Harlan F. Stone

“ The record in this court shows a bill of complaint to have a conveyance of real estate in Alaska annulled on the ground of duress and to have paid to the plaintiff moneys alleged to have been deposited in the Wells Fargo Nevada National Bank of San Francisco by one Noyes, claiming to act as receiver of a Nevada corporation. These funds are alleged to be the proceeds of a part of the real estate. The complaint is entitled 'Superior Court of the State of California.' The record shows next an answer filed in the federal court for the Northern district of the state. ”

“ North American Savings & Loan Bldg. Co. (C. C.) 97 F. 9) . Jurisdiction could not be sustained on the ground that the case is one 'arising under the * * * laws of the United States,' because the mere fact that the defendant Noyes is the reputed receiver of a state corporation appointed by a federal court is not a ground for removal. [7] Gableman v. Peoria, Decatur & Evansville Ry. Co., 21 S.C.t. 171, 179 U.S. 335, 45 L. Ed. 220. The record shows no other way in which the case arises under the laws of the United States. There is no actual controversy as to any federal matter. ”

“ The requirement that jurisdictional facts be affirmatively shown cannot be dispensed with. Compare Hudson v. Parker, 15 S.C.t. 450, 156 U.S. 277, 284, 39 L. Ed. 424. We may not indulge in conjecture as to the ground on which jurisdiction was invoked. If we were at liberty to do so, what appears in the fragmentary record before us would preclude our sustaining jurisdiction. Jurisdiction could not be sustained on the ground of diversity of citizenship, because the citizenship of the principal defendant is not disclosed. ”