BCBDICK V. PETEESON. 841 �defendant appeared in the state court and pleaded the gen- erai issue and the statute of limitations. The cause was by the state court continued at the February term, 1876, at the June term, 1876, at the October term, 1876, at the February term, 1877, and at the June term, 1877. At the October term, 1877, George 0. Tollman had leave to file petition of intervention, whereby he alleged that he was the owner in tee- simple of the land in contiroversy, having, after the com- mencement of this suit, purchased the same at master's sale under a decree of foreclosure. He avers that under eaid de- cree and sale he was. placed in possession of the land by the marshal, and defendant, Petersoh, ejected therefrom, about September 1, 1877. The petition of intervention alleged, in substance, that ail the interest, and the possession, of the original defendant, Peterson, had, by virtue of the foreclosure and sale, passed to the purchaser, leaving Peterson thereaf- ter a nominal party only. The petition of intervention was filed October 23, 1877. On the same day the intervenor (Tollman) filed bis petition for removal of the cause to the circuit court of the United States. The petition is in the usual form, except that it avers the citizenship of the parties in the present tense. The removal was on the same day ordered by the state court. At the May term, 1880, of this court, the cause was tried, and resulted in a verdict for the defendant. A motion to set aside verdict, and for a new trial, was afterwards made by plaintiff, and is still pend- ing. More recently a motion Was made by the plaintiff to set aside the judgment and remand the cause to the state court, upon the ground that "said judgment is void for want of jurisdiction in the court, the cause having been removed from the state court, and it nowhere appearing that at the commencement of the suit the citizenship of the parties thereto was such as to authorize the removal thereof and. confer jurisdiction upon this court." �Wright, Gatch e Wright, toi motion. �Chas. A. Clark, amicus curia, contra. �McCkary, C. J. This pourt bas several times held that the petition for removal, or the record of the cause in the statfr ��� �
