The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1907-09-24
SOME CONSTITU-
TIONAL HISTORY
How Georgia Stood Pat
and Caused the 18th
Amendment to Be
Adopted.
BY T. K. Oglesby.

BY T.. K. Oglesby.
The recent railroad litigation in the
State and United States courts in .,orth
and Alabama brings the elev-
enth amendment of the constitution Of
the United States prominently before
the public eye again, and Georgia's
agency in causing the adoption of that
makes an interesting chap
ter for the student Of history. The
incident that brought it about occur
red over a hundred years ago, and
absorbed at the time the attention Of
the entire Union. for in its issue was
the preservation Of that
State sovereignty without which the
Union could not have had existence
nor been perpetuated.
1t was in the year 1892, just five
years after the formation of the con-
stitution, n a little more than three
years after it went into operation,
when Washington was President, and
Edward Telfair was Governor Of Geor-
gia, that a suit was brought in the
United States Supreme Court against
the State OF Georgia by a citizen Of
South Carolina named Chisholm, for
a SUM of money alleged to be due him
from The State. The State of Georgia.
through her official agents. the Gov
ernor and Attorney General, was duly
of the suit. and served with
summons to appear before the court
and maxi answer to the claim against
her. Taking the position that a SOY
ereign State, which she claimed to be,
could not, by the Federal Constitution,
be sued by a citizen of another State,
Georgia refused to obey the
Whereupon the Attorney General of
the United States. as counsel for the
plaintiff, moved that, unless Georgia
appeared at the next term of court,
judgment should be entered against
her by default, n a writ of inquiry
of damages awarded. Due notice was
given to the State of this motion. the
consideration of which, however, was
term, that n State might have time
to deliberate on the course she would
take. Georgia paid no more atten-
ton to this notice than she had to the
first one. Still standing upon her
rights and immunities as a sovereign
State, n asserted hal the United
States Government had no judicial
power over such a case, and. simply
entering a written protest to that Ell
tect, without %deigning to recognize the
jurisdiction of the court even so Tar
as to enter into an argument of the
matter, she refused to appear at the
next term; and thus was the first great
Constitutional question b1ouSht before
the Supreme judicial tribunal of the
government for question
of a broad construction or a strict con-
struction Of the powers conferred upon
the government by the States through
the Constitution-tne question Of State
sovereignty and State rights-the
question pon which the convention
that framed the Constitution would,
in all probability, have split IRENE
diably IN two, but for the opportune
patriotic action of a Georgia delegate
in that convention. That body, as is
well known to those familiar with its
history was divided into two parties,
the Nationals and the Federals. The
Federals were those who We're in tav-
or of forming a strictly Federal Gov
eminent, which would preserve unim-
paired the rights. equality and sepa-
rate sovereignty of the States; while
the Nationals ~cOntended for a govern
ment more national than federal--a
centralized, consolidated government,
in which the idea of States should be
almost annihilated. From an incor-
rect political nomenclature, which has
been permitted to take historical root
SO long that it is not likely ever to
be eradicated from the public mind.
the Nationals, or OF
tina Observation-Disclosures, Madison,
Edmund Randolph, Morris, Wilson,
and their allies and followers-are
commonly said and believed to have
been fe0eralist leaders in 1t. The very
reverse of this is true. They contend
ed most ~strenuously against the fed
eral, state-sovereignty idea. They
wanted, as was expressly declared by
Mr.. Randolph, "a consolidated union,
in which the iCea Of States should be
nearly a"nnihilated."
The Federals finally succeeded in
having the State sovereignty principle
incorporated in the Constitution, and
this secured their adhesion to it. But
afterward, when the Supreme Court
was n and they saw that the
judges were nearly all Nationals, they
feared that, under color of its power
to construe the Constitution thai court
would, by a broad construction of its
power, attempt to ~extinguish the great
vital principle of the Union, which
they had so hardly aved from annihi-
lation at the hands of the Nationals
in the convention.
They had not long to wait for proof
that their fears were we'll founded.
The court had been in existence but
three years when the a~pprehended at
tempt was made by commanding the
sovereign State of Georgia to appear
before it on a level with a private in
dividual, a citizen of another State,
and defend herself against a prosecu-
ton h. that individual.
Georgia, as we have seen, refused
to obe the command. The command
was repeated, and so was the refusal.
the Supreme Court issued it's I'LL
lat that unless the State of
pear, or show cause to the contrary
in this court, by the first day of next
term, judgment by default shall be
entered against the said State"
The rext term came. but Georgia
the power of the court, and
came not with it. The court then
rendered judgment against her and