
    Byson v. McPherson.
    1. Removal of Causes to Federal Courts: controverting petition. The facts stated as grounds for removal, in a petition for the removal of a cause to the federal court, cannot be controverted in determining the question of removal. (Van Horn v. Litchfield, 70 Iowa, 11, followed.)
    
      Appeal from Kossuth District Court.
    
    "Wednesday, March 16.
    Action to recover forty acres of land in Kossuth county. The defendant filed a petition for a removal of the case to. the circuit court of the United States, and the petition was denied. From the order denying the petition the defendant appeals.
    
      Qeo. K. Clarice, for appellant.
    
      11. J. Danson and J. C. Cooh, for appellee.
   Adams, Ch. J.

The defendant filed-an answer setting up a defense under certain grants of congress. His application for a removal was based upon the allegation that the controversy involves the title to' the real estate described, and that the question necessary to the determination of the cause is one arising under the laws of the United States, and involves a construction of the grants and laws of the United States, and that the real estate exceeds in value the sum of $500. The plaintiff filed an affidavit to the effect that the value of the property was less than $506. The court overruled the petition for a removal, and retained and tried the case, and rendered a decree for the plaintiff, The defendant insists that the facts stated in the petition for removal, as a ground of removal, cannot be controverted in determining the question of removal, and we have to say that we think that he must be sustained. Van Horn v. Litchfield, 70 Iowa, 11.

Reversed.  