The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1898-03-16
OYSTER CASES DECIDED.
Father Worth Cannot Be Compelled to
Pay Them.

Father Worth Cannot Be Compelled to
Pay Them.
At last the oyster claims case seems
to have been finally decided, so far rs
the courts are concerned.
1t will be remembered that under an
act of the Legislature the solicitor i'll
Pamlico, Craven and other eastern coun-
ties was directed to serve notice on per-
SONS who had entered certain oyster land
to show cause why they should not sur
render them, This the clerks claimed
TO have done and put in bills of cost
amounting 10 between $4,000 and $1,000.
The counties in which these suits were
brought refused to pay the bin Of costs
and the matter went to the Supreme
court--first on the question: of the cOun-
rvs liability for the costs. 1t was deci-
ded that the county was not liable.
Then the State Treasurer was asked
TO pay the bill and he too refused. The
Supreme court was again appealed IL
and il said that the State was liable;
but added that the question was as to
how the money was to be obtained with
which to pay the costs.
Treasurer Worth obtained a re-rehear-
ing and again it was decided against
him.
Then Judge Robinson issued manda-
mus commanding the Treasurer TO pay
the bill of costs out of such moneys as
he might have in the State Treasury.
From this he appealed and yesterday
afternoon the Supreme court handed
down a decision reversing Judge Robin
son: holding that court costs do not con
stICute a part of the expense of the
State government, and declaring that as
there is no appropriation to pay these
costs, the Legislature will have to pro
vide for their payment.
The opinion of the court is written by
Judge Clark. He says:
Payment of legal liabilities incurred by
the State is q matter for the legislative,
not the judicial branch of the govern
ment, for by virtue of its sovereignty the
State cannot be sued.
THE State constitution also effectual-
ly bars any judicial action to enforce col
lection of liabilities against the State by
providing in the Constitution, Article
NV, section 3. that mo money shall
be drawn from the Treasury but in con-
sequence of appropriations made by law,
i. @. by legislative authority The
tI0thttlhOb JuI SlFCA lLlS COuI
by Article ~, section 8, is especially
limited, the decision being merely re-
cOmmendatory' to the General Assem-
bly,, and the court forbidden to issue any
process thereon.
'"There is wide difference between
the liability of State and the right to
enforce it by judicial process. Take an
admittedly valid State bond 1t is is
sued by authority of the General As
sembly, signed by the Governor and pub
lie Treasurer and evidenced by the broad
seal. But the judicial branch of the gov
eminent cannot direct a mandamus 10
the Treasurer for the payment of princi-
pal or interest
1T is only when the legislative de-
partment has appropriated certain
fund to the payment of a liability in
Cured or to be incurred and the Audi
tor or Treasurer refuses to obey the leg
islative mandate that the court can issue
its mandamus TO compel him to do go.
The court cannot direct him to pay a
claim, however just and unquestioncd
when there is no legislative appropria-
tion to that purpose.
'The only authority that can be IN
vOked as n legislative appropriation 10
pay this liability is the usual provision
in the Revenue Act, to he found in Acts
1897, chapter 1853"