FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   430   431   432   433   434   435   436   437   438   439   440   441   442   443   444   445   446   447   448   449   450   451   452   453   454  
455   456   457   458   459   460   461   462   463   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   >>  
ession from the immediate subject of this paper, I shall take occasion to mention here a supposition which has excited some alarm upon very mistaken grounds. It has been suggested that an assignment of the public securities of one State to the citizens of another, would enable them to prosecute that State in the federal courts for the amount of those securities; a suggestion which the following considerations prove to be without foundation. It is inherent in the nature of sovereignty not to be amenable to the suit of an individual without its consent. This is the general sense, and the general practice of mankind; and the exemption, as one of the attributes of sovereignty, is now enjoyed by the government of every State in the Union. Unless, therefore, there is a surrender of this immunity in the plan of the convention, it will remain with the States, and the danger intimated must be merely ideal. The circumstances which are necessary to produce an alienation of State sovereignty were discussed in considering the article of taxation, and need not be repeated here. A recurrence to the principles there established will satisfy us, that there is no color to pretend that the State governments would, by the adoption of that plan, be divested of the privilege of paying their own debts in their own way, free from every constraint but that which flows from the obligations of good faith. The contracts between a nation and individuals are only binding on the conscience of the sovereign, and have no pretensions to a compulsive force. They confer no right of action, independent of the sovereign will. To what purpose would it be to authorize suits against States for the debts they owe? How could recoveries be enforced? It is evident, it could not be done without waging war against the contracting State; and to ascribe to the federal courts, by mere implication, and in destruction of a pre-existing right of the State governments, a power which would involve such a consequence, would be altogether forced and unwarrantable. Let us resume the train of our observations. We have seen that the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court would be confined to two classes of causes, and those of a nature rarely to occur. In all other cases of federal cognizance, the original jurisdiction would appertain to the inferior tribunals; and the Supreme Court would have nothing more than an appellate jurisdiction, "with such exceptions and under suc
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   430   431   432   433   434   435   436   437   438   439   440   441   442   443   444   445   446   447   448   449   450   451   452   453   454  
455   456   457   458   459   460   461   462   463   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   >>  



Top keywords:

federal

 

jurisdiction

 

sovereignty

 
nature
 

sovereign

 
governments
 

States

 
general
 

Supreme

 
securities

original

 
courts
 
tribunals
 
action
 

independent

 
confer
 

compulsive

 

inferior

 

appertain

 
pretensions

authorize

 

purpose

 
contracts
 

exceptions

 

obligations

 

nation

 

cognizance

 

conscience

 

binding

 

individuals


appellate

 

consequence

 

altogether

 
involve
 

classes

 

existing

 
forced
 

confined

 
observations
 

unwarrantable


resume

 
destruction
 

enforced

 
evident
 

recoveries

 

rarely

 
ascribe
 

implication

 

contracting

 

waging