The State of Rhode Island v. the State of Massachusetts

*536; JANUARY TERM; of

The Plantations, Island Providence Rhode complainants the Commonwealth de Massachusetts, fendant. Supreme jurisdiction by Court has of a hill filed the state of

-The tp ,. Massachusetts, the state of against and establish the boun- ascertain northern states, the that dary rights jurisdiction between the and restored sovereignty be to the and plaintiffs; they quieted thereof, and in the enjoyment and confirmed title; and for other their relief. further power is the subject hear determine matter in controversy Jurisdiction the ' suit; a parties'to adjudicate or any judicial power exercise over them. jurisdiction,on the ohjectiori process An from the of the! ground exemption spit-is manner, the brought, (cid:127)court in which or the a brought in which defendant is' issue; it, appearance by objection into is waived but .pleading when the power of goes parties-., subject matter, to the the court over defend- the the the or not, writ, for he -give plaintiff ant need cannot the or bill. better Supreme special, jurisdiction. is of limited and original Court one Its action which, casfes,controversies, particular parties must to the be confined over the act; it-to any proceeding constitution laws have authorized without limits .the prescribed nullity. is non judice, coram action a And want the or and-its whether power party, objected by apparent'to'the excess of or is it must sur1- Court, action, proceed cease its or extra-judicjally'. States, sovereign in The several states the United their in highest capacity,, people thereof, whom, by revolution, convention prerogative power parliament devolved, plenitude crown in a un- transcendent the; act„and coristitütion; any 6y adopted impaired by .authority, controllable by they respectively gra-ht judicial power made to which Statés a over United two, By constitution., states. controversies'between more Wasordained or power, party, judicial cases where state should exercised in by this Supreme original jurisdiction. as one their exemp- states Waived Courts as-sovereigris judicial power, tion from original right, by their own inherent cases; grant over themselves in such not grant would its-exercise any acquired tribunal. By grant, jurisdiction inferior this Court has Over parties cause, by delegated their own consent' and authority, executing power agent judicial specified. States the cases United has appeared, process-in Massachusetts submitted to her legislative capacity; plead bar of plaintiff’s action on- certain matters which the -of judgment the Court asked. jurisdiction parties rest, All doubts as to at are thus over grant well the people, legislature as the Submission power process; calling on the on'the case pre- exercise its bill, . sented plea, and answer. Although the constitution contro- docs not terms extend the to all ’ none, states; versics yet between two or more it in may terms excludes whatever be their nature or subject. This in construing powers as to United grants constitution Vol. XII. —4 supreme court. 65£ Rhóde lsland v. The State-óf [The-State ivlaásachuset'ts.] held, exception of and- an the restrictions ever States, particular presupposes pxceptéd, are^not are embraced those .case as,a jf'down r,ule,-'.that grant prohibition: general within the and have laid implication terms, .exception where no will be made none is made there construction. ffieitimes, of ana the‘history the. of look construction In the constitution must to we and, .existing adopted, of things the examine was-framed state ascertain when law, mischief, remedy. and the the old the compact .boundary fixed-by The established nations between and becomeseoncldsive subjects .thereof;!-and all the and tobe their-rights; and is citizens binds -re.al, treated, purposes, boundary: to ail .intents and the true The coristruction a'judicial such'Compact is question.. of bpt.tWo the who can the' bounda- There act tribunals-under can constitution ' limited, eXpre'ss j.-the states, -legislative' judicial-power or the the former is ríes- in of wh,ere. compact referred, by terms, agreement or dissent or' is to. assent them ' states; exercised.only and as the can.be a state’is the letter .thi»-Courtwhen herb,.or the is party; cannot exist. exists,by grant thepqopleof power: a diréct from- Court This -their itlls ex- agtoit,'selected by by-their,authority, selves,'forthe'púrpóáeS ercised theit them .states, parties.-to of people specified. the ds'they-respectively-become- the n constitution, judicial.píiwer rff the States, jurisdiction-'over g¡¡.ve- Ifnifed -citizens, themselves;-controversies.between statés,between or dif- th.e same utatesi/claiming lands their. férent eonfhctifig'-.'.grauts, disputed, Under within territory- , differently' boundary in deciding court oil acts

No than ‘On' .between lines land., separate Tf tracts there is, between is.-.un^brtairity line where'the if there ¿'confusion of-interlocking is of-boundaries -the.nature grants, the obliteration marks, intermixing -posseksibu the- effects, 'under different-proprietors, kmdred'dausesj'it accidfentj'fráud-, time.; 6r or other is a appropriate oa's.e tqequity. commission; ,An .i's-direéíe.d, awarded; issue at law of boundary “or,-if a. thecourtare- .either; they decree and. without whati the-boundary satisfied where of a farm, a ma- ¿fid a-state, nor, province,.or is shall be: ¿either is of law'or position,-that There reason "for authority be- boundary any nature-, is, in states its p tween political question nations than'.any more b,e subject on they may -other contend. .can settled None without war or .treaty p'ower; political but,-under which-is and new confederacy, old ¿ apd could he -settled can court' constituted by themselves-, as tneir owp' jo substitute^, ¿lope authorized do that'for-states, Whibh stated do could before. proceed been' that- this It has Court- contended cannot in causé this without some prescribed process appropriate decision case;-, rule but no oh Question arise on these process pleadings; can hone' necéssary, as now the defendant plfead,. appeared plea in itself makes point cause, first proceeding; is,'whether additional without plea shall-be allowed, if law, b¿r to.'bar complaint, sufficient overruled, as not being or'.be .a law. thoughtrue fact. which,holds presume cannot Court any. This prerogative rights state for -the citizens', of its good by the constitution has agieed that those of áhy- other' oWn, shall rights, enjoy privileges, state in each as jts do,, immunities would wrong, do or deny right either to a sister state or its citizens, or refuse to submit TERM,' 1838. island v.- State Rhode Court; pursuant its delegated authority; those decrees rendered own monarchy,¡ declares that in a' its law such decree when execiites fundamental itself .thp opinion, Ohnstead, expressed legislature^ its that if In case'of States, thereby courts of may judgments rights annul of-the United natiop. .' mockery, deprived a-solemn acquired, becomes constitution ' by its 'SÓfatal a result enforcing own must-be of the means 6f laws tribunal'. all; statp-must people every deep'interest feel a- in’resist- deprecated and the Unión, consequences and iii so principle's averting ing so' fatal' destructive themselves;' 1832,’ ON the 16th March, .by Rhode Island, state-of so- Ma$Sachusetts,;for a bill the state licitor, filed settlement against states; two for-a moved (cid:127)of the. sübpeehá cases; to1the similar issued,, practice to be according under term; held adv'sement until'the was following (cid:127).This motion ' March, bn was issued the.2d subpoena and k. awarded returned with was 30th July,'1833;, service This.subp'oeija- Mp. 1834, the Webster January, on-the .appearance 18th on' defendants;, and, motion, his- was con for entered' oause with, answer, Of demur. to plea,. tinued leáve filed- and answer Mr.' 1'2'th by January, 1.835, plea "On the -was (cid:127) Í836, 22d Webster;--and on the February, á'greément of ofvcoun- by was'.Qrdered' the file á the sel; complainant, replica- gf from the'defendant, within months the-last to the answer ron, six shall 1836,-or that the cause tefm, stand’dismissed.-(cid:127) January day.of 1836; 18th of on- the- filed August, a’replication, complainant' The' “ a notice for time;- of’intention same move at and .the thé to withdraw the. replication., upon ground leave rule" into mistake.n -and entered agreed same requiring'the set,-forth, - original .by complainants, The bill filed charter November, 1621, James the by King third of .day on'.the grantéd and First, ruling, ordering planting, council-at. Plymouth, the limits New describing and England;,in-America, governing ' conveyance so. grant territory granted. boundaries Sir 1628, to March, l9tb*of óf- the Henry at council Plymouth; thé o'f described same; land others, of a tract in and Rosewell certain aforesaid, which America, of New liés that part England, all “ Mononiack,. called there, commonly extends between a river and great other, Charles river, river, there Mérrimae, called and. alias certain Massa-r pommonly the bottom of a there called bay, certain being Máttachusetts, and, also, all arid Massatusetts, bay; chuseft's, alias alias COURT.. SUPREME- bf, of [Tha-State Rhode.Island-v. lands, whatsoever, hereditaments; those and within tlie lying singular south, of the said of three miles Charles th,e part space English also, and, all river,, or of thereof: and ány part singular every, hereditaments, whatsoever, and lands within and'being lying the- - of of three the southward miles the -southernmost English space ,tlie Massachusetts, Mattachüsetts, said called of alias part alias bay, thosedapds and, also, hereditaments, and what-. Massatusetts bay; all 'soever, lie and miles' within .three space to. English river, Monomac-k, Merrimac, called the said alias the Northward thereof, arid all' every or to northward part and. lands whatsoever, hereditaments; aforesaid; within limits north lying «arid breadth, latitude and -and and south-in length longitude paain there, the-breadth aforesaid, lands within throughout western sea and ocean -tothe from Atlantic east part, Sputh on the west The letters o'f confirmation,'and part.” patent sea 1629,,to th First, March, Charles Sir Rose- Hgpry grant lands others, for the included charter of Janies: well in-the ¿nd of the council at the deed First; Plymouth, them name' ¿nd of Mattachustetts in New Company “The-Governor Bay the said letters patent. incorporated England,”' - of June, '1635, stated on’ the 7th -bill further day -'The at colony Plymouth-for governing established planting'a council America, surrendered the yielded up charter England, New. First, First; to Charles the which surrender was duly James That after form letters-patent, accepted. granting t,o fórth; the] letters prior- patent granting,

