Case ID: us-ct-cl_23/html/0484-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Field", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE OF LOUISIANA v. THE UNITED STATES.
    (22 C. Cls. R., 85, 284; 123 U. S. R., 32.)
    
      On the defendant's Appeal.
    
    Moneys accrue under the levee and swamp land acts, and are credited to the State, hut the accounting officers set off a balance remaining unpaid by property holders in Louisiana under the direct-tax acts, 1861, 1862. This action is brought more than six years after the sale of the swamp lands belonging to the State.
    The court below decides:
    (1) When the right of action depends upon a contingency the statute of limitations will not begin to run until the contingency happen.
    (2) Where a statute provides “ that upon clue proof by the authorized agent of the State before the Commissioner of the General Land Office” that swamp lands granted to the State have been sold by the Land Office “ the purchase-money shall be paid over to the said State.” {Act 2d March, 1855,10 Stat. L., p. G04, J 2.) The right of action is not com-pílete until the Commissioner acts; therefore the statute of limitations does not begin to run until then.
    (3) The purpose of the Direct Tax Acts, 1861, 1862 (12 Stat. L., p. 292), was not to impose an obligation upon a State to collect the tax (unless the State chose to assume it), hut to apportion the sum total among citizens holding property in the several States, being an application of the theory that the power of the General Government operates in certain cases upon the individual citizen.
    (4) Where the citizens of a State neglected to pay their proportion of a general tax, the balance remaining unpaid can not be set off against a debt due by the General Goveroment to the State.
    
      (5) In an action 'brought by a State against tbe General Government tbe law of set-off is tbe same as if tbe controversy were between individuals.
    (6) A set-off in legal signification means tbe application of a valid demand in favor of tbe defendant and against tbe claimant in satisfaction or diminution of bis claim.
    The decision of the court below is affirmed. The Supreme Court decides:
    (1) The Court of Claims has jurisdiction of an action by a State againt the United States for a demand arising upon an act of Congress.
    (2) The action of a State in the Court of Claims to recover moneys received by the United States from sales of swamp lands granted to the State by the act of September 28, 1850, is not barred by the statute of limitations until six years after the amount is ascertained from proofs of the sales before the Commissioner of the General Land Office.
    (3) The direct tax laid by the act of August 5, 1861, did not create any liability on the part of the State, in which the lands taxed were situated, to pay the tax.
   Mr. Justice Field

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court October 24, 1887.