sake of harmony and to avoid confusion, the Federal courts will lean to an agreement of views with the State courts if the question seems to them balanced with doubt. As, however, the object of giving to the National courts jurisdiction to administer the laws of the States in controversies between citizens of different States was to institute independent tribunals which it might be supposed would be unaffected by local prejudices, it is their duty to exercise an independent a matter as to which the latter or its citizen judgment in cases not foreclosed by previous adjudiis concerned.2 Upon this basis rest observances under extradition treaties, q. v. And some adjudications upon the estates of decedents and insolvents are respected, between the States, to the extent that reciprocity obtains. Comity obtains to permit the corporations of one State to pursue a lawful business in another State.3 Judicial comity. The respect which tribunals of independent jurisdictions entertain for the decisions of each other, in the determination of questions involving reference to extra-territorial law. cation.1 In several uses has a somewhat technical import: Commencement of a building. Work done on the ground the effect of which is apparent. See further BUILDING. Commencement of an action, prosecution, or suit. Such inception of judicial proceedings as affects the several defendants; as saves the cause from the bar of the statute of limitations, q. v.; or as assures the jurisdiction, when collaterally questioned. The Federal courts adopt the construction given to a State's constitution or statutes by the courts of that State, whatever the opinion as to their soundness, except where the highest State court has given different constructions, and rights have been acquired under the earlier construction; in which case they follow the latter; except, also, in interpreting a contract ❘tice, filing the bill, or, perhaps, issuing and endeavorbetween States, whether the contract is in the shape of a law or of a covenant by State agents; and except in cases where the Constitution, a treaty, or a statute of the United States, provides otherwise.. They give a change in construction the same effect in its operation upon existing contract rights that they give to a legislative amendment - they make it prospective. But they are not bound by decisions upon commercial law. Where the law of a State is not settled, it is the right and the duty of the Federal courts to exercise their own judgment; as they always do in reference to the doctrines of commercial law and general jurisprudence. So, when contracts have been entered into, and rights have accrued thereon under a particular state of the decisions, or where there has been no decision, of the State tribunals, the Federal courts claim the right to adopt their own interpretation of the law applicable to the case, although a different interpretation may be adopted by the State courts after such rights have accrued. But even in such cases, for the 1 L. comitas, urbanity: comis, friendly. * See Story, Confl. Laws, §§ 28, 33-38. • Cowell v. Saratoga Springs Co., 100 U. S. 59 (1879); Memphis, &c. R. Co. v. Alabama, 107 id. 581, 585 (1882), cases. • Fairfield v. County of Gallatin, 100 U. S. 52 (1879), cases; Caroll County v. Smith, 111 id. 563 (1884), cases. Jefferson Branch Bank v. Skelly, 1 Black, 436 (1861); Wright v. Nagle, 101 U. S. 793 (1879). In civil actions, at common law, suing out or issuing the writ " commences" an action; in equity pracing to serve the subpœna; under codes of procedure, service or publication of the summons.2 See BROUGHT. Before an action can be commenced, the cause of action must be complete, the day for payment must have passed, a precedent condition must have been performed; the plaintiff must have the necessary privity, and as against the particular defendant; in the case of a tort there must be a legal injury (q. v.), and, possibly, the act must not amount to an untried felony; where there is a breach of a public duty, particular damage must have resulted to the plaintiff. Commencement of an indictment. The most common form (derived from England) is "The jurors of the people of the State of, in and for the body of the county of —, upon their oath present," etc.4 Compare CAPTION, 2. 1 Burgess v. Seligman, 107 U. S. 33-34 (1882), cases, Bradley, J. See also Pana v. Bowler, ib. 541 (1882), cases; Norton v. Shelby County, 118 id. 439 (1886). 2 See generally 26 Cent. Law J. 31-33 (1888), cases; 2 McCrary, 189; 4 Woods, 108; 11 F. R. 217; 17 ia. 475; 10 Ark. 120, 479; 19 Cal. 557; 21 id. 351; 45 id. 125; 30 Ga. 873; 1 Ind. 276; 11 id. 48, 354; 8 Iowa, 309; 9 id. 178; 10 id. 308, 418; 16 id. 59; 3 A. K. Marsh. 18; 5 Bush, 435; 15 Mass. 455; 7 Me. 370; 33 Mich. 112; 42 Miss. 241; 36 id. 40; 5 Ν. Η. 225; 47 id. 24; 37 N. Y. 122; 10 Barb. 318; 6 Cow. 471, 519; 17 Johns. 65; 36 Pa. 474; 24 id. 124; 15 id. • Oates v. Nat. Bank of Montgomery, 100 U. S. 246 293; 1 R. I. 17; 11 Humph. 303; 10 Tex. 155; 28 id. 718; (1879), cases. * Machine Co. v. Gage, 100 U. S. 676 (1879); Douglass v. County of Pike, 101 id. 687 (1879). 30 id. 494; 42 Vt. 552; 55 id. 355; 6 W. Va. 336. 3 See 21 Cent. Law J. 401-12 (1885), cases. People v. Pennett, 37 N. Y. 122 (1867).