The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1882-05-01
Gi1e g!:l,I;,'ti|elliiqetner.
WEST VIRGINIA CEmrlYICArr..
LnwyerJ.M u. Mnson', opinion In Kcgnrt

| ri. s..T" Il. " tnetns "t#H.l. .N.s. -hH
CnAnlEsTowS, W. Va. April %, 1852.
Editors In,ellIsenccr.
In rep y to your inquiry, t'What will be
the effect on the West Virginia certificates
so.callcd, OF the suits by New York and
New Hampshire against Louisiana now
pending III tho United States Supreme
Court? very chceriully furnish you nm
extract from All opinion recently given by
me to certain foreign holders Of West VII.
GINA bonds. JIM. NAsos.
1t isa principle OF law that
government cannot be sued. England
cannot be made defendant in any court
OF France. It has always been the most
cherished doctrine OF our Union that, as
10 their domestic concerns, each State Is as
much distinct government rs England or
fraucc. Those who framed the Federal
constitution proposed TO give the Supreme
Court OF the United States power to decide
cases where one OF the States was party.
Article ! Ill provided: THE judicial power
OF the United States shall extend to cases
ailectin. ambassadors, 0s TO con,rover.
sizes between two or more States, be,wecna
State and the citizens OF another State
Very soon suit WINS brought by an
individual against u State: Chisholm sued
the State OF Georgia md the court took ju-
rist!iction. This decision caused great ex-
citemeut and the Constitution was amend-
ed at once (l703l by adding article NJ:
The judicial power shall not extend to any
suit against one Of the States by the citi.
zens OF another State.
Since this amendment no one has ever
ufvtg trI 11nNs, Stnt. IL l. I 1
individual. The creditors OF State stand
upon the precise footing Of the creditors Of
France or any other Government-they are
entirely dependent on the pleasure OF the
legislature. Such was the opinion OF Mr..
Webster, given in 1880 to Barring Brothers,
and it has never been questioned. But as
between themselves, II there Is contro.
very between two States, Ms such then the
Federal Supreme Court must decide it. II
q question arises between France and Eng.
land it my be submitted 10 arbitration:
the alternative is n war. The design OF the
Constitution was to make it obligatory on
the several Suites TO submit their contro.
yersles TO the Federal court This view is
the universally accepted doctrine OF all |
parties IN every part OF this country. 4
contrary doctrine would SO cnrage all
classes OF the people that they would defeat
any measure based on it.
Many attempts have been made TO cvade
the purpose Of the eleventh amendment by
making one OF the States party to suit
IN which she had no interest, but the court
has never tolerated the evasion for mo.
ment. ,.
In lS1Sa gentleman OF the Richmond
bar projected the novel idea that the bonds
OF deinultins State might be (nominally)
assigned 10 4 sister State which could then |
bring suit. Thus, New York would allege
that she owned the bonds OF Virginia,
which allegation tit was sug:ested) would
make "a controversy between two States" |
and hence the court might take iuris,ic.
uon. This very original theory was pub.
llshed in one OF our law journals, but it fell |
stubborn and has never been endorsed BY |
the profession.
It will be observed, no one pretenls that
State may be sued by IN individual; the
express object OF the amendment was to
prevent such suit, and yet the idea is TO |
accomplish by shallow evasion exactly |
what our organic laY expressly prohibits. |
We may affirm with perfect safety that the |
O'' "a A's'ea totGihtC panty
But it seems some adventurous brokers |
on Wall street" desired to experiment with
this PROPOSITION. and, in 1850, the e.isa.
ture OF New iolk passed an &C. as follows:
Any citizen OF this State being the owner
OF Il valid claim against any Of the United |
States, which is past due. may assign the
same to the State Of New York.
The Attorney General shall bring an action
in the name OF the suite . The
owner ofthe claim shall pay the costs OF the
suit.
New Hampshire passed 4 similar law, and
suits were instituted against-Louisiana,
which are now pending in the Supreme
Court and will probably be decided in the
course OF q few days. 1t is the general
opinion oil the bar that the court will hold
that the NJ amendment cannot bethwarted.
There is no possible way to compel
legislature to levy tax, and il Il popular
Indignation is excited against an attempted |
usurpation OF Federal power that indi.na-
ton would be reflected on the securities
themselves and inevitably lead to repudia- |
ton, the value OF u State bond depends en-
tisely upon the good will Of the people"