before .set in the bill to the Island and’ set forth colony afterwards Plantatibns, the tract land the limits' within comprised Providence had been Plantations, of Rhode the' state Prbvidénce settled, awith considerable population emigration, colonized and. Massachusetts, and the colony-of England bay; principally same, had the who and-settled persons and so.colonized ¿nd and consent of were seised possessed-by purchase the'Indian roads, lands, islands, harbours within rivers, of certain natives, and Sécond, Thát on 16.63, tract. the 8th the' July, .said King-Charles William charter of. patent, granted incorporation-to by letters “ Breriton, John The others, the.riame Gover- by Coddington and ¿nfi Pro- of. Company Rhode'Island'arid English Colony nor America;” Plantations New England, granted vidence “ all that the letters by conferred corporation, part patent, TERM, of Rhode State Island our Unionsin New N America, dorr England, containing alian- -and tick álias Nanhyga'nsett, Narragansett, bay, 'countries on the west bounded the. middle dr -adjacent, or-westerly parts channel, there, a river and known commonly called name river; of-PawcatuCk, alias'PaweawtUek, and so the said river along lies, as -the or middle or stream thereof rea'cheth into the greater up thereof; Unto the head and from north.country, .thence, northward drawn north, -line due with Uiitil meets line south straight of the Massachusetts and on or colony; northerly .by the. north south line of the or aforesaid Massachusetts southerly or colony plan- tation; and. east towards the three extending eastwardly English miles, to east and north-east of the most eastern and north-eastern aforesaid said 'Or- as''the parts bay, Narragansett bajr exr lieth from the' ocean on the tendeth itself south or unto the southwardly, mouth-of which runneth town of -Providence; river towards the and from side river, said along eastwardly thence bank- called the name called up falls ('higher river) .of Seacunek. n Patuckett falls, the most westwardly Plymouth line being colony; falls, and- so from- the said line in.a due meet straight north.until aforesaid line of the and boilnded oh with-the Massachusetts'colony; And, in the lands by-the-ocean.; particular, belonging .south Pawtuxet, of Providence, Warwick, alias Nisquammaco.ck, town Pawcatuck,. and the rest the-main land in the tract aforesaid,- upon rest, with, Block, Island, Island, and'all together islands and banks in the bay, and'bordering Narragansett. the tract aforesaid, (Fisher excepted,) only together

coa?t all-firm'lands, havens, rivers, waters, with fish- soil?,-grounds, ports; mines mines, minerals, other stones, ings,- royal, precious and all." (cid:127) woods, and all rocks, slates, quarries, singular wood grounds, other franchises, commpdities, royalties, jurisdictions, privileges.,- pre- heminences, whatsoever, .hereditaments, tract, said within bounds, lands,, aforesaid, them, islands, or to dr of them, be- and. or in-anywise

longing appertaining.” -tóstate'the bill.'proceeds char- cancelling vacating ter to The Governor and Massachusetts New bay Company on a facias; scire and afterwards the of the same England,” regrant with territories known name of territory, colony of Massachusetts New colony Plymouth, province Bay Queen of Maine, &c., William the 7th dl King Mary, on. supreme court.

m2 State of Rhode Island v. State Massachusetts. J then far- 'October, territory Tbe so description granted; 1691.' n the’following: case, iri this same important “ America; and All that England, lying extending part New n Monomack, alias-Merriniact; river commonly'cálled great from-the said'flyer and northward of the the north part, on miles from.-three Atlantic, or on the and all the western ocean south-part, sea’or fo-thé lands, and-hereditaments, whatsoever, limits within'thé afore- lying far -as or- said,' and-extending points promontories outermost .called, south, and Malabar, Cod north- and.' Cape Cape land arid- and- and within breadth, and latitude, length, longitude all.the aforesaid, there,,from and breadth’ compass throughout the’-mainland the-east, and or western sea ocean Atlantic part; said -towards Island, westward, as far-as our' colonies of Rhode sea, or- South And,.aláo, all .that Connecticut, Country.- part and-the Narragansett land; main at the Piscataway entrance .of beginning portion nnfi -Newichwannock, so to same into ’harbour, and river up pasa into, thereof, the' furthest head, the same from thence and’through and finished,- till one hundred '.and arid northwestward, twenty miles ,harbour mouth; -the aforesaid,-riorth-eastward, Piscataway along from -from of one tó hundred period coast Sagádého’ek,.'and sea ,to cross miles,'aforesaid, over larid one hundred' twentv ,’the- into land Piscataway up- miles twenty before.reckoned 'river; also-the 'Newichwannock arid harbour, north through half Isles, Nan- Shoals, with Isles-of tpgethen C'apáwock aforesaid; and’ also the -lands ánd' heredita- túckett, neat tíód Cape- iri the and being coütítry.or-territory commonly-called' ments lying, Nova.Scotia;' and'all.thosé lands arid-hereditaments.lying Accada-or Scotia, between the said or country Nova territory extending river thereof.” Sagadehock, any part -the-said' and- ’ ahd the that/the -Mássaehusétts Thé bill’ province colony Island; Plantation's, established, and' thus con- Providence of Rhode letters, when, 4, 1776, patent July until. under linued charters colonies became -The'bill states. independent sister with their line, letters char- the.dividing boundary patent under alleges arid Rhode ter Island colony to.the' Providence.Plantations line'drawn, east Massachusetts, been three to have “a Eng- and'.west river, or ofany miles every, lish south .of.the’rivér’called-Chárl'es for.some charter That after years granting part thereof-”’. iji included Massa- Island, lands colony adjoining (cid:127).to \yere little-value; and-uncultivated, chusetts; remained wild :.TERM',. The State island Statp of. Rhode TThe of Rhode entered that previous: inhabitants said northern land and that'the of-the improvements; made parts dis- or established, been defined settled, :line never having the of the and arose between province controversies inhabitants pute^ of,.the and Massachusetts of of Island and the Rhode colony Bay of said Plantations, and the between the Providence governments of and said colony. colony, relation province boundary, to state, consequence The bill that in Of. various disputes proceeds nu- colonies, about two controversies the the and which, of same; merous efforts were to settle made and adjust yvere bill of a result to productive satisfactory alleges, as Plantations; of Rhode Island and and'to colony Providence the state Island, off afterwards established. Rhode ; set forth in

These the bill are'particularly proceedings and large of Rhode .and at legislatures Island giyen-, Massachusetts-are. same,, with the and operations commissioners appointed thereof.- After the' efforts acting the-authority under made stating states,' both and after became indepen- they. two colonies whilst dent.states, line, to 1.791: to determination up alleged been state; to súecess; and-without proceeds have i{ the bill abortive or about of our one thousand hundred That'on Lord year seven ñipe, and othér were 'said appointed state commissioners Providence and the said Plantations state Rhode-Islahd and Mas- sachusetts, for -the and the said purpose settling northr ascertaining ern ofthe- said Providence, line and Island Planta- tions'; that- the said lase commissioners con- respectively, mentioned such until of- thé our tinued Lord one year commissioners thousand -hundred and seven and that the said la-ut eighteen; mentioned coni?

missioners had reveral but were never meetings, able to-agree upon settle, and settle, and never did Upon said line agree northern of. the said state of Rhode Island and Plantations.” Providence The bill asserts the of Rhode right iii territory dis- same, pute.; that Massachusetts inis possession, exercises and asserts sovereignty same, over under tine ,the. or-charters, same was included in the pretences grants, -crown belief that'the England, under line, three mistaken miles south o'f Charles river, (a.station been having by-Nathan- fixed WoodwQrd iel and Solomon as the three miles Saffrey, point south river,) runs where Massachusetts has actually, .Charles assumed it line, is; run; that the alleging claimed, been always Ras COURT; SUPREME The State of Rhide. Island v. State:of Massachusetts, the commis- was settled ádjusted by claimed by authority parties under respectively. sioners acting errors show the proceedings com- bill proceeds to. colonies; mark, “That no for the .two missioners acting mpnument existed, which the place at stake or .time Woodwprd set were so have Saffrey, alleged aforesaid said That who exe- stake, then ascertained. the persons could up the said did and consented to cuted, pretended agreement, witnessed where them, either of said stake or pot, any place did'any go nor did or any set nor either was they, up; .alleged or. been made, or or run make cause them, any any survey, survey any line, cause, take lines, run, or lines to be or or line any any or at what if the said stake'was ascertain place, any, means setup which the said Woodword and nor whether the Saffrey; place said been was as aforesaid to have set said stake up alleged Wood- miles, .more, and no south fact three Saffrey, word English river, thereof; Charles every part river'-called line, said nor whether the ssid pretended agreement alleged haye was the Woodword and in fact fun said ever Saffrey, by .been and line Woodword nor said run said by pretended whether Saffrey; the true and line between said province proper, boundary .was the of Rhode north, and the said colony the Massachusetts on Bay south, to'the Island'and Plantations on the according Providence in the true contained respective, intent'ánd meaning grants charters or letters aforesaid.” patent that,'the bill under the asserts, and run line agree- designated and ments, Island; has been while resisted always colony, Rhode than state; since and that no She other boundary became soyereign Massachusetts, that in. the bill between and Rhode asserted Island defined, than that and established in and by respective granted thee forth, ánd aforesaid herein before set accord- letters patent .charters thereof, to the fair construction ever been consent- true ding and to, Or to be the true line ed admitted boundary complainants; or since she while royal either she government, continued'under state.- The of. became and an independent sovereign proceedings exer- with and are Massachusetts prevent “.interfere alleged of that law which, cise and sovereignty .of jurisdiction ánd- the-Union, land she is entitled to the constitution of exercise land, charter over the whole-tract of and mentioned described Pro- or letters of Rhode Island and patent colony said granted TERM, State of-"Rhode Islands. "State yidenCe Plantatións, citi-; and hereinbefore set forth, and .over thereof, Zens and to her claim in this her bill according inhabitants made.” s have; asks, The bill that inasmuch no satisfac- complainants “ on common law side 'of the tory especially relief concerns and Controversy questions jurisdiction sovereignty,” the commonwealth of Massachusetts answer the set forth in matters bill; and -that “the northern line between 'the com- boundary and plainants the state of Massachusetts the order and de- may,'by cree of this Coürt, established; honourable be and ascertained'and that the rights jurisdiction sovereignty complainants to the -land, mentioned, whole tract- of with the de- appurtenances scribed and said charter letters granted patent said Plantations, hereinbefore colony Providence Island Rhode set forth, and. north, east and west line drawn running an three miles south of the waters .'said Charlés or"of' river, thereof, every part and confirmed to be may complain- restored ants, and the free full and complainants, may quieted enjoy- ment of her the-same; over sovereignty' .and title, said jurisdiction-and of Rhode sovereignty state over, and Providence and esta- the same be confirmed Plantations blished, .Court; may the decree of the the complainants such and- further relief in the as to ‘the’ premises, shall-'seem with consistent conscience.” good meet equity ' Massachusetts, “The Plea Answer the commonwealth of of. bill Of of. Island,”

the- alleges, complaint 1642,'for the boundary,line the frue southern purpose ascertaining at Massachusetts, Of a station Or fixed monument erected south of true river, taken and-believed to point Charles which monu- Massachusetts; and real line of the colony notorious, and and ment has been and ever well known became since sta- was and word and Saffrey’s then ever’since has been Wood called station, and tion, iWrentham of after the said Plains: fixing and of the char- aforesaid, after of the line and after the running granting of station Island, of Rhode north said and all the while territory ter over the and line was and claimed, held, and possessed, jurisdiction Massachusetts, df her and own same exercised by parcel enjoyed arisen about the territory, 1709,. controversy having year dispute line. two the said between governments respecting Von. P XII. —4 COURT. SUPREME of State Rhqde.Island Island and were, of-Rhode by goyernmenfc appointed,

persons .Massachusetts, settle'the misunderstanding government colonies; and what between the persons appointed the line about should, tó be be forever-after'taken and deemed agree upon,-should bounds, 'up-in so drawn the stated-lines .as the-agreement .be seals, hands arid within six months indented, under.their writing, as aforesaid. the commissioners 19th .afterwards, January, on the That “añ and entered into met, agreement colonies by the

appointed and the colony line colony betwixt Massachusetts the partition “ That stake Island,’’ declared: it set .Rhode .of skilful Woodword and Solomon Saffrey,' approved Nathaniel -Up six artists, Lord one thousand hundred forty- in the year- our of' renewed, latitude de-' forty-one in the two; since-that often distant mihutes, three miles south- being English fifty-five grees-and river, Charles -called ward river part southernmost for the Massachusetts the letters' province, patent agreeable-to allowed, sides, on both commencement the.line accompted and, Island, the' and to Rhode between -the Massachusetts colony two in such .manner said continqed -betwixt the governments that, said two after it -the governments, proceeded house; Bissell’s as is de- river, at or.near over-Connecticut may pass line, tract of Woodword thé ánd Nathaniel p'lap cypher'ed and Solomon Saffrey.”- there-had been error in on'

