0. 4 W. I. B. CO. r. L. S. &' M. S. EY. CO. ���% ���"bill waB filed against the L'ake Sliore & Michigan Southern Eailway Company as a corporation of the state cf- Illinois only, The petition allegea the necesàkry amount requiredby the statu te as the subject of controversy, and executëd the proper bond. TKe state court refused to grant the prayer for removal, and a transcript bas been taken of the record of the state court, and leave is asked to file it and have the cause docketed in this court, on the ground that it is a case properly removable to this court under the acts of congress. �On the face of the petition the case is removable, bat ii has been submitted to the court upon the facts as heretofore stated, and the question is whether, when a ' corporation is creatëd by the laws of one state, and then becomes Consoli- dated with the corporations of other states, by virtiie' of the laWs of the state of its creation and'dther states, and then changes its natne and is sued by thàt hame in a state court of its creation by a corporation 6t the sàme state, one Of the corporations created by the ia^ws of anothef state' can go into the state court and have the cause removed into the 'federal �court. :: ; ; �When the suit was brought in the st'àte court agkihst the Lake Shore & Michigan SoutHëm' - Eailway ' CtMpainy, we must assume that the corporàtidn meant vas that'fereated by the laws of Illinois. The laws of other siàtës wnich" creg.ted the corporations of those states had no force in the etate of Illinois, except by virtue of its legielation, and therefore the Consolidated corporation of that state becatoe such by the laws of Illinois, and the resuit of the coinbined legislation of the several states was that as to Illinois the corporation of this state was the sole representative of the other corpora- tions. It may be said, therefore, that in consequence of the legislation of the varions states the corporation of each state became an integral part of the Consolidated railroadcompany between Buffalo and Chicago, whose interests were in com- mon, and yet, as regards the respective corporations, each was a legal entity existing by virtue of the laws of the state of its creation. This, I understand, is the effect of the de- ����
