Delay in petitioning for removal till after the statute time had passed, is ground for remanding; 1 but delay to move to remand may be ground for refusing to remand on that ground." 92 Whether a motion to remand lies before the day fixed for filing the record in the Circuit Court is not settled.93 94 An order remanding cannot be reviewed on appeal. The Act of 1887 expressly so provides, and the subsequent Acts of Feb. 25th, 1889, (25 St. 693) and March 3d, 1891, (26 Stat. 826) have not granted an appeal.95 In remanding a 18. costs on remand.] case removed under the Act of 1875 or 1887, the court may impose a reasonable attorney's fee as a compensation to the party procuring a remand, even where the remand is for want of jurisdiction. 96 19. Defendant's time to plead.]-In the second circuit the defendant has a total of twenty days from the service of the complaint, excluding the days intervening between the filing of the petition for removal and the entry of the record in the Circuit Court. 97 91 Kerting . Am. Oleograph Co., 10 Fed. Rep. 17; Delbanco v. Singletary, 40 Fed. Rep. 177. 92 Miller v. Kent, 18 Fed. Rep. 561; but see McGregor v. McGillis, 30 Fed. Rep. 388, contra. 93 See Hamilton t. Fowler, 83 Fed. Rep. 329. 94 Removal Act (1887), § 2. Nor is there a remedy by mandamus. Ex parte Penn. Co., 137 U. S. 451. 95 Richmond, etc., Ry. Co. v. Thouron, 134 U. S. 45; Gurnee v. Patrick Co., 137 id. 141; McLish r. Roff, 141 id. 661; Chicago, etc., Ry. Co. v. Roberts, 141 id. 690; Mo. Pac. Ry. Co. v. Fitzgerald, 160 id. 556. 96 Josslyn r. Phillips, 27 Fed. Rep. 481; Pellet v. Gt. No. Ry. Co., 105 id. 194; Riser r. So. Ry. Co., 116 id. 1014. Compare Mayor of Nashville r. Cooper, 6 Wall. 247; and Mansfield, etc., R. R. Co. v. Swan, 111 U. S. 379. As to costs in the Supreme Court, see Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 451; Hanrick r. Hanrick, 153 id. 192. 97 Heidecker r. Red Star Line, 32 Fed. Rep. 706; Pelzer Mfg. Co. v. St. Paul, etc., Ins. Co., 40 id. 185; Bryce v. So. Ry. Co., 129 id. 966. Petition to remove cause from State to United States court, on account of a Federal question. [Title of State court and of cause.] To the court [stating name at length, with county]. Your petitioner [name of petitioner] shows: I. That your petitioner was at the commencement of this action, and still is, a resident of the district, in the State of and is a citizen of said State. That this suit is of a civil nature, and arises under the Constitution and laws98 [or, Constitution or, laws] of the United States [or, under a treaty made under the authority of the United States with and ratified on the 98 See, for statement of a Federal question arising on a State statute and an act of Congress, Railroad Co. r. Mississippi, 102 U. S. 135. II. That the time fixed by law [or, by the rules of this court] for the defendant to answer in this suit will not expire until the day of next. III. That the matter in dispute in said suit, as appears by said complaint exceeds, exclusive of interest and costs, the sum or value of two thousand dollars. IV. [Allegation as to bail as in paragraph V of Form No. 456.] [If ex parte order in N. Y. State court is asked, allege condition of cause, and no previous application. See pp. 116 and 170. [Offer of bond and prayer of petition as in VII, etc., on page of this volume.] [Date.] [Signature of], Petitioner.99 Petition to remove cause from State to United States court for mere difference of citizenship,-Short Form.1 [Title of State court and of cause.] Your petitioner [name] respectfully shows that the matter and amount in dispute in the above entitled suit in which he is the defendant, exceeds, exclusive of interest and costs, the sum or value of two thousand dollars. That the controversy in said suit is between citizens of different States, and that your petitioner was, at the time of the commencement of this suit, and still is, a citizen of the State of residing at in said State, That and is a non-resident of this State of and resides was then, and still is, in said and resides at lon on Rem. of C. (4th ed.), 181. If an order of the State court is asked, a fuller form may be desirable. See next form. State [and so on, stating the citizenship and residence of each party to the suit]. And your petitioner offers herewith a bond, with good and sufficient surety, for his entering in the Circuit Court of the United States in and for the district of New York, on the first day of its next session, a copy of the record in this suit, and for paying all costs that may be awarded by said Circuit Court if said court shall hold that this suit was