By presumption agreement, station, had' been within the -line certain made survéys up setting ascertained, there Massachusetts, thus it. stipulated .should “be and remain unto the of. -town inhabitants said Providence.and Plantations, a government Providence breadth, northward of tract of .land of mile certain one line of described'and platted, said and'Saffrey,-as Woodword before at Pautucket, so proceed from "the river beginning great breadth, until come line, north side of the said equal patent ^providence line, the said patent to the line cuts where place west less; more or acr.es, be the samé contain supposed thousand .five Providence, soil- be, to-the .town whereof and. remain shall to, be made thereof go- others,.according.to'the disposition -Nevertheless, to continue Rhode Island aforesaid. an.d vernment of her majesty’s thé pro- remain ithin government if in this .'ceof agreement Massachusetts Bay, ány thing vi' thereof, so, notwithstanding.” contrary seemingly is'38; TERM, of State of island The' State Rhode {The other for the

The'agreement'contained provisions preservation the line, and for. the the surveys made the inhabit- ascertaining- by same; ants Providence‘within the so-that'they proceed- might- improvement-thereof. with' the settlement and was

This executed the bauds and the agreement under seals’of commissioners; :ancLwas- on witnessed by persons two part colonies.'

The and answer that the-whole of the real and true plea alleges, merits cause of the.-complainants’ heard, supposed were.fully action tried, and and judgment com- agreement determined missioners; that the same-was matters in a'full-settlement controversy, and was.madfe and the station so fixed good-faith; established,, became capa- matter common notoriety, the,line ble of. known and being always ascertained. n that, and- answer further afterwards, plea about 18th, 1717,.'to June. the line be- settling complete running the twd tween of. governments, Massachusetts- general assembly commissioners, order to meet passed appointing .an commissioners line; -to be Rhode Island to run appointed by according 19th, January Certain agreement-of proceedings took to'the part Massachusetts place, preparatory procéed-ings commissioners; June, and on 17th as- general Island, colony Rhode .and Providence sembly Plantations act, ah on the Island, 'passed commissioners Rhode appointing part-of line with the the.boundary commissioners th.e-final-settlement On or 'about the named-and Massachusetts. appointed 22d October, 1718, the- and then met, commissioners made an agreement, sealed, executed, them, which was delivered signed, stipulated declared : .“That the Nathaniel stake.set-up Woodword Solomon in the one thousand six year hun- Safirey, Wrentham-Plain, dred1 be the station or com- forty-two, -to the line shall which- divide between mencement two begin aforesaid, from which said stake the dividing line'shall governments run,,so it- two miles a half may (at river) Connecticut ase ..be the southward of line, .a due west variation com- allowing to be'ninfe line forever be'and pass said shall remain degrees, to be said- line' and dividing governments, demand, or difference, claim, former what- controversy, challenge soever And on of the said twenty-ninth day notwithstanding.” aforesaid, October last of the said assembly colony general SUPREME COURT. Massachusetts.], y. State-of of Rhode Island [The State Providence Plantations agreement'of accepted commissioners, same duly.-recorded; the said and.caused be. and confirmed ratified thereby

and' same.. in'; faith, done with a The answer was and avers that'all good all the circumstances the'respective full-and by equal knowledge'of ,faever rescinded, or annulled, arid that same has been parties; abandoned; was in of the the last agrees and agreement pursuance- 1.719, Afterwards, on the 14th the commis- May., of irient 1709... Island, Rhode of and: on the re- signed

sioners Massachusetts part of return, their designa- and proceedings,-uhd'er statement port, and em- Subscribers, the committee of “The of being tion appointed of Bay of the province Massachusetts powered governments ,of Plantations;, Rhode Island and Providence and for colony- line the said stat- and west east governments;” settling the stake Nathaniel Woodword and Solo- 'met at of that they-had ing heaps line, had run the Plain, and placing on.WrentKam

mori'Saffrey, same. and trees stones designate .marking .of return, the said defendant further alleges report, —“That .afterwárds, qr that is to about the sixteenth say, statement one of bur Lord thousand Juné, seven hundred in the year Ray nineteen, the' the said assembly colony and general approved Plantations;” and the defendant Rhode Providence álr and of the 'to date said the- that from the present-time, agreements .leges, of Massachusetts has á possessed the said commonwealth mb-enjoyed over, the, same, exercised and all north territory, jurisdiction of-Octobér, 1718, the said the-said agreements prescribed line,;'as' and’ the said molestation; hindrance defendant without avers said both the- by. parties points beginning agreed -that the stakeor station the said Wood- setup by viz': said agreement, line therefrom river, arid the run Connecticut word .Sarfrey, and are well then-were, been, an'd still known noto- since'have ever and- rions; line fixed .said whole agreement oecp-, qertain; said-defendant definite,-and and has jireeise, and exercised enjoyed sovereignty jurisdiction', rights inéd'ánd tq tripe. same, from the thereof to date thé'present "according 1710; of 19th- -The January, pleads agreement defendant qf 22d thereof, Octo- confirmation agreeihept pursuance date; ber,-1717; áhd unmolested same from under possession in'bar tKe whole'bill complainants: prays judgment accordingly.' TERM, State of .The-State Island v. of.-Massachusetts.]

' The aver, answer stated wfere plea agreements further made entered into with full circumstances" knowledge .all that the same were-a-valid effectual parties; both and" settlement inatters were ir-to with- controversy;-and entered made out fraud or and the has station settled-there been misrepresentation: notorious, known, and the been line run always therefrom- its marks memorials discerned renewed. capable, being

'.Mr, Webster, Massachusetts, for tne state of counsel moved dismiss the Island, .the state o'n of. Rhode-. bill-filed the. ground the", that the Court had causé. Austin,

-The-motion was Mr. argued by .attorney general Webster, the state Massachusetts, Mr. on the and by part of Massachusetts; Southard, and Mr.-Hazard and Mr. the state of Rhode Island. Austin,

Mr. in of the motion: support" Court,, This is "action bill on the the an of side by equity instituted Massachusetts; of state,of thé state Rhode Island the by against ,asserts The. the of claim Rhode Island to bill jurisdiction and of over a therein territory, sovereignty portion particularly described. described, so and territory, comprises eighty one.hun- miles, of.

dred square part being six'townships, incorporated .under the laws -a Massachusetts, of with of about population five thousand state; at citizens of that and not present less than five hun- persons, dollars of dred thousand taxable But bill "no makes property." It claim soil. does not seek to disturb right the. title of land, whose possessors ancestors present derived probably title from the of the grants- early their- Massachu- government, setts. admits that the and which it sovereignty jurisdiction Seeks’ is, now "and heretofore, from the first acquire, always, settlement have, fact, country, been and -point possessed, enjoyed first, tjue aftérwards colony, Massachusetts, province and Massachusetts, then the state of at declaration of Ameri- can at the independence; constitution United adoption States, and time; avers uninteruptedly present over which are territory and now jurisdiction demanded sovereignty for Island, Rhode was not within included an- cient but was colony Massachusetts, contained in «70 SUPREME COURT.- of Rhode Island.v. The State-of Massachusetts.] by thé Island, óf established limits of as

description Rhode Second, Great made' to' colony Charles .of .eharteh her a.

Britain, charter, of. that force 16.63and.by now’rightfully ought be- usurped bütthat Massachusetts to. enjoyed by wrongfully her:' claimed,-and sovereignty over jurisdiction .territory-thus, it,'and now without possesses always-possessed right, Court,-that the northern therefore-asks-of-this .The'-complainant -of Massachu- and the state b’oundary-line complainánt hetween be Court,- honourable setts,. order and decree may,' by and-, that the established, jurisdietipn rights ascertained confirmed;to and- restored of. your complainant,- maybe Sovereignty ¡lull and-' may quieted-in your complainant the.complainant; and-, over the and frée: .her .jurisdiction enjoyment, sovereignty (cid:127) “ sáid hñd same; title, and the' sovereignty ánd; of tbis the- confirmed established decree may'have and that your-complainánt honourable such Court shall relief in the honourable and further premises, and- and consistent with conscience.”' meet, good' seem equity bill, it a commission- -of the .'that Among allegations appears colonies, of thé line between the two partition for the estáblrshm'ent thereof;, thé. ¡respective-focalgovernments was appointed commissioners, 1710-11; and esta- January,. agreed is, Known, had now and- line, as-it been always before blished. established,

possessed But the seeks various complainant enumerated, to set the bill aside are in this .'agreement causes which commissioners, as null void. dication adjv bar, to the complainant’s has filed a special plea The respondent award, arbitration, made settlement demand, grounded -a commissioners'; uninterrupted- poáses- constant-and by those more, -in full answered all 'and- has than- a eentury': it fon sion under this' award. seeks to vacate which the- complainant the allegations been -the of have pleasure well- would hoped And respondent thé of ancient the merits and effect to discussed this have an order this counsel, under her but when learned adjudication; a filed replication, plea, general to. answer the respondent’s .Court' to -to of an intention move with-notice the same they accompanied since, a intimated- desire change same; and withdraw there would be To this bill-itself. thé amend tenor-of and the trouble -delay, inconvenience no: objection TERM,; 1836. Tlje of Rhode Island v. State .Massachusetts.] so, a extensive To open, .operation. litigation keeping, bring a issue, the whole Massachusetts speedier presents matter only a of her defence. single point A is now made -to for Want -dismiss bill] motion jurisdiction.

n In the' United States, 3d establishing arti- government'of constitution,'and cle of- the second section, provides that the judicial extend-, all in law and shall cases power this equity -arising under constitution, States, the- laws United and treaties made, or. be,

which shall made under to all cases authority; am- affecting consuls; ministers and bassadors, other to all cases of public- admi- and maritime controversies which ralty jurisdiction,; United' ' shall he a States controversies- between party;, two or more States, &c.; all cases ambassadors,-other affecting public iu ministers- consuls, those in state shall be party, Supreme- Court shalkhave'original jurisdiction.’ o,f

Whether suit is the' subject present controversy betwqen constitution; and-whether, within the if it meaning is considered,.a so necessary law exercise of congress judi- to.the Court in the -whether, cial premisesand this if -such law power sufficient action has been had any be-necessary, au- congress which, arc thorize under questions, judicial motion, proceedings, to be examined and decided. are motion to the bill, dismiss it is support contended,

In has' suit: over jurisdiction present n 1. Because of the character respondent, independent of the .. of the suit. nature suit, of-the nature of the Because independent character

of the respondent.

If the first these can .maintained, he propositions is, the result law,’this in the state of present Court-cannot entertain-juris- Union, of this diction over for cause. If bemay doubtful, and second established; will-result in proposition of this this, suit, that the matter subject being sovereignty and ,a beyohd court. sovereign-rights, „of To a court the United the-jurisdiction every case; Status 1st, two nust circumstances concur. or the party, subject n the must suit, be one to-which of .the judicial power government extends, constitution; and, as that is'defined 2dly^ must There be some'rule decision- established by the supreme. COURT. SUPREME ' n ,. of Rhode'Island Massachusetts:] The.State the, the administration rif country, by right

power be; determined. the matter controversy'may the parties n States dries -not inherit- conde by United The-government this is it. ance, power. respect, succéssion into- judicial In from other sill .known.-in history essentially different governments n .or á nation has established colony; been by the world. Where foundation there Wasa of' parent institutions .conquest, by should victors, whiteh its establishments state," municipal remained, own if It had .Its domestic placed. arrangements, be -any, with, Such was case until by paramount authority. changed Union, be when ceased colonies. states Thegrivern- of'this States is á new with the ment government, beginning .the-United the confederation'was its constitution. there Although prototype, or; was no no national federal géñeral government/and certairily. .' the constitution formed one.

judiciary,-until had. United States may, therefore, all,' exercise The'government con-, the-, than all the no moré but judicial power'..provided by stituiion/ third, , article contains declaration of The instrument and, Of extent power. existence new causes, and ascertains ac- parties/the' -It judicial- the.courts-for the; extent, it certain To a establishes and; tion. rulé decision; branch this- of. into the inquiry perhaps, particular case, Court in how far

'rif the depend- will- ascertaining bf"decision, because, the constitution; is carried if the rule party rulé for merits controversy, deciding "the are, constitution, this-Court; -there can given-to controversy to its action this particular. be impediment no' words admitted, constitution the express

It is the United States extends to .controversies between judicial therefore, be within the states. party, may opera- two or more in case controversy contem- such power; tion of more exists with one or states. the constitution plated all extend controversies? the term Does .controversies observed, word prefixed that.the It Is to “all/’ omitted. The extends cases, is here judicial power classes all cases' under the, United the laws of under cases States; to all ambassadors, &c.; all &c.; cases of made, 'cases affecting treatiés its. admiralty phraseology-is changed, maritime .jurisdiction: of the word limited the omission the universality “all/’ 'and TERM, 1838. Rhode;]stand v'. Stateof Stateof UfasB^chuketta.] [The- to'controversies relates tó'which UnitecbStates shall when two or and to between more státéS. á ju- controversies party, does,not controversies,!» then, dicial reach..to power, all'possible United, twp shall be a of which States party* the between more states.- - are are- those are the which limitations.? The made What fir?t the, tribunal;' of the the and'are terms included character judi-

cial .“ law which power; and-the words the- precede, bquity,” of of subject, judicial-cognizance. enunieration .. matters constitution, a Alttiough'the government was new by the formed custom; succession or government, nothing by took men. to

who1framed the an educated constitution were intimate. acquaint- anee with the whose were; to laws judicial England;, institutions of our'own, foundation -.the a.great degree, whose .language^ used, relation, when them this to aNave mttst deemed teeh-.

nical meaning..

