The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-04-16
Leads all North Carolina Daies i'm News and Circulation
ment such an extraordinary power as is

Iment such an extraordinary power as Is
Iclaimed in the present case.
There are certain general principles
underlying this government which, we
lcontend. forbids such a construction. We
take IT to be well established by the de-
lcisions of this court that the respective
Estates of the Union are supreme and SOW
lereign except as to those powers delegat-
led to the government of the United States
and those powers which by the Constitu-
ltion they are prohibited from exercising.
"It would seem idle to multiply author
Iities in support Of the general principles
above mentioned. From these, it appears
that in all matters not delegated to the
general government, the States are sover-
eign, and as said in Texas V. White
(supra), endowed with all the functions
essential to separate and Independent ex-
istence' This being so, it is proper to
inquire into some of the attributes of
this sovereignty and the nature of some
of its essential functions. This, we think,
is easily answered, so far as this case is
concerned, b ythe statement of the gener-
ally recognized proposition, that a State
has exclusive control of all matters of in
ternal regulation, including the power of
taxation, the administration of its fiscal
affairs and the possession and manage
ment of its property and the revenues
therefrom.
These are political powers of a State,
and upon the States devolve all the
duties of the sovereign and Of separate
and independent existence;' such as to
10 h.
ties and education of its people. the sup
port Of its charitable and other institu-
tions. and for the expenses necessary for
| its general government, and we may add,
| to it's very existence as a political body
Considering then that a State except
as to powers granted to the Federal gov
ernment is sovereign and endowed with
all the functions essential to separate and
independent existence and that its
| 'bounden and solemn duty is to exercise
such essential functions, it must follow,
we think, that to it belongs the chief, il
not the chiefest attribute Of sovereignty.
that is to say, its immunity from any
judicial power as to the settlement of its
public obligations.
''The State of North Carolina, for rea-
sons which appear to it to be just and
proper, has forbidden the Treasurer to
satisfy the demands of the complainant
and its allies in this suit 1t has forbid
den that any of its property shall be so
applied and this it has done in the exer-
else of a discretion which is vested in
it as a political body, endowed with all
the functions essential to separate and
Independent existence" For the reasons
hox 1x-a
cited. we insist that this discretion cannot
be controlled or coerced by the judicial
power of this or any other court. If no
power exists to enforce decree, then the
court, we respectfully submit should re-
fuse to entertain the Jurisdiction.
The evident purpose of the amend
ment, so promptly prepared and finally
adopted, was to prohibit all suits against
State by or for citizens of other States
or aliens, without the consent of the
State to be sued, and, in our opinion, one
State cannot create a controversy with
another State. within the meaning of that
term as used in the judicial clauses of the
Constitution, by assuming the prosecu-
tion of debts owing by the other State
to its citizens, or, we may add, to the
citizens of other States.
Such was the language of this court in
New Hampshire V Louisiana COS U. s.,
I6); and we contend that the pleadings
and the testimony in this suit bring it
within the principle thus declared. The
creditors in the above mentioned suit at
tempted to evade the Eleventh Amend
ment by more open and direct course,
that is, by assigning their claims to the
complainant State, under statutory sane
tion, for the avowed purpose of collec-
ton for their own benefit. Seeing that
this method would not avail them, the
creditors in the present suit have con-
cocted a scheme which, under the guise
OF gift to the complainant State, is to
accomplish the same result In consid-
Grafton OF what may be Justly called a
fee, and small one too, Gas it will verv
probably be diminished by counsel fees
ana other expenses, see Act of South
Dakota, Page 4D, the creditors have. in
effect, employed the complainant State to
commence and prosecute this suit in or
der that all the outstanding bonds of the
class sued upon, and which are owned
or controlled by Schafer Bros, NAV be
drawn within the jurisdiction of this court
on the ground that the holders theerof
are necessary parties to decree of fore
closure Although essentially plaintiffs
In interest, and should be arranged as
such, they could not under the judicial
clause of the Constitution, be Joined as
complainants with the complaining State;
and hence they have procured themselves
10 ne sued as co-defendants. If. in pur-
suance OF this arrangement. they can sue
coed in collecting their claims. they will
succeed in doing precisely what Is pro-
hibited by the Eleventh Amendment If
we have established by the testi-
mony that such was the purpose of the
gift, and that this suit is instituted in
order to carry out such purpose, then we
respectfully submit that it is an attempt
ed fraud upon the jurisdiction of this
court and an evasion of the Eleventh
Amendment. 1t may be that counsel will
argue that the complainant State has the
legal title to the ten bonds sued upon,
and that no matter what were the pur-
Of HO hn