Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1857-03-04

it cannot take a donation Of lands within the ter
ritOrial.limits Of the State over which the laws
and jurisdiction Of the sovereign power do not
extend The gift is the same In effect as II
made to the county Of Shelby, or any other
quasi corporation amenable TO the sovereign
power Of the State.
1t lie a fundamental principle Of our system
Of Jurisprudence, that "the law pervades all
human society, and knows no vacuum" There
can be no such thing in this government as a
doubtful jurisdiction as to the crimes, where the
locus in quo can be determinately assigned as
the territory either of the Federal or State
government. And such an anomaly as a re.
gion either Of a large or small. area, within the
limits Of the United States where crime can be
committed with impunity-a sanctuary for the
felon-amenable to no human laws, is wholly
repugnant not only to the principles Of law we
have stated; but to the plain letter Of the Fed
eral and State constitutions as well as to the
theory Of human goyernmentitself. The juTis-
diction over crimes committed upon the ceded
grounds in question, cannot be in a state OF
allegiance. If it be not in the general govern
ment it must be in the State. We have seen
that for the purposes Of jurisdiction, it matters
not how the territory be acquired.
The sovereignty attaches to the soil acquired
from North Carolina and organized into a
State in 1876, and to any lands thereafter &C
CURED by compact or agreement with otter
States or otherwise" So jealous, indeed, have
been our courts upon this subject, that it has
been held by our highest judicial tribunal, in
the most elaborate opinion ever announced in
the State, that the jurisdiction Of the State
Courts could be extended over a region Of cOun-
try within the original chartered limits Of the
State, the occupation and enjoyment Of which
had been guaranteed by treaty to the Cherokee
tribe of Indians, notwithstanding the existence
of the treaty under which that tribe claimed
jurisdiction to punish all climes committed
among themselves. How far this would be au.
tnority with the highest judicial tribunal Of tn,
Union, is evinced by the repeated adjudication
of that court, that the expositions Of STATE
Constitutions and State laws by State Courts,
is generally to be taken as conclusive author.
ity.
In view Of these general principles, there
fore, and without further elaboration, the con-
c~lusiOn is, in my judgment, unavoidable, thai
the act Of retrocessiOn by the General Govern.
ment was an unqualified transfer Of the terri
tory in question-of both soil and sovereignty
to the State Of TenEessee-that the dominion
and fee Of the soil in a technical sense, is il
the city Of Memphis, but the sovereignty there.
Of in the State of Tennessee-that said act
was a simple and authorized cancellation Of
the original cession-that the jurisdiction ovel
that territory reverted ipaO JaeiO to the Gov
eminent Of Tennessee, and that no action OF
the part Of the latter is essential to give i
validity.
IL. & Docs not the act Of Congress donating
the Navy Yard to the city Of Memphis carry
with it all the rights, privileges and immuni-
ties vested in the donor; and if so, can tbs
State of Tennessee tax said property as tina
of other individuals or corporations"
If / have been successful in maintaining tn,
first proposition, the solution Of the second fol
lows as a necessary sequence. The one in
wolves the other. This vital power of taxation
in a State is its most important attribute o.
sovereignty. It is the life current Of govern
ment itself. It embraces all things and sub,
jects which can be legally taxed, within the
limits of State sovereignty, and may be relin'
quished by express enactment, but never BY
mere implication. "The power of State taxa
tion,' says Chancellor Kent, sis to be measured
by the extent of State Sovereignty, and thii
leaves to a State the command Of all its re
sources, and the unimpaired power Of taxing
the people and property of the State" Tn,
legislative as well as the judicial jurisdiction
over the ceded grounds in question, with the in
cidental taxing power, passed by the origina
cession to the General Government. While
that power claimed the sovereignty and th,
soil, the authority Of the State to levy its rev
enues in part from those grounds was super
seeded. The soil and the sovereignty once re-
linquished by the General Government, reverted
to the original proprietor, to State of Tennes-
see, and with it, Of course, the rights of taxa
tion, eminent domain, and all other incidents Of
sovereignty. 1t may be proper to observe, il
conclusion, that this opinion proceeds upon thu
assumption that the act Of retroeession is alb
solute and unconditional in its terms.
1t results, therefore, in my judgment, that By
the act of retrocession by the General Govern
ment of the territory in question to the city o.
Memphis, the sovereignty thereof vested in th'
State of Tennessee, and that ali its legislative
and judicial jurisdiction for the purposes o.
revenue, for the punishment of crime agains
the State, for the enforcement of contracts, anc
for the redress of public and private wrongs.
extended itself over the same; and that sale
sovereignty is as complete and absolute without
as it would be with an express enactment BY
the Legislature re-asserting the same.
Very respectfully,
JOHN L. T. SNEED,
.Attornsy General of Tennessee.