2 FEDERAL REPORTER.
part of the section, which declares in what cases the circuit courts shall have
jurisdiction. r `
· Ross, J. This action was commenced in this court. It was brought _
_ to recover of defendant a large sum of money, in amount exceeding one
million of dollars, for services alleged to have been rendered, and for maps .
and data. alleged to have been furnished, by plaintiff to an alleged Mexi—
can corporation, styled "Luis Huller & Co.," in connection with certain
lands in the republic of Mexico, payment for which it is charged was
assumed by the defendant. In the complaint it is averred that the
plaintiff isa citizen of the republic of Mexico, and a resident of the
f county of San Diego, state ofCalifornia; that the defendant is a corpo-
ration duly created by the laws of the state of Connecticut; that under
and by virtue of its charter it has the power and capacity to buy, re-
ceive, hold, and sell lands in any state of the United States, and in any
and all parts of the republic of Mexico; and to do any and all acts, and
to make any and all contracts, relating or incidentto the purchase, sale,
or holding of such lands; that defendant has ever since its creation car-
,, ried on businessby virtue and under the authority of and in accordance
~ with its charter; that its principal place of business is in the city of
Hartford, state of Connecticut ;, and that it is “ doing business in the state ·
of California, and has an oflice and managing agent in said state of Cali-
fomia, within the county of San Diego." The summons issued inthe
action was served by the marshal of the district, as appears from the re-
turns indorsed thereon, upon one Charles Scofield, " managing agent of
defendant in‘San Diego county." The defendant has appeared specially
and only for the purpose of objecting to any jurisdiction of this court
over it; and has, among otherthings, pleaded that it is a foreign corpo-
ration, and that at the time of the commencement of this action, and at
the time of the attempted service of process upon it, it had no place of
business or agent or officer in this state, or any person authorized to re-
~ ceive service of legal process for it, and that Charles Scofield at the time
of serviceupon him- was not, and never was, a managing or other agent
or officer of defendant within this state. A r r
Without reference to the question of the sufficiency of the plea as set
up in the preliminary answer, I think it sufficiently appears from the
r complaint itself, that this court has no jurisdiction of the defendant in
the action. By the act of congress approved March 3, 1887, it is pro-
vided- ‘ t · v
" That the circuit courts of the United States shall have original cognizance,
concurrent with the courts ofthe several states, of all suits of a civil nature,
at common law or in equity; where the matter in dispute exceeds, exclusive
of interest and costs, the sunror value of two thousand dollars, and arising
under thejconstitu-tion or laws of theUnited States, or treaties made, or which
sha1l_be made, under their authority ;i or in which controversy the United States
are plaintiffs. or petitioners; or in which there shall be a controversy between
citizens of different `states, in which the matter in dispute exceeds, exclusive
of interestand costs, the sum or value aforesaid; or a controversy between
citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states; or
a controversy between citizens of a state and foreign states, citizens or sub- .