` snnnou v. VIRGINIA,.T. & 0. s..& 1. co. 7 .
C. Leake, Jr., were the respective plaintiifs, and-the Virginia, Tennes-“
see & Carolina Steel & Iron Company, a corporation,.and its directors,
were defendants, the object of which was to cancel subscriptions to the ··
stock of the corporation defendant," and compel it and its directors to
refund the amounts already paid in the subscriptions. Act Cong. March
3, 1887, § 2, provides that any suit in which the controversy is wholly
between citizens of different states, and which can be fully determined-
as between them. shall be removable to the United States circuit court
for the proper district. A ·
White ct: Buchanan, Christian cb Christian, and W. W. Gordon, for plain·s
tiff. _ . Q
R. A. Ayers, Atty. Gen., for defendants. . ‘ · c
. PAUL, J. These seveusuim were instituted in the circuit court of a
Washington county,=Va. The defendants, the.Virginia, Tennesseedr
Carolina Steel & Iron Company, Frederick W. Huidekopcr, John H.‘In—
man, William °P. Clyde, George S. Scott, A. H. Bronson, Extine Nor4
ton, and Nathaniel Thayer, petitioned the state court to remove these
cases into this court, which petition was denied, and- the said defend·.
ants, under the provisions of section 2, act March 3, 1887, amending
act March 3, 1875, (24 St. at Large, 552,) presented their petitions, _
with a copy of the record, to this court, and the causes were docketed
here at the May term, 1888. They are now submitted on a motionto
remand to the state court, on the ground that this court has no jurisdicr
tion of said causes. The object of all these suits is the same. They are
brought by subscribers to the capital stock of the Virginia, Tennessee &i s
Carolina Steel & Iron Company, for the purpose of annullingtheir sub·—
scriptions, and to recover the amounts already paid onsuch subscrip—4
tions, on the ground that the subscriptions were induced by fraudulent
representations made by the directors of said company, and contained
in a prospectus issued by said directors". The claims are made against
the Virginia, Tennessee &.Caro1ina Steel & Ironi Company, a corporation
under the laws of the state of New Jersey, and the directors of said com—
pany. The directors are the defendants Frederick W. Huidekoper, a
citizen of the District of Columbia; John M. Bailey, a citizen of Virginia;
George S. Scott, William P. Clyde, John H. Inman, A. H. Bronson,
and Extine Norton, citizens of New York; and Nathaniel Thayer, a cit-·
izen of Massachusetts. The other defendants are citizens of the state of ·
Virginia. It is conceded that they are merely nominal parties to the-
suits, and it is not necessary to consider their citizenship in discussing
the question of the jurisdiction of this court. The citizenship of the
plaintiffs in the several suits is as follows: Thomas Seddon, Thomas V
Seddon, trustee, James B. Pace, James H. Dooley, and 'l`. C. Leake,
Jr., Virginia; William C. Seddon, Maryland; and J. C. Maben, New"
York. The plaintiffs move that these causes be remanded to the state
court-—F*irst. Because the petition for removal is insuifrcient, in that it
fails to allege that the citizenship of the parties, as stated in the petition,
existed at the commencement of the suits. The records, as brought into