The New York herald., 1869-04-13
Shall the United States Defray a Part of
the Expenses of the Rebellion?
The Texas Indemnity Bonds Declared Not Legally
ISSUED by the Rebel State Government.
THE McCARDLE CASE DISMISSED.
tho Texas Indemnity Bonds-lmpOrtant De:
cision Of Chief Justice Chase.


No. e.-Tne state Of TerdS Us. George White. John
Childs, John A. Hardenburgh ana Otllers-This is
an original suit in this court in which the State OF
Texas claiming certain bonds OF the Unitel States
her property, asks an injunction TO restrain the
defendants from receiving payment from the ma
tional government and to compel the surrender of
the bonds to the State. IL appears from the
bill. answers ana proofs, that the United
States by act of September Q, 1850, offered to
the State Of Texas in compensation for her claims,
connected with the settlement Of her boundary,
$4,000 600 IN five per cent bonds, each for the sum
of $1,000. and this offer accepted by Texas. One
half OF these bonds retained. for certain pur
poses, In the National Treasury and the other half
were delivered to the State. The bonds thus deliv
cred were dated January l, 1851 and were all made
payable TO the State OF Texas, or bearer, and re-
deemable after the 3st day Of December 1864. They
received in behalf Of the state, by the Comp
troler of Public Accounts under authority OF an act
OF the Legislature, which, besides giving that
authority, provided that no bond should be avail
able in the hands OF any holder until after
endorsement by the Governor OF the State
After the breaking out or the rebellion, the nsur
gent Legislature Of Texas, on the 11th OF January
1882, repealed the act requiring the endorsement of
the Governor Acts Of Texas, 1902 ana. on same
day, provided for the organization of a military
board composed of the Governor, Comptroller and
Treasurer and authorized majority OF that board
10 provide for the defence OF the State by of
any bonds in the Treasury upon any account to the
extent of $1,000, 900. Texas Laws OF 1852, p.
55) The defence contemplated by the act was 70
be made against the United states by war.
Under tins authority the military board entered
into an agreement with George W. White and John
Childs, two OF the defendants for the sale to them OF
1856 OF these bonds then in the Treasury OF the STATE
anu seventy-siX more, then deposited with Droege
& Co., in England, In payment for which they en-
gagged TO deliver to the board large quantity of
cotton cards aud medicines. This agreement was
made on the 18th Of January 1865. On the 10Th Of
March, 1866, White and ChIds received from
the military board 13j Of these bonds. none OF
which were endorsed by any Governor OF Texas.
Afterward, In the course OF the wears OF 1865 and
1885, some OF the same bonds came into the possess
sion OF Others OF the defendants by purchase as
security FOR advances OF money such Il brief
refer more in detail TO some particular circum-
stances OF 1t.
The inquiries to which our attention was direct.
ed by counsel arose upon the allegation OF the answer
OF Chids-hrst, that no sufficient authority shown
for the prosecution OF the suit IN the and on
behalf OF the state OF Texas and secondly that the
state having severed her relations with majority
OF the States OF the Union and having by her ordi
nance OF secession attempted to throw OH her
allegiance to the constitution aud govern.
ment OF the United States, has so far changed
her status 10 be disabled from prosecuting suits
In the national courts. The first OF these ale egatons
Is disproved by the evidence letter OF authority
the authenticity Of which is not disputed has been
produced, in which J. W. Throckmorton elected
Governor under the constitution in 1866. and pro-
ceeding under an act OF the State egislatu relating
to these bonds expressly ratiles ana confirms the
action OF the solicitors who led the bill and en.
powers them TO prosecute tins suit and II is further
proved by tie affidavit Of Mr.. Plschll, counsel for
the complainant that he was duly appointed by
Andrew ]. Hamilton while Proyisonal Governor OF
Texas, 10 represent the State OF Texas IN
reference TO the bonds IN controversy anu
that his appointment has been renewed
BY Il. NJ Pease, the actual Governor. II Texas was
state OF the Union at the time OF these acts and
those persons or either OF them competent TO repre-
sent the state this proof leaves no doubt upon the
question OF gutGOrlty.
