The Forrest City times., 1901-10-11
ARKANSAS STATE NEWS.
Chancellor Martin Holds That Con-
pict Lease Case Cannot Be
Deci1ed on Demurrer.
OCCURRENCES OF WEEK BRIEFLY STATED
Census Report shnws Wonderful Increase
In Manufacturing For This State-Re-
ports of state Treasurer and State
Land CoLl ssioner
L onvict Lease Case,

Convict Lease Case
In the suit of the Arkansas Brick
Manufacturing Company against the
board of p"nitentiary commissioners,
Ia Pulaski chancery court, involving
the VALIDITY of the contract with the
company for the hire of 500 convicts
for period of ten years, Chancellor
Martin held that the case cannot be
decided on demurrer The courts
ruling follows:
First That the motion of the Brick
Manufacturing Company to strike
from the files the motion of the state
to be made a party should be over
ruled, because it is founded upon the
false theory that the state not being a
party to the suit. cannot file any pa
per until 1t is made a formal party to
the record. when as a mater of correct
practice it may, by leave of court, file
petition to be made a party, and
upon that motion, that is, the motion
of the state. the court will determine
its legitimate relation to the litigation
and its right to complain or defend
without striking from the files of the
states petition.
Second. That the states motion 20
be made a party. solely for the pur-
pose of moving to dismiss the entire
action, should be oyerruled. because
ID while the state cannot be sued in
any court without its consent. upon
the theory of law derived from the
common law and emphasized by con
stitution and statute that the soy
ereign will do no wrong but will al
ways do justice without compulsion
from any tribunal When, however.
one or any number of its officers are
guilty of acts done in the name of the
state. which are alleged 10 be wrong.
such as attempting to annul. by sim
pie resolution of a board, without the
right to be heard, contract the
courts have always interfered by
proper process to prevent such acts
as are illegal on the part of the states
officers, and, as has been decided by
the supreme court of Arkansas and a
the supreme court of Arkansas and
large number of others, the courts
will not permit the sovereign to in
terpose its sovereign exemption to pre-
sent an investigation of the real mer-
its of q controversy growing out OF
the alleged illegal acts of its officers
and ca If the court should sustain
the motion of the state to be made a
party for the exclusive purpose of
moving to dismiss the action its duty
would be to sustain the motion only
to the extent that 1t affects the party
making it, that is. the state; and the
result would be simply to dismiss as
to the state and leave the action still
pending as to the other defendants,
the officers whose acts, If illegal. may
be restrained No useful purpose can
be subserved. and the court will not
do the fruitless thing of making the
state a party to the suit for the pur-
pose of dismissing as to it, and thus
leave the action just as it stood before.
Third. Some of the questions aris-
ing on the demurrer to the bill are
of such a character that an inyestiga-
tion into the facts should be had. The
demurrer admits all of the material
allegations of the bill, and admits, in
this case. too much.