A means,'therefore, a to power and' judicial power interpret, -.to make laws; ancf “law and equity,’’, reference terms tp , bfi the complicated code. extensive, mother but not cotiptry;' universal, and limited in its operation decisions. by Well.settled limitation,

A. on the broad of. the is grant, necessarily-im- tefms. branches plied power. judicial, power extends shall be a controversies States which United party,.and a', between state and states; it-would be foreign manifestly ab- surd, to bring political disputes nullification, aboli- day,( slaye.ry; controversies are to arise be- .which beginning tion* states them; to decision concerning tween trial in a of jury court law. It submitted, between,-.state? also, that must be controversies limited, to those which the states in that begin .with capacity,'-and does not extend controversies between antiquated existing colonies, to which the states not'have may succeeded,- may ac- to circumstances, cording court can have means judicial to ascertain.

But the mode of proper this article of the considering, constitution, in -relation to the take is' to judicial power, constitution as a whole,, and keep constantly mind grand' design intention framer?; of. it as always its. regarding unique, original, consist- ent with itself. -The' of its framers grand establish object was government ..common states, sovereign have.that- .to sove* Q VoU.nXII. —4 COUHT., SUPREME Island'v.-The State [Tjie .State Rhode whereyerit could.sp.be left;, without unimpaired, impairing r.eignty (cid:127) United Union. power The-judicial government' States, case, in this of 'the view- all. or .any part power, exercise, States United. might through .government to be established. -which department

appropriate or, such, more ..It extends controversies two -of within the decision law precise are properly equity, pf states,'in between the virtue terms, those sense.of arising ánd state,»; with be-proceeded decided.aócording relation judicial and the doc- forms established customary, proceedings', state, laws. Every acknowledged trines known and virtue-of. state,, virtue of citizen 'his and-every al- every sovereignty, stands, the' state, absolved th'e -to such

legiance States; United until of'the government- so; into much States, .power United putting operation judicial of. for as is or- constitution the,purpose; by necessary granted decision, directfed a the rules thé forms court, established ganized of hot for-its cognizance; of-its process-, designated subjects n it these to respects; power- assigned by exceeding, itself. constitution the, no intercourse If, therefore, there’ is law between regulating (cid:127) there, a no is for thé,Union;

the states of- settling controversy rule states,- two more by, that between may reason suclrinter.- arise a J then made should- be law course.' admitted could R one sue intercourse of might státé binding another this-Court, a exists, for a breach of until law suchlaw; such yet, , state, character, no a bécause 'the jurisdiction, having can‘.entertain above is-not amenable' to orfoeyonfi.the any superior;- existing.,law cannot-.settle,a Court lawno expound, having judicial do; as all such controversy, on.the-question depending, controversies the- of, whether conduct the- has, ih case' complained' presented,, con- to, or which'are departed by imposed from obligations formed law..

The then, doctrine, out this next to be are which, carry positions are:, established, of this Court .’inany particular case, on some depends for exercise adequate legislative provision its under .the -and that-in powers secondly,, point constitution: no now fact, law is on a state of force operates juuicially which.

thi» Union. twp.

A contended, it is is legislative provision, necessary, pur- regulate the- first, the form thé citation poses; process TERM, v. The State of of Rhode'.Island [The.'State last, execution, without which is a mere judicial'action judgment rule case, to establish the law mockery.; secondly, fhe is to be action conduct which the .tried. ligitants which, material, In as the most be' first con- last, to -the' may regard that, doubt can to the sidered, it exist as necessity supposed such'law, as action. judicial Judges.are pre-requisite to.expound ' (cid:127) it; is, does law, then only pertinent question not make- act law this regu- can,recognise, any-existing ? late the states of. Union intercourse established, It is is that when a nation supposed becomes (cid:127) is, fit

revolution or a member of the of nations, family otherwise law, facto, of international But under'the not ipso only operation nation, does the law international apply doctrine of but the law itself is states our not the confederacy; subject tribunals, administration coirimu- when operates judicial counsellors; nities. are its Ambassadors the ultima argument, ratio If law international are made regum. principles appli- cable to forum, judicial bécause-'the'municipal individuals law of the place has the international law as incorporated apart'of itself, and administers it the force of domestic legislation. itself establish a rule of decision.' It does so may

constitution of-treaties, the-case which are declared to Be the law of the supreme land;.and it own shall be provides'that-its provisions binding in all the slates. Whatever difficulties be found in might judges administration the constitution or between indi- treaty,, them,- under without vidual the aid of a law litigants claiming rights be done without case; congress; they may away touching because claimed the constitution or nothing any treaty States to case, United show the-claimant the'right present the bind to course of respondent action. any prescribed' The .establish, of of necessity law. direct enact- by congress ment, or hy States, code the United has implication, ad- been mitted this Court. 'Hunter, 1 Wheat. 329. And Mait.in it.is in Court, in supposed by case, that that con- giving opinion was bound to in. its courts all the gress vest judicial power government. has it hás not because

Congress judged differently, appropriated all the But judicial power here, is question government. omission,

not-whether whether, is in the ain congress wrong clear case of omission, this or court of United States can 676 SUPREME COURT.: of RhodeIsland-v..The

[TJie'State Stateof-Massachusetts.] In a defect.: supply early this period, history very_ were, Court, it was statés, like that-the amena-' supposed' ¡individuals, ble to its that it in jurisdiction,; was impression intimated under- sustained., argument, by. majority of'the and'-seemingly that the moment a Court formed, is it is Supreme all exercise constitution,.whether in vested powers it-by .judicial legisla- for, ture so nob- Chisholmé’s prescribed; methods- or: its--doing j 419;. Exr’s v. Georgia, Dali. The-State.of Con'd. Rep..6; unanimous.;' The the-Court not Iredell’s opinion and. Judge of, ijLh become, amendment opinion dissenting article of constitution, It to be observed, is the.better this- authority. that the text re- mot-change constitution,, amendment does Of-the' That the same.- declares liCialpower, .amendment <ju mains to case,..which, deémed to not be extend shall .construction.- in thé abové .case beeri the Court It made reach. is-fur- had that all the remarked, subsequent ther this proceedings,of have, defendants, in hive they -pro-, states' ¡regard asi far. to. case. But the- overruled needed, been fastened case being, ain than even mode th'is august.Court, perfectly' higher tribunal rió that.no.-.dictum, and in principle submitted promulgated is legal,,it law. authority it,'can Have.the a code' the-. laws.tor necessity-of government judiciál .This, one. has attempted to'establish apparent, action being congress so, at’all, 'judiciary far ás it -is done done, act-of. laws section, iri the the states-as'a 3.4th This statute adopts, n But ás ho cari they apply. of action-wheré law Massachusetts rule ' this, embrace can mat- respondent particular -Rhode contro- rule prescribed the'present there rio ter, byis section versy. taken, aforesaid, It. has contended statute beeri corifiecv-' itself; a codé mixed and with the tion e&tablishéd' mis- constitution máde the common of Great cellaneous, practice equity up law institutions, our .Britain, sq^vés modified.by particular , basis, a-.certain, so extent,' undoubtedly To action. éxtent it states'; if but to what re- many, is.true o|d is not ánd States, the United has been a debatable question,

gard de' settled.- mitely yet case; because; is .not. settle in thi's. if the.com-: necessary

It here, law-and are in. law chancery operation mon England force, do latitude and not-reach-the respondeat. utmost TERM; 1S33. y.. State, Stateof"RhodeIsland of. The [The Massachusetts.] ; no; common over law takcs the-actions England jurisdiction hold, states; is there in- nor any.-power sovereign chancery a his-coh'sent.. jurisdiction sovereign, over without Union.

Such' is- this respectively, character- of is has 'Noman,w,ho This it not at discuss. proposition intended -to his the constitution can' fail haVe country, all' studied mind side It made on or the other.- is main- up point, the'one state, - American is- .tained’ qualified respondent, eyery law, common and as such there- sovereignty, exempted by (meaning by, from -country,) responsi- ..code judicial judicial '/whole- that a It- is. not contended' not bility/. may constitutionally law .be . is, under ip discussion whether -made reach state. The question ;ató what state. The we law extends .is. present present.law term, distinction, law; and for and- it'is cófnmoji by eminence, On that’ common beyond controversy, law'operates subjects riot and. only,-and* sovereign sovereigns; property; and. rights. Unitpd If otithe States the'constitution goyernmept authorizes a state judicial process judgment, government subject the' of the United necessary-f6r. States pass--the pqrpose. laws may done, is declare is done. But what -not may. what declare reason, short, Che If depart- for any judicial'- has stopped congress,* If it has at same to stand. ment point' brought adopted Court; the; more, can' do no than-the law, and more common nothing extend the common law its- common law. .not warrants. If ..does pan -the Court. over neither sovereignty, fpr is alone a'suit- contended The-doctrine’ which-prévents States a'demand by every United individual against, who' tó-the as. unlimited in. The-.cou?titütipn is United regard dispute. The., ,to controversies extends states.

States'as the to',which And-in the United be a-party. shall the’earlier.' State? same of this it'is- tile thing,

decisions maintained plaintiff whether par.ty designate4.be regards-jurisdiction, con- Massachusetts, instead soliciting defendant. The a suit in claim, of .its for an instituted might gress adjustment levied if .would Court; this- execu- a/judgment, obtained line, or'the arsenals the .country. tion a ship , to -its States, United carried legitimate sovereignty absurdity. it. extravagant Consequences, But. protects SUPREME COURT.. 67S The State State of Island v. when, in'his

Chief Justice case he Jay; opinion Georgia in. rpde over state that the conclusion of admitted sovereignties, logical his on the a the United to liability involved States argument part law. it, however, á at avoids suit by extraordinary He. sug- citizens, that-i£ states or cases individual gestion against national courts are in all their and constitutional supported legal the arm of the Of proceedings by executive judgments power States; the United but in cases of States, actions the United agáinst no is courts can to power case, call there aidGeorgia n What is this but.an of duty fear. through abandonment Dali..478. It would have been to better lord adopt maxim of"the English chief Fiat ruat answer is that justice.1 ccelum. justitia, better action, ,law, it stands,, in a' can bé main- judicial court a tained state or national. That con- whether against sovereignty, authorized, has,'in stitution both to cases, so frame and congress pass that the on the one other; and the judicial power may operate laws but that is until action of the be to any not- judiciary would dpne, the-case, law-of but to make expound one.- But thé United sued. in cases sometimes is States This are.

contract, or -other of action,- similar in which the United causes States, citizens, as a ‘to eitizen-with other cohsents private dealing come a into court Of to submit con- operation justice, struction land. laivs reach -to' laws land The. contract;

contracts.. United States a and when it makes sub- mits, consent, own a suit, to admits- by' expressly, in the decision law of contracts shall to its case. The United apply States makes a and, by constitution, is treaty; the law a-treaty takes, It claims itself land. under that treaty; .land pos- pasted session, law, a suit at spve- cannot virtue .'its But it waives its reignty. and' submits itá under sovereignty, title treaty, commissioners, or to a decision judicial arbitrament in court law.

Have states consented to be sued? Unquestionably the pro- vision of the constitution their consent is what exactly contains; but provision not of consent, but con- inquiry struction.

Massachusetts does not to take herself Outof the propose constitu- tion, or to of its any admits, She withdraw obligations. certain under circumstances has her waive agreed sovereignty, she

apd submit her controversies decision; maintains, that judicial TERM, 1838. .679 State of. y. The before, this, sue can called do court be established, must made, law code suitable to the her propounded, decision character, case; and the forms of process, proceeding, m.ode means it, be first enforcing judgment, legisla- .established States, But tive the United never submitted its' authority. in its its acts

sovereign capacity, rights, sovereign judicial cog- nizance, and can; contended, never by agree- states^ decrees, ment submit controversies to intended never these to include in- controversies -questions sovereign right, Tor ; no law .is made no law ever can be regulation themselves, made other- and each one.-for than itself , alone.

This'view the case fortified 'law .by consideringNthe greatly is. of. to administer. which the this Court This in- desires complainant of case; deed be to the merit's deemed to an'd lt may belong finder, so. But it is an of also examination appropriate'subject does this' the motion One of the of grounds is,; now submitted. motion that law of the .on there'is no these country binding pay- existing ties,- them, "between this Court applicable controversy obvious, can be if administer. would This exceedingly 'com- . bull under the V.,'‘ had his'title Nicholas

plainant Pope presented to-be which he all the countries discovered from. Africa divided by. he VI., which divided India; under in Alexander three-quarters firmas of the et terras Omnes insulas inventus aut" globe: habitable &<?;.

inveniehdus, et detectas detegendas, bill in the isj set claim figspon- judgment forth-in counsel, dent’s equally'extra-judicial Untenable. thus: its claim be

The state Island states By Rhode .of Charles charter to certain by First,'king;of persons Eng- giveh March, 1638, the- land, date 4th colony, bearing of.'Massachusetts south line on the bounded established, by was with territory -the miles, on south Of of three part drawn within Space English or of thereof- river, or of.any every part ‘the said called Charles river That, Second,' on or about 8th Charles a' was charter granted Island, of Rhode which its July, colony establishing these, words: “on north Or. defined northern was in boundary line Massachusetts- southerly south or the aforesaid northerly, by boundaries.,of charters, the two these or Plantation.” Colony By two and conterminous. colonies were adjacent charter of Massachusetts in That of the colony after vacating SUPREME COURT. óf The State of Rhode prtte Massachusetts,] 1691which, 1.684,and the charter so far province .aá. in granting same, concerned, established the this matter conterminous'boundary Massachusetts, 1.719, words; about government the same herself of a-tract-'of land more southerly possessed wrongfully than drawn, be run three miles'south line would a true should.be river, thereof,. called Charles or- river every .part the whole of the north line-of the colony extending length “and apd more than miles in Island, Rhode four miles being twenty length breadth, thereof, rods the east end and more than fifty-six thereof, miles breadth the west five conti- .since at .end to'exércise over the nued same.”'- .wrongfully From other statement,' .is that parts complainant’s apparent true line then place .dividing by bothpar- -the admitted chatter, to be ties it was drawn that- described on a territory Massachusetts claim occupied by province the, location was the place char- right; place designated Massachusetts, of. fas hefas, ter. aut from- possession per time; is admitted- (cid:127) The title Islahd to she is premises,' admitting right in the of the charter, construction and the. from which point drawn, line (in. which,: time, at a will should proper she inis' proved, .-a validity errof,) "depends grant great charter of the an adverse crown,..against possession .British' than more one hundred and next a state by province, years; first Union; of-war, revolution^, through the vicissitudes independence.

