Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1809-05-15

prehenslon, there is not one solna -
in favor Of it. Ii the tile to The ,bi.a
dispute be in the state, and this is maj
appear to the court, it lis .inconcrivabIA =
the plaintiff should recover SO as 70 H.
that right. But if he should recover !
state would not be bound by the iuden u
not being party toit. This isrby no enea.
a new case--If one individual oh,a;na
Judgment or decree against another ,bs !
terest OF a third person, not party. will ~
be bound or prejudloed by the d4o.;a a''
bat he may nevertheless assert his rich, G :;
court of justice against the party in I boss ~
sion Of the property to which he claims t;,Ia
The state cannot be forced into court , h.,
she~may come there if she pleases, IN M ~
suit OF her rights, ana will no doubt do -
upon all proper and necessary occasions
But il, on the other hand, the mere claim osl
interest by a state in the subject in disnn,s
between two citizens canhave the marie ef
feet Of suspending all the functions Of >
court Of justice over that subject. and ofI
/ annihilatlng lis DEGREES when proaounc,
ed, this effective and necessary branch .el
our government. and of ali free govern
ments, may be rendered useless At a
ny moment at tie pleasure Of state.
Il the suit be prosecuted against a STATE
the court ptrceives at once its want !,
jurisdiction, and can dismiss the partv ~
the threshold. But ii latent claim in tbs
state, not known perhaps by any of the Iii.
CANT parties, is sufficient to GUST the nri;s.
diction, to aRpul, the judgment vhcnrend.r.
ed, and to affect all the parties concerned
with the consequences Of CARRYING VOID
Judgment into execution, the federal cour,
may become more-than uselcss--thcy he
trapsinwhichu ewary sui!orsmaybe ensnarrd
to their ruin. 10 illustrate this position d,-
district attorneymen;ioned manyyery stropg
and very supposable cases. !! will adj one
other. a. sues B. for ddbt, or for pro.
perry either real or personal in his posses
sion. CONSCIOUS thar he must pay the mo-
ney, or lose his possession in consequence
of the unquestionable title Of his adversary,
B. pays over the money, or conveys the pro-
perty even pending the suit, to a third per
son, for the use of the state, ana by tai:
operation arrests the further progress of the
suit, or avoids the judgment whenever it
shall pass. a doctrine SO unigst, and big
with consequences SO alarming, and so fatal
TO the general government, should have
streng and unequivocal words tc support it.
The court would be very mischievousiy en-
ploycd in supplying them. We should con-
vert this amendment, this sacrifice made to
state pride, into az. engine to den lish alto
gether one Of the essential branches Of the
general government.
TO this branch of the argument, there
fore, the answer is short but conclusive
The state is not party, and she has no iu-
terest = tn sabjece il dispute in the { STRICT
court. The decree Of the court Of appeals
extlng,:.59ed the inseresc Of Pennsylvania iE
any share 81 the Active and her cargo, aaG
vested the full right to the whole ia DIM
stead and his associates, who might right
fully follow that part ofthe proceeds whicl
came into the hands OF the Representatives
Of Rittenhouse, who neld th,ss RS sake
holders for whoever might haze title te
them. .Ritsephouac himself kcia them ID
his private capacity and not as treasurer
for his indt,idual security against the bond
given 70. iioss, and which. Was stll cut.
standing when this decree was rendered.
know not how tits part Of the subject can BE-
made palmer.
There is another. objection to the aTaa't-
m ert drawn from tie interest OF the STATE
which was not satisfactorily answered os
Mr.. Ingersoll, to whom it was stated BY HS
court during this discussion, by the Gov" ~,
,s.itution Of the United States, the9adlelA
power extenassto all Controversies bet|ce"
2 state na citizens of another stats, "hS'''
yer might be the nature OF the opntfoyS' y,
,.oe+e~oc "a the court 20 which 'HC