The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1904-02-03
CARPET BAG BONDS VALIDATED.
Five Justices Of the U. S, ST.
preme Court Decide in Favor
of South Dakota,
And the Chief Justice and Three ether
Justices Dissent.

Washington, Feb. 1.-The case OF
the State of South Dakota versus the
State of North Carolina was decided
today by the United States Supreme
Court favorably to South Dakota. The
case involves the validity of 6. mort
gage On stock of the North Carolina
Railroad Company. given by the State
of North Carolina to secure the pay
mens Of State bonds given in aid of the
road in 1857. The State of South
Dakota holds ten bonds of $1,000 each,
under gift from Simon Schafer and
Samnel NJ. Schafer, of New York city,
the amount due on the BONDS and
cupons attached being $4,000.
The opinion was rendered by Justice
Brewer and the decree of the Court
was embodied in the following order !:
ssA decree will therefore, be enter
ed, which, after finding the amount
due on the bonds and coupons in suit
to be s27,0o, no interest being recover
able, and that the same are secured
by one hundred shares Of the stock OF
the North Carolina Railroad Company,
belonging to the State OF North Caro-
lima, and directs that the said State of
North Carolina pay said amount to
the State Of South Dakota. and that
in deafnlt Of such payment an order
of sale be issued to the marshal of this
Court, directing him to sell at public
auction all the interest of the State
Of North Carolina in and to one hum
dred shares of the capital stock Of the
North Carolina Railroad Company,
such sale to be made at the east front
door of the Capitol building, in this
city. Public notice to be given OF
such sale by advertisement in some
daily paper published in the, city of
Raleigh. N. c., and also in some daily
paper published in the city of Wash
ington. .
The Chief Justice and Justices
White, McKeEna and Day united in a
dissenting opinion.
The decision of the Court is con-
sidered an important one, ndit marks
a new departure in ordering the sale of
property in dispute in case of failure
to satisfy Judgment. Coming to
that point, Justice Brewer said there
Was "no reasonable doubt of the valid
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 pro-
perty rights. BE added:
.swe are confronted with the con-
tention thas there is no power in this
Court to enforce such judgement,
and that such lack Of power is conclu-
siye evidence. that, notwithstanding
the general language of the Constitu-
tion, there is an implied exception Of
actions brought to recover money. The
public property held by any moncipal
city, county, or State, is exempt from
seizure upon execution. because it is
held by such corporation, NOT as a
part of its private assets, but as
trustee for public purposes.
s.There is in this case mortgage of
property and the sale of that property
under foreclosure may satisfy
the plaintiffs claim. If that
should be the result there would be no
necessity for a personal Judgment
against the State. That the State is
a necessary party to the foreclosure of
the mortgage was settled by Christian
versus Atlantic and North Carolina
Railroad Company. Equity is satisfied
by a decree for a foreclosue and sale
Of the mortgaged property, leaving
the question of 8 Judgment over for
any deficiency, to be determined when,
if ever, it arises. And surely if. as
we have often held, this Court has
Jurisdiction of an action ny one State
against another to recover q tracs of
land, there would seem to be no doubt
of the jurisdiction of one to render a
decree for the sale OF personal proper
ty."
The bonds were presented to South
Dakota for the aid of the State Uni
yersity, and with the end in view oi
prevailing upon that State to bring al
original action in the Supreme Court,
which action has now proved success
full. There are about s2O5, 600 worth o.
other bonds outstanding.