The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1878-10-30

and whose opinions were received as the
highest authority upon subjects which the
pfesentsuPreme court of the countrydiscusses
with the superficial flippancy of college
debating club. In 1899 Dan ell Web her. the
great expounder of the constitution, !"
wrote as folOEs to Barring Brothers & Co, of
London, England, an attorney for the
bank:
Your first inquiry is whether The legisla ure
of one OF the states has legal and Unconstitutional
power TO contract loans at home aud abroad
To this l answer that the legislature of a
state has such power; and how any doub
could have arisen on this point it Is difficult
fur me to conceive. Every state is an indie.
pendent, sovereign, political community, ex-
cept in SD far as certain powers, which it might
otherwise have exercised. have been
conferred on general government
established under q written constitution and
exerting It's authority over the p. opIe OF all
the states. This general government Il lin.
tied government. It's powers are specific and
enumerated. All powers not conferred upon
ltslill remain with the states and with the
people. The state legislatures, on the other
hand, possess all usual AID extraordiu sry
powers of government, subject TO any limita-
lions which may be imposed by their own
constitutions; and, with the exception as I
have said, of the operation on those powers Of
the constitution Of the United States The
powers conferred on the general government
can not, OF course, be exercised by any indi.
Vldual state; nor can any state pass any law
which l. prohibited by the constitution of The
United States.
The security for state loans IS the plighted
faith of the state as a political community
IL rests on the same basis a. other
contracts with es sblishsd governments-the
same basis, for example, as loans III de in the
United states uuder the authority OF congress;
that Is TO say, the cool faith Of the govern
inent in making the loan, and its ability TO
fulhll It's engagements. II has been said that
the state can not be sued on these bonds
But neither could the United States be sued
nor, as suppose, the Gro 4n of England in
like case. Nor would the power of suing.
probably, give the creditor any su bstantial ad.
ditional security. The solemn obligation of a
government, arising on Its own acknowledged
bond, would no be enhanced by q Judgment
rendered on such bond. II either could not,
or would not, make provision for paying the
bond, 1t is not probable that 1t could or would
make provision for satisfying the judgment.
1t Will be observed that Mr.. Webster de
clared that the states are sovereign and indie
pendent when they borrow monsy, and in
this regar: his opirion differs from the pres
ent supreme court. Which opinion shall
the students of the American system OF gov
eminent follow, that of Webster, world re
nowned for his towering intellect and pro-
found erudilion, or tie partisan supreme
court as now constituted? We do not pre-
sumo there are dos we'll informed law
gers in Indiana who believe the recent de-
cIsion of the court of any value whatever.
It is not in accordance with the constitution
or with the history of the country, and is
supported by neither law nor logic.