Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-12-21
CLASH WITH A FEDERAL COURT.
North Carolina Supreme Court De-
cision Reversed I'm Peculiar Cnse.

cirion reversed In Peculiar Case.
RALEIGH, December U.-The Legis-
lature at its session Of 1891, passed
an act Incorporating the oxford and
Coast-LAne Railroad Company, which au-
thorized counties, cities, and townships
TO subscribe bonds to aid in building the
road. The town Of oxford voted under
this act "a subscription Of $4,000. The
bonds were issued and sold TO the Union
Bank. of Richmond. Va, and the town
defaulted in the payment of the interest.
and suit was brought ID the state court
10 compel payment. There was luug-
ment i'm the Superior Court for the bank
and appeal was taken TO the Supreme
Court. AT the September term, 1895, the
court decided the bonds invalid because
the blu 10 incorporate the oxford and
COast-Line Railroad Company was not
read on three several days in each house
of the Legislature and the vote by yeas
and nays taken and entered on the jour
nails on the second and third readings, as
section II Of Article il. Of the COnstitu-
ton requires.
This was supposed to be the end Of the
case. but the bank then brought suit
i'm the United States Circuit Court 10
have the bonds declared valid and for the
writ Of mandamus to issue compelling the
commissioners of the town of oxford to
levy the necessary tax to pay the ac-
crued interest. The town put its defence
on the decision of the Supreme Court OF
the State. declaring the bonds ~unconsti-
tutiSnal and void, and hat the United
States Court VAS bound by that decision,
which raised the question, How far the
decision of the State Court binds the
Federal Court TO municipal bonds held
by q nonresident purchaser for value p
The decision of the United States Court
was rendered by Judge Pufnell. He says:
Whenever a question falling under the
laws or Constitution Of the United States
is presented, the United States courts
have q clear jurisdiction, and they would
fail in the purposes for which they were
created if they did not take jurisdiction,
even though their decisions conflict with
that of the State Court" He then de-
cides that the court annOt go behind the
enrolled act i'm the office of the Secretary
of State; that the signatures Of the
Speaker of the House and the president
Of the Senate 10 the act are conclusive
and cannot be contradicted, and for this
decision he quotes che decision of Carr
vs.. Coke, JIG North Carolina Supreme
Court Reports, where 1t was alleged and
offered TO be proved by the journals OF
the House and Senate. and other evil
dence. tina an act of the Legislature
had not passed either house of the Gene
raj Assembly, but had been certified by
the presiding officers. The Supreme
Court held that where It appears that
a bill has been duly signed by the pre-
siding officers of the houses Of the Gene
raj Assembly the courts cannot. go behind
such ratification to inquire whether il
was fraudulent or erroneous before it
had passed the requisite reading by each
house" To this same effect is the de
cisiOn of the same court in Calling vs..
Tarboro', IS North Carolina Reports. and
BrOadnax VS.. Groom, Ga North Carolina
Reports.
The question now presented is what
Will the commissioners of oxford do?
The state says the bonds are invalid and
principal and interest must not be
paid; and the United states Court issues
a mandamus and says they must be paid.
1t Is q conflict of jurisdiction such as has
never before arisen in this State.