foreign corporations. Another statute, aud the one chiefly relied on by complainant, provides as follows : �"A summons shall be executed, except aa otherwise provided by law : pany, organized under the laws of any other state or country, and having f^n office or doing business in this state, by delivering 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 ol business, then to any offlcer, agent, or employe, in any county where sucl service may be obtained." �It bas been held by the sapreme court of Missouri that under the above-mentioned act of March 14, 1859, foreign railroad companies were not liable to be sued in the courts of this state without an attachment of property, unless in the case of a com- pany owning a railroad terminating opposite the city of St. Louis, and having its chief office for the transaction of its busi- ness in that city. Bohb v, Railroad Co. 47 Mo. 540, and cases cited. This was held upon the principle that a statute specify- ing ^¥hat particular foreign corporations may be sued in this state necessarily excludes suits against such as are not in- cluded within the terms of the law The latter act enlarges the right of suit by extending it to railroad companies hav- ing lines of road terminating opposite to any point in this state, and which have an office or place of business in this state, whether it be its chief office or not ; but it still applies only to railroad corporations. �It is thus seen that the action in the present case could not be maintained in a state court under the decisions of the supreme court of Missouriy in the absence of the last statute above quoted. The question, then, is, does that statute en- large the jurisdiction of the courts of the state, and authorize suits in personam therein against foreign corporations, in cases not coming within the laws previously in force? It will be observed that it is a statute regulating the service of Bummons upon a foreign corporation. The natural construc- tion of such a statute is that it is intended to regulate service of process in such cases as are authorized by law to be ��� �
 * * * fourth, where defendant is a corporation or joint-stock Com-