Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1890-01-29

The Virginia Cases.

II is to be presumed that the Supreme
Court Of the United States will before long
render its decisions in the several virginia
cases which were recently argued before
that tribunal. If these decisions shall be
favorable 10 the State We may afterwards
reasonably entertain the hope that our
financial troubles are at end. and expect
The bondholders TO close with the offers
which have for years been open TO their ac-
ceptance.
But will those decisions be favorable to
Virginia? With States-rights man OF
other DAYS as Chief Justice of the court.
and two States-rights men Of other days
upon tho bench with him. the people who
hold that nothing can justify Federal in
reference with the State in such matters
as are involved in the several Virginia
cases now pending in that court would
have reason for expecting a decision IA
yorable to their views if there were not
six of the Associate Justices who believe
too much in the consolidationist doctrines
which tho results of the war between the
States have made both too common and
too popular.
The Supreme Court of the United States
Is said to be subject of study on the part
of European jurists and other distinguished
men in Great Britain and on thecontinent.
An article in the last issue of The Nation
fntimates rather than asserts that they re-
gard the wisdom of the fathers OF the re-
public as manifested in the establishment
of that court as wonderful if not partaking
of the miraculous. 1t is the one feature
Of our form of government which had no
forerunner, and which was not evolved
from institutions existing in the older
countries of the world.
But to return TO our subject. VIII VIZ
ginia gain her cases? A decision rendered
last Monday and reported in our issue OF
yesterday cannot fail TO excite lively hopes
in the breasts of our people. We allude to
the decision affirming the judgment of the
United States Circuit Court for the East
ern district of North Carolina in the case
of WILLIAM L. CHRISTIAN ct ais, appellants.
o.. the Atlantic and North Carolina Rail-
road Company ct ais. This case was
strong one for the advocates of the I'M
limited jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
North Carolina some years ago subscribed
for more than million of dollars of the stock
of a company organized for the purpose of
building railroad from Beaufort to Colds
bore. As was stated yesterday State
bonds were issued by the State to raise
money to pay for this stock. and the State
not only pledged its public faith as secu-
rity for the redemption of the bonds. but
in addition pledged all the stock held by
the State in the railroad company. The
State also pledged all its dividends to pay
interest, and promised to pay the interest
out of her treasury until dividends were
declared. AS there had been no interest
paid in twelve years the plaintiffs, who are
bondholders. sought to have the bonds
declared lien upon the States stock.
Now hear the Supreme Court, speaking
through Mr.. Justice Bradley:
1.-THE State of North Carolina is the only
party really concerned. The whole pro-
ceeding is virtually against her. The
object Of the suit is to get possession of
her property, to sequester her DIVIDENDS
(if any there may be), and compel the
payment of them TO complainants, TO seize
and sell the railroad stock of which she is
in sole possession, Though it be true that
the bondholders have a lien on the divi-
dends and stock, it is not lien that can
be enforced without a suit. and that suit
against the State. The court Is of the
opinion that the State is an indispensable
party to any proceeding in equity in which
It's property is sought TO be taken and sub
jecfed to the payment of its obligation.
The Judgment of the lower court III favor
of the State is therefore affirmed.
May we not reasonably expect the same
tribunal to say in the Virginia cases?-
"The State of Virginia is the only party
really concerned. The whole proceeding
Is virtually against her. Though 1t be true
that the bondholders have lien upon the
States revenues, il is not lien that can be
enforced without suit. and that suit
against the State, and suit against the
State being unconstitutional, cannot be
s,no,rxasnaIv