John Catron

Name: Northern Indiana Railroad Company v. Michigan Central Railroad Company — Separate
Author: John Catron

Summary

“Northern Indiana Railroad Company v. Michigan Central Railroad Company — Separate”, is a work by John Catron. It explores elements such as the United States, the Circuit Court and corporation.

Quotes from Northern Indiana Railroad Company v… (John Catron)

John Catron, Northern Indiana Railroad Company v…

“ Powerless and vain as probably ever will be the 'still small voice' of an humble individual, in opposition to the united declaration of those justly considered the learned and the wise, still, under the most solemn conviction of duty, the effort can never be forborne to raise that humble voice in accents of alarm at whatever is believed to threaten even the sacred bark in which the safety both of the States and of the United States is freighted. I hold that, beyond the Constitution of the United States, there is no federal government, either in the mass or in the detail. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Catron, Northern Indiana Railroad Company v…

“ We are told, by the English jurists, and by the decisions of the English courts, and so, too, in the case of the Bank of the United States v. Devereux, it is laid down by Marshall, C.J., that a corporation is an invisible, intangible, artificial creature. In one sense, at least, the citizen may render himself invisible and intangible-he may abscond. In what signification he must become artificial, amongst the infinite varieties which may be imagined, will present a question more difficult to be determined. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Catron, Northern Indiana Railroad Company v…

“ A corporation is composed of many individual members, having a joint interest, and a joint right to sue in their corporate name; and the consideration here presented is, whether a State law, creating the corporation, makes such corporation 'a citizen,' according to the Constitution, regardless of the fact where its members reside. If the corporation be such citizen, then every member of the corporate body might reside in Michigan, and yet have the right to sue citizens of Michigan there in the United States court. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Catron, Northern Indiana Railroad Company v…

“ But in the possession of a portion even of his corporate attributes, the citizen may be deemed a quasi corporation, when it shall be thought convenient; and will, doubtless, in that chrysalis condition, furnish as just a representation of the integral legal entity, as the latter, in the shape of quasi citizen, can ever supply of the real, material, and social being with whom it is sought to identify it. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Catron, Northern Indiana Railroad Company v…

“ That beyond the pale and limits prescribed by that instrument, to be interpreted, not by indirect or ingenious or forced constructions, or by remote implications, but by the plain and common-sense import of its language, a language familiar to the common and general understanding, all is unwarranted assumption and wrong-a termination of all legitimate federal power. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Catron, Northern Indiana Railroad Company v…

“ And as no averment is made in the bill before us, that the president and directors of the corporations suing, are citizens of different States from the president and directors of the corporation sued, I think the demurrer ought to be sustained, and the court below instructed to dismiss the bill.
I view this assumption of citizenship for a corporation as a mere evasion of the limits prescribed to the United States courts by the Constitution. The profitable corporations are owned in a great degree in the cities; there the president and directors often reside ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

John Catron, Northern Indiana Railroad Company v…

“ The defendant pleaded in abatement, that Rutherford and Baring, two of the stockholders, were citizens of North Carolina; and that the State of South Carolina was also a stockholder. To this plea there was a demurrer, which was sustained in the Circuit Court and in this court.
It was held, 1. That the State could not object, as she stood on the foot of every other individual stockholder and need not be sued; and,
2. That fugitive stockholders, who were changing every day, and quite too numerous to be included in a suit, need not be made parties of record. ”

John Catron

Summary

Quotes from Northern Indiana Railroad Company v… (John Catron)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature