The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-04-10
STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND THE DEBT.

STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND THE DEBT.
The Times must recruit It's corps Of constl-
tutional lawyers II 1t would avoid the fatal
reefs Of ldioey on which 1t, some time Since
wrecked the Georgia constitution. A better
illustration of the old proverb, "A little learn
Ing is dangerous thing" has seldom been
afforded than In this mournfnl dilemma into
which the 1imes has been betrayed by Its re-
cent exhibition OF scrap-book learning. We
humbly submit that constitutional law, IN
volving as IL does the rights Of man
and The principles Of free govern
ment, ID not u question to be treated
Or understood by mere casual scribblers, to-
tally ignorant OF It's elementary principles us
laid down by the masters, aud just rs ineapa-
bic Of understanding or applying such frag-
mentary truths as they may have precarious"
ly picked up from newspapers and other TIM
authentic sources.
II IL o profound and comprehensive science
which has engaged the lifetime study und
reflection Of the brightest inteleets the
world has ever known, and, based on the eter-
nal principles OF truth and justice Its history
Ii written In sacrifices as heroic and martyr
doms us splendid as any that are recorded In
the annals Of religion itself
| Possessed Of this reverence for our subject,
we must decline TO descend to the level OF the
Times for the purpose OF refuting the silly
but harmless twaddle II has been forced to In
Its efforts to escape the absurd position In
which we placed IL by merely applying It's
"littlc learning" to the doctrine 1t had been
preaching In regard to the State debt and the
contract and exigible rights Of the bond
holders. Having exposed the contradictions
of the Times, and shown conclusively that It's
two postulates are utterly irreconcilable,
our purpose III accomplished, and we feel I'M
der no obligations to pursue the subject
further. 1t Is not even pleasing to us,
through the organ OF destructIveness, to
prick the bubbles Of It's sophistries or rend
the gauzy texture OF It's logic.
The only advice we have to give the Times
is TO abandon It's ambitious project OF estab-
fishing q new school Of constitutional con-
struction, and, like the DEMOCRAT, accept as
oil sufficient tho authoritative utterances OF
the Supreme Court and the teachings OF the
great statesmen and lawyers who have de-
voted their lives to mastering the subject.
The Times may argue and refine till dooms-
day. but until 1t produces some decision OF
the Supreme Court overruling that In the
case Of Cohens vs. Virginia, published by us
the other day, we must accept the law as laid
down In that decision. ALI the hair
splitting and sePhistry In the world cannot
obscure or destroy the plain and unequivocal
language used by Chief Justice Marshall in
that case In constituting and applying the
eleventh amendment to the constitution. Ia
that decision he said, In language too plain
for misconstruction, that this amendment
left to the State 'the full power OF consult
Ing it's convenience In the adjustment OF its
debts or Of other claims upon It," and that
the Federal courts were entirely without au-
thority to enforce obligations held by In
dividuals against the States. He further
more said that the apprehension that the debts
ofthe State might be prosecuted in the Fed
eral courts formed very serious objection
to that instrument" and induced this very
amendment. No man was better qualified
than Judge Marshall to tell the origin OF
this amendment. By reference to EIlison's
Debates 1t will be seen that 1t was Judge
Marshall himself who suggested 1t in order
to remove ''any possible doubt" during the
discussion OF the question In the Virginia
ratifying convention, although he declared
that. even under the original provision, "a
State could not be called at the bar Of the
Federal court" for, said he, ait Is not
rational to suppose that the sovereign power
should be dragged before court
In this same debate George Mason said
is this State to be brought to the bar OF JUS
tiee like delinquent Individual? Is tile SOW
ereignty OF the State to be arraigned like q
culprit or private offender2 y What Is
to be done If a judgment be obtained against
q State? Will you issue teri facias? It
would be ludicrous to say you could put the
States body In jail. How is the Judgment,
then, to be enforced? A power which cannot
be executed ought not to be granted"
To which Madison replied that "it is not In
the power Of individuals to call any State in
court, adding that if the clause .'be found
improper 1t will be amended
| We see no practical good, nor, for that
matter, any pleasure In going behind these
unanswerable authorities to bubble with the
Times over the occult meanings of mere
technicnalities. When that paper undertakes
to overturn these authorities, or assaults the
principles they inculcate, it will be time enough
for us to take up the cudgels But the Times
will not have the hardihood to deny single
one Of these propositions, and will be forced to
| refer the whole question of the States debt
to the convention and make its fight on moral
grounds alone. This is all that the DEMOCRAT