wrongfully or improperly removed thereto. And he prays this court to proceed no further herein, except to make the usual order of removal, and to accept the said surety and bond, and to permit the record herein to be removed into said Circuit Court of the United States, in and for the said district of [New York]. [Signature of], Petitioner. [For verification, see Form No. 457.] [Bond as in Form No. 461.] FORM No. 456. Another Form; more appropriate where an order is asked in the State court.3 [Title of State court and of cause.]3 To the Court [stating name at length, with county]. Your petitioner [name of petitioner], the above-named defendant, shows: I. That the controversy in the above entitled suit is [or, that there is a controversy in the above entitled suit], wholly between citizens of different States [or, between citizens of the State of and the foreign State of — or, between citizens of the State of and foreign citizens, subjects of ― naming nation or both, according to the case and if the controversy is wholly between part of the parties, may add: namely, between A. B. and Y. Z., and the same can be fully determined as between them*]. [If the suit is by an assignee, etc., say, That the plaintiff, as appears by his complaint herein, sues as assignee or transferee of the chose in action sued on; and the assignor under whom he 2 No order is essential. Loop r. Winters, 115 Fed. Rep. 362. 3 For a statement as to the general rules for preparation and presentation of petition and bond, see pp. 766-772. 4 Of course this allegation is ineffective of itself; the complaint must support it. Louisville, etc.. R. R. Co. r. Wangelin, 132 U. S. 599; Chesapeake, etc., Ry. Co. v. Dixon, 179 id. 131. claims is, and was at the time of the commencement of this action, a citizen of, etc., as above."] [If the cause was commenced by another person as plaintiff, and continued on his death, etc., state the facts accordingly, alleging his citizenship at the commencement of the action, and ever since until his death, etc.] II. That the matter in dispute in said controversy exceeds, exclusive of interest and costs, the sum or value of two thousand dollars; that the time fixed by law [or, by the rules of this court,] for defendant to answer will not expire until the next. day of and a III. That your petitioner Y. Z. was, at the time of the commencement of this suit, and still is, a citizen and resident of the State of [or, a citizen of the State of non-resident of the State of , naming State where suit is pending], that A. B. was then, and still is, a citizen of the State of [or if a corporation is a party, say, a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of principal place of business in trict of said State, and so on, alleging the citizenship of each proper party, and the residence of the petitioner]. 6 and having its within the dis IV. That there are no other parties in this suit than hereinbefore mentioned [or, that the only other parties in this suit are -stating names and reasons why their presence may be disregarded]. 5 Mex. Nat. R. R. Co. v. Davidson, 157 U. S. 201. 6 The citizenship of a corporation is that of the State originally creating it. Southern Ry. Co. v. Allison, 190 U. S. 326. A corporation of one State cannot become a corporation of another State for jurisdictional purposes, by filing its charter in the latter State, or otherwise complying with the laws thereof. St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v. James, 161 id. 545. (See, as to N. Y. rulings on this point, in matters of State court cognizance, Matter of Cooley, 186 N. Y. 220). An action against a Federal corporation cannot be brought in a district and State other than that named in its charter as its home. See 39 Am. L. Review, 578, and cases cited. A national bank is to be regarded as a citizen of that State in which it is Sig. 51. located and transacts its principal business. Act of 1887, § 4. A corporation organized under the laws of a State which is divided into more than one Federal district, is, under the Federal laws as to the bringing of actions, a citizen and inhabitant of that State and of the district in which its principal place of business is located. Galveston, etc., Ry. Co. v. Gonzales, 151 U. S. 496. An action involving a Federal question cannot be brought against a corporation in a district other than in which it has its corporate habitation, although it may have offices within the district in which it has been sued. Re Keasby & Matteson Co., 160 U. S. 221. 7 For the practice where sham or nominal parties have been joined, see Dow . Bradstreet Co., 46 Fed. Rep. |