Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-05-04

operation OF internal and Invisible agents,
not by human laws. The provision forbid
ding any State to pass laws impairing con-
tracts was adopted without any expostulation
or explanation, assuming that State was
prohibited by ii from managing the affairs
Of its treasury and finance without restraint.
10. When the constitution was adopted
the 81 ates were in debt from distress among
their inhabitants; this clause was not re-
ferred to in debate as preventing State from
settling with their creditors on such terms
as they might prescribe; the illusions were
ali to private engagements. The opinion Of
that time has been confirmed by that OF this
court for more than seventy years, that all
who deal in the obligations Of a sovereign
State must rely altogether on the good faith
Of the State. The restraint imposed is that
no law should have force that interfered with
private engagements made without fraud.
The statement here explains at length some
of the words used in the constitutional
clause). The constitution restraints the
States from depriving an obligee of any
power the law affords to force a contract. If
the contract be one which cannot be enforced
in the courts no law passed in respect TO it
will violate the constitution.
H. When the Louisiana bonds went into
the hands OF the creditors they knew that
their dependence was upon the continuing
sense of obligation on the part of the State
to fulfill them; that there existed no power
Of coercion ON the Judiciary of the State.
The case of New York is that of every citi-
zen, except that the constitution gives this
court authority TO determine controversies
between the States. New York has acquired
some of the Louisiana coupons and asks a
decree for the amount. The interests of the
Union of the States is superior to other in
terests; special interests are secondary and
subordinate. Powers not delegated by the
Union are reserved; among the reserved
powers are those relating TO the moral and
material progress of the State, their political
and social order and well being.
II. The States are not subject to any neg
alive upon their obligation. They have
entire dominion over their domestic affairs
and possess the sovereign exercise of the
dominion not coded. The plan of the con-
stitution was so to organize the powers of
government that one State should have no
opportunity of controversy with another.
The vast expenditure of subtlety and craft
to engender a controversy is shown by Pc
rusal of the acts OF New York and New
Hampshire.
10. The constitution did not destroy the
States, and interfered as little as could be
with their internal management. 1t made
no pantheism in the country's politics,
condition of things that accounts for the
manifest mistakes and erroneous opinions
delivered by this court in the Chisholm rs.
Georgia case. We wonder now how they
could have been conceived. No wound more
in that Judgment. 1t would have led to
irritating controversies between States and
between citizens and States.
IA. The judiciary is a separate depart
ment of this government, but its powers are
not without reservation and condition. (The
statement here digresses into long essay
upon the abuse of the judicial power in
various ages and natioas.) The Supreme
Court of TIE United States was created so
that citizens of different States might settle
their differences, but there is no provision
for controversies of citizens with States or
recognition of State having power to main
tain the quarrels of her citizens with other
States. The caution with which the
rangements are made show that such devices
as New Hampshire and New York have
adopted to introduce the complaints and
controversies of citizens of one State against
other States, by lending their names and
countenances to them, contradict the aims
and intent of the constitution. The care
with which undelegated powers are pro-
tected from encroachment, shows that none
of those contrivances which have been en-
ployed to cover usurpation of ungranted
powers beyond the bounds established had
any sanction from the authors of the con-
stitution.
10. New York desires a decree declaring
Louisiana indebted for interest due on thirty
coupons, and that decree should issue, in
Guiding all New York citizens holding con-
solidated bonds, for interest and principal.
Similar suits have been brought in Louisiana
against the State treasurer and auditor, but
the State Supreme Court declared there was
no jurisdiction to deal with such questions;
no precedent for a suit OF the kind exists.
The Louisiana code is drawn from France,
and the highest judicial authority there de-
clares the State is justiciable only by her
SELF whether in her own favor or against
her. The management of the States fnan-
ofa oIa he
rest, can be determined by the legislative
authority only. The statement here quotes
authorities to show that the State alone can
know her own needs and power to meet
claims; also to prove that State must not
sacrifice its taxpayers to the public credit
ors.) The constitution provides that judicial
power shall extend to all cases in which the
United States are party, and the United
States determine the cases in which they
shall be party. The organization OF the
Louisiana treasury Is analogous to that of
the United States; the treasurer can disburse
only in conformity to law, and no money
can be withdrawn without legislative appro-
priation. There have been instances in
which such officers were controlled by the
courts, but they are rare, and imply clear,
unmistakable duty imposed and make no
exception to the rule of the State as sover-
eign. A State may not be arraigned and
sentenced, and coerced like an individual;
when an obligation is cast upon the princi-
pal and not upon the servant we cannot en-
force it upon servant while acting as such.
(Long citations are made in the statement in
support of these positions).
10. Besides claiming a decree for the
thirty coupons the New York bill impre-
Gates this court to decree Louisiana indebted,
for the amount of the bonds and coupons, to
the plaintiff; principal and interest to be
paid when due, and that the constitution
and laws of Louisiana arraigned in the bill
be declared void. The bill goes far beyond
the concessions contained in the act of New
York. That act invited the citizen to place
himself and property under the State by
iHdiree.ioa, 90 as to evade the provision for
bidding citizen to sue State. New York
assumes that she may inform the court that
she is injuriously affected by provisions in
the laws and constitution of Louisiana, and
she prays for judgment, which is to be held
in trust for the citizen. This is a claim of
jurisdiction beyond what was ever asserted