New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-04-09
SUING A STATE.
A VITAL CASE BEFORE THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT.
STATE SOVEREIGNTY VS.. MAN sovEREIoNTY-rHE
STORY OF THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT
STUDY OF THE CASE BY Mr.. MON
CUgr ID CONWAY.
CuKE D. CONWAY.

CURE D. CONWAY.
| TO he Edftor1r rae FrtbWnc.
Sir: Tho United States Supreme Court win decide. in
the month Of April case likely prove historic I'm
portanee On the docket n stands: No 1o34-The State
OF North Carolina and william p Roberts, Auditor vs.
Alfred H. Temple Tho question TO be determined Is tho
stability OF State By one Of Its own citizens 1t is re-
Variable fact that his question has come directly
before the Supreme Court during the century OF Its
lstence While politicians absorbed in their task Of
training stecds for grand Presidential Derby Day. the
pn1e Of which will be forgotten, there suspended
In the balances Issue which affect tho entire Fed
ofal system. This North Carolina case follows. with
proximity almost picturesque the late decision In the VIZ
gnIa coupon case determined that State.
proceeding under unconstitutional law could not be en-
Joined In the interest Of allen citizen OF another
State It has now only decided that State IS not
amenabs its own citizens for nullncation to take It's
place part Of organic law Although, as has been
said this question boon directly decided by
Supreme Court. H. incidentally asked by exGov
Hoaiy in the Of another not depending
the point and answered that the Supreme Courts
Jurisdiction could extend to any such suit against
State because corresponding Of exeeu
ton may be assumed that this viii have to be
revised by the whole court that actual case has
before t involving the rights Of the individuals who
ave the People') not by state Legislatures but by
conventions constituted National Union and its trl
, bunal.
The XIth Amendment on which States rely to
shelter unconstitutional laws mparing tho obligation
OF contracts" art l.. Sec 10) may be quoted or
readers convenience: The judicial power Of the
United be construed extend any suit
in equity commenced prosecuted against Of
the United nv citizens NJ another State hy c
subjects Of any foreign stae 1t hardly fail
to impress any who scrutinyes this article that all
reference citizens right against his own State
must have been omitted full consideration. But
The spirit Of the Constitution adverse the assumption
Of powers by Federal Government by Implication only
unless when powers essential others distinctly
given the question remains whether the trainers Of tho
Constitution really intended to institute to deny tho
right Of q citizen his State.
The story Of the XIth Amendment has never been
written though the need Of full historic treatment Of the
subject viii appear from the following brief study At
tho close OF Revolution the citizens Of this country
were loaded with British debts" It part or tho
treaty Of peace with Great Britain ,hat these obligations
should impaired The foreign bonds largely
transferred 20 citizens Of the United Sites and in order
that they should not be escaped by state assumptions Of
their citizens debts the constitutional prohibition in Ar
tcle against imparng tho obligation Of contracts"
Of the compromises OF the Constitution" The
Ex-Governor OF Virginia Edmund Randolph wrote to
James Madison Morch 1881 that n the peace OF this
country met With any untoward event. one Of the
would be these British detjs7 S.). That
appointed the first Attorney General OF the
United States and one Of his earliest tasks deal
with case involving the liabilities OF State to the su5
Of on aen creditor The eloqucnce Of Patrick Henry and
Ingenuity Of Marshall yet Justce vainly endeavored
to end an escape for the debtors. Jones vs. Hyton-
Curtis Decision 164) In a manuscpt letter before
Attorney Gener Randolph writes to friend from
Germantown, Augu,. II, 1892:
supreme Court Our business was prepaatory TO soI1o
& dxed or DEBATE on the first Monday in FebTaofy The
STAT Of Geora applied ioI an o to stop IN ths
in the last Circuit Court by British subject whose estate
a1 STep to n Of these ohs sf'a S premier smd a.
the cultivation OF Southern popularity that the professor
aPcncd 0 Of the frs, .b9ons Of warm tempe ana that
1t VIII take series Of n sottle with such mixture
OF Judges regular course oil chancery.
When the case referred to tClishom Va Georgia.
Dallas Rep 419 on February, 1893, the Attorney
General moved Georgia should be ordered appear
term or Judgment entered against the State The
excitement caused by the alluded to in the OPEN
ing Of his powerful speech did not want the remon
STRANGE OF Georgia satisfy that the motion have
made Unpopular Before that remonstTance was read
had learned from the acts OF another state, whose will
be always dear TO that she too condemned It. On
ordinary sons these dgnned opinions might influence
greatly, but this which brings into question a
sutiona right 20 surrender It would be in Official
pern1y" Article III o the jurisdiction Of the
supreme Court In between State and aliens IS
that may excite dstOnshmcnt that Georgia should
have denied IT. CHIEF Justice Jay said. in giving his
opinion: Geozea refuses appear ond 10 the
plaintiff because she IS sovereign (sc State and there
fore not liable to such actions Now. II the reader viii
the phraseoloey OF the Accomplishment, in the
letter TO Madison quoted above he will see tat the
amenabny Slater is declared be IN question: not
merely smenaby foreign plaintiff. The whole
course proceedings prove that the amenabllty of
state to OF It's citizens included in the gen
question whether could be Involuntary made
party In suit For the judiciary Act (Sec 49, said:
The Supreme Court shall have exclusive Jurisdiction Of
all controversies OF ciy nature when State party,
except between state and It's citizens and except also,
between state and the citizens other States aliens
which latter t. shall have original but not exclusive
jurisdiction" From this # is clear that the Jurisdiction
extended to civil actions between citizen
and his state where q Federal question involved
Otherwise the Constitution could have inforced its
provisions against citizens injury by nfraction Of
tract deprivation Of liberty property without due
process o. law. That the stability Of State by one Of
It's citizens is not among the specifications ursl
In Art III Sec IA applicable by the fact that these
limited issues Involving probable conflicts between
two other urisdctons-such example. those
OF State and foreign State Where individual ct-
and his State In question the issue is between
the single jurisdiction OF the state and its revising Fed
era branch whose authority is therefore established by the
first clause OF the section The judicial power shall cS
tend all cases. law equity, arising under this
Constitution the laws u the United States and treaties
made or which shall be made, under their authority"
These considerations render the Chisholm VS. Georgia
record OF importance TO the Issue now before the court
The Jurisdiction stated in the Constitution undenia
be the position taken by The State that tht Judicial
Act having provided any mode Of execution against
State any penalties the supreme Court representing
iudlcally the laws well the Constitution, had no
power to proceed to Judgment against State As tho
North Carolina will pretty certainly upon this
point the further history OF the Georgia may
briefly stated The Attorney General declared that the
spirit OF the Constitution Of State amenab
ity:
Are states TO enjoy the high privilege OF acting thus
cmlnentiy WIong without contrOii The
has establ!scd'a principe prOhibtOry
shall be without It's yndcaory quality, In other words
mat the hfrictiJn Of piOnlbiOiy law, although
press peagity BE- omitted. d. punishable. We meet
with no difficulty when the conduct OF state can be en
m3dyered on through the medium Of ndyiduA For
instance without suing state person arrested may be
liberated b. habcds corpus, person atalned and con
under post Law may b. those who
offend against Improper treaties be protected, who
them Ice punished; the actors under letters
" maIquc and Gtrs1 may BE- mulcted; coinage bills Of
credit unwarsntet tenders and tie mpIring Of contracts
individuals may be snDlhated But this redress
goes only half Of the preceding uncOnstitu
pass without unless states
LIE VIM % IN