rne other allegation presents q question OF jurs-
diction ltis not TO be questioned that this court
has original jurisdiction OF suits by states against
citizens OF other States, that the states entitled
70 invoke this jurisdiction must be stales OF the
Union. But II IL equally clear tnat no such urisdic
uon has been conferred upon this court OF suits By
any other political communities tlan such States
IT, therefore IL Is true that the State OF Texas was
not at the time OF fling this bill, is not one
OF the United States we have no Jurisdiction of tbs
suit and 1t Is our duty 10 dismiss 1t.
We are very sensible OF the magnitude and import
ance OF the question. OF the interest Ii eXcltes and
ofithe difficult, not to say impossblity OF dis
posing OF II as 10 satisfy the conflicting judgments OF
men equally enlightened equally upright and equally
patrotic; but We meet II IN the case and we must
determine II IN the exercise OF our best Judgme nt
under the guidance OF the constitution alone. some
not unimpOrant aid, however, in ascertalning the
true sense OF the constitution may be derived from
considering what Is the correct Idea or State
apart from a. y union or confederation with other
states. The poverty OF language often compels
ine employment OF terms In quite different signi-
ncations ana OF this hardly any example more
signal Is TO be found than IN tho use Of the word we
are now considering II would serve no useful pur.
pose to attempt an enumeration OF all the various
senses IN when II IL used A few only need be no.
ticed. IL describes sometimes a people or cominu.
nifty OF individuals united more or less closely In
political relations, inhabitlng, temporarily or per-
manentiy, the same country; often 1t denotes only
the country or territorial region Inhabited BY such
community; not unfrequenty II Is applied TO the
government under which the people i've; q, other
Gnf- Fhg afNl4 4aIl lla. ...f
ritory and government.
II is difficult TO see that in all these senses the
primary conception Is that OF people or commu-
nlty The people, in whatever Territory dwelling
either temporarily OF permanently, ana whether or
iooser or less defnte reatens Constitute the STATE
This Is undoubtedly the fundamental idea upon
try established. IL stated very clearly ny an
eminent Judge tMr. Justice Patterson, ia Pennailow
w. Downey, Adm. 3, Dali s3 IN one Of the earliest
aware Of anything IN any subsequent decision Of
different tenor.
In the constitution the term state most Frequent,
expresses the conlbped idea just noticed, OF people
territory and government. state In the ordinary
sense of the constitution Is political community
free citizens occupying territory OF defined bound
aries ana organized under government sanctioned
and limited by written consntuuon aId estab
union OF such states, under common constitution
which forms the distinct and greater political Will
states and nakes Of the people and state
which compose lt one people and one coun
Try. The use OF tIe NcIu ia lltb sens
hardly require, further remark. In the clause
which impose prohibitions upon the states IN r.
epect 10 the making OF treaties emitting OF bills
credit, laying duties OF tonnage and guaranteeing
the states representation In the House OF Repre-
sentatives Gnd IN the senate. are found some Ia
stances Of this use IN the constitution. Otiers VII
occur 10 every mind. But II Is also used In Its geo
graphical sense as In the clauses which require tina
Representative iu Congress shall be an Inhabitan
Of the state In which he snail be chosen and that TN
trial Of crimes snail be held within the state wher
comToitted And there are instances m which tn
To i,a thafy
mary one. 10 which we have adverted OF a peop,
ar political community, as distinguished from gov
eminent. In this latter sense the word seems ~ n,
nsed In the clause which provides that the United
states shall guarantee 10 every State In the Union
republican form OF government aud shall pro,ec
each OF them against invasion. In this claus
a plain distinction was made between
Stale AMI the government OF a state. Having thu
ascertaned the senses In which the word state
employed IN the constitution We will proceed to cor