The free press. (Southern Pines, N.C.) 1898-19??, 1904-02-05
NORTH CAROLINA LOSES
United States Supreme Court Favors
South Dakota's Contention

Supreme Court favOrably to South Da.
kota. The case involves the validity Of
a mortgage on stock of North Carolina
Railroad Co. given by the State OF
North Carolina to secure the payment
of State bonds given in aid of the road
in 1857. The State of South Dakota
holds ten bonds of $1,000 each under
a gift from Simon Schaeffer and Sam
uel M. Schaeffer, of New York, the
amount due on the bonds and coupons
attached being $4,000.
The Chief Justice and Justices White,
McKenna and Day united in dis
senting opinion
The decision of the court is consiG-
cred an important one and it marks a
new departure in considering the sale
of property in dispute, in case of fall
ure to satisfy Judgment. Coming to
that point Justice Brewer said there
was no reasonable doubt of the legal
ity of the bonds and mortgages in con-
troversy'' nor question respecting the
title of South Dakota to the bonds"
He also asserted the jurisdiction of
the court in cases brought by one
State against another to enforce prop.
erty rights. He added:
I'VE are confronted with the conten-
ton that there is no power in this
court to enforce such judgment and
that such lack of power is conclusive
evidence, that, Notwithstanding the
general language Of the constitution,
there Is an implied exception of &C
tions brought to recover money. The
public property held by any municipal
ity, city, county or State, is exempt
from seizure upon execution because
it is held by such corporation, not as
part of it's private assets, but as trus-
- for public purposes. o.
There is in this case mortgage of
property and the sale of that property
under a correct measure may satisfy
the plaintiffs claim. If that should be
the result there would be no necessity
for personal judgment against the
party to the foreclosure of the mort
gage was settled by Christian VS.. At
Iantic & North Carolina Railroad
Cfnn1nanv Tnritxr ic GoJ Jo
cree for a foreclosure and sale of the
nortgaged property, leaving the ques
Ion Of judgment over for any def
'iency to be determined when, if ever
t arises. And surely if, as we have
often held, this court has jurisdiction
If an action by one State against an
)ther to recover tract Of land, there
will seem no doubt of the Jurisdiction
II one to render a decree of sale of
PERSONAL property"
The bonds were presented to South
Dakota for aid of the State University
nd with the end in view Of prevailing
pon the State to bring an original ac-
ion in the Supreme Court, which ac-
ion has now proved successful. There
re about $250,000 worth of other
onds outstanding.
The Decision in Raleigh.
The Raleigh correspondent Of the
charlotte Observer says concerning
ne bond case:
The Observer correspondent was in
le office of the Governor when the
tier received a telegram sent from ,
to eX-Judge Sheppard an
that the United States SUI
'eme Court had decided the South
akota bond suit adversely to North :
arolina. The news flew rapidly t
nong the officials. The Governor
i'd at once: "You can say from us
at the interest of the holders of
ock in the North Carolina Railway
Ill be fully and carefully protected" I
The decision appears to involve pay =
ent Of about $4,000 in round num-
RS, principal of 10 bonds issued in II
n Of tho WnctnrY, Month No ;,,o