If, therefore, charter, title existence, such a ho admitting gives an against adverse if the ^possession"; declaration especially, American and the independence; a -of federal subsequent formation Court, have, be government,,to by judicially-noticed vacated law, or law, on supposed title, which claimant rests and this so that the charter cannot plainly, be but by inquired under, it is constitution bound events by the. subsequent declaration of in all independence, states, because respects' the. were.thereby created;1then, under motion to

states dismiss even (cid:127) for want dismissed., bf. the bill be must jurisdiction, case, Such is' be conceived state of Massachusetts makes claim herself; no admits none for Island, and. by Rhode. or virtue of any .force or from grant,-charter, authority British crown,. Whatever been, have in ancient times, the might validity 1838., TERM, 6.81 Rhode Island State,of [The-State ceased, at the instruments of-.royal they power, these .declaration have any operation .on independence, .American. had contributed to or colodies corporations establish. great Massachusetts, when became a state in the she integrity became so pr her, of her whole as it was whenever by territory, possessed then charter, Or force of treaty, however acquired, by .purchase, grant, her árms, ultimate'evidence claiming _actual possession exists, or human existed, any yet right, there.then denying megns that tribunal what can-lawfully how or by pos- inquire .that obtained'; session was or that' to determine the exists authority any limits, than Union, of an state of the other by way original was,'de facto, whát it determining July, 4th nations, the So far as Great Britain and. regards foreign of the United settled treaty peace exterior'boundary it_.was the thirteen sove- States; tyhat owned by proportions existence, then a adjusted political, reignties, was commencing was.a then.to This matter agreement themselves. adjustment no which,- fact of made, admitting or to rest on possession; assumed from right no proof, capable, higher higher-title, be wise the,,exercise would now .as inquire of the right: and. established, were Great Britain the seven Saxon

how kingdoms, of to decide attempt define héptarchy-,-.as.to or limits' to. Union, fact that a beyond American constitutes what or con- nation independent, proclaimed it was was .when so -the ' -under constitution federacy established the ori- this Court affirming been décisions many There It land, and of British government. validity grants ginal these decisions. with to set any. militating up principle .not proposed distinction them, sup- each of will show examination careful A for. . contended doctrine- now porting titles, .doubt, are, recogniséd well or Discovery conquest land, and deduce, political govern- ab grants origine, terms, the them, very with these titles But carry ment. is the only per- conqueror, The discoverer idea possession. he acquired, so his force of possession in possession;

son title conveys to. out a-territory, marks a government, establishes vacate; cannot contract grantor the soil. The-grant come into has never case doubted, although but was never .it grantee. or abandoned be surrendered that might judgment, established much, so colony .and more But corporation, XII. —4 Von. R COURT. SUPREME of of Rhode Island v. The State [The a, not a of discovery, private, public, political conquest

right institution. ' was crown, it the doctrine that was inviolable maintain by To to-, to them the revolution; but deny .power of the patriots of it, is to bastardize revolution annihilating dissolving, abrogating, did was to cancel and it annul any itself. If the revolution thing, and the same which the charters; by right these royal conquest, to make a obtained political government king England it. states here, right gave destroy case, Wheaton’s im-

In the Dartmouth Reports, only College was, then in whether corporation question, question portant that, former It- was in the corporation. admitted private public That-a was a' case, state. in- by was repealable public colony of a stitution', the character ünden-able. and partaking corporation, .cor-, summoned into Indeed, wTas chancery public Massachusetts rendered to -an- vacate and year judgment poratión, in 1684, hei; revolution, But the declaration nul charter. of indepen- dence, States; the constitution are acts the formation the.United the decree of the lord chancellor. They than authority higher and the colony, itself. .colony dissolved the. government thereafter claimed possesséd new country by people states; weré-assumed the' their'charac- by title. Sovereign rights ter, .communities, Ae claiming public right self-govérnmerit actrial then now possession; the soil territory over Island, before, Rhode whatever was then inwas, fact' by clarified It was the 'part-of possession, integral afid ail Massachusetts..

state,-as as Boston or All much other titles arid the Salem. merged, end. charter an waS-at state Rhode Island claim' Neither- can -by virtue thing Island, of Rhode a charter colony granted En.glisfi Island, her act of own vacated independence,

crown. her .charter, remitted herself to -title- of arid possession, better which, Warner, of Bristol, she now holds'the towns Barrington, ¿Little Tiverton, lands Mount Somerset, and the fine Compton, her actual extent,, half Squash;' almost territory Hope Poppy to-Massachusetts, part of original and unquestionably belonging Massachusetts, united in .colony, which was one Plymouth,1 colony 50; Memorial; 4, Morton’s Baylie’s Plymouth, p.' in'1691. part charters, see For the impossibility' being governed TERM, 1838. JANUARY. .of State Rhode Island V. The'State Massachusetts.] 209, 210, 309, 313, 364; 83, 84, 137, S.

Bancroft’s of U. Hist vol. 244. 205, 412, 442, 396; 2d 1st Mass. "Hist. Soc. vol. to bé on this relating

Some proposed subject questions may title, and under his assumed of complainant Supposed rights before"this be to which must answered obligations respondent, cause can judgment. proceed,to hearing of,,or be for acts done'in by state sued virtue

Can sovereign had If claim of in its- Massachusetts right sovereign capacity? the true border "Rhode Island to be supposed by

marched across line, and, attitude, in a taken disputed possession belligerent of is such act within the this subjecting cognizance territory; claqsum to of state trespass, quare fregit? action action of the If what is the is'maintainable, such suit law by rule the- in cases where constitution down of lays regulated to.be treaty, where the is not within scope any proceeding, subject ? statute law of not defined any and is congress to bé court, is she be amenable to If a státe made may

answerable,for ? of a to she has succeeded the acts colony sued, suable, has common rights is If she award,' satisfaction, accord and" defendants, to plead arbitrament or common any .or the bar of law limi- statute title by prescription, ? tations an- colony of its the estate and

If a state appurtenances takes had in succeed, is it what such colony to cestor, to whom it claims to exist; claim every or lay thing when it ceased to may possession title, disseised had a although such- to colony paper state or colony? of some neighbouring intrusion ancestor, its whát rule colony claims If a state rights ? be ascertained such law are what rights estate will estáte, pass colony of real such are such rights

If ? of seisin or livery deed only, in the first instance is,there "title" any rights, is for sovereign" the suit sovereignty If ? claim possession to-such United States American provinces, of the South If, in case so nationality, their long independence

delayed acknowledge not it, and the secured;, was a contest about possession there nations, law of same be if such principle claimed for the whole whether sovereignty doctrine prevail ? the whole or for a territory, part Can allegiancé remains.

But the quéstion more significant SUPREME COURT. State, Stató Rbode-Island Massachusetts; .citizens, natives five.tbtíusánd owing American such, her the duties of citizens, of by decree one changed consent,'without notice to .them Court;'without to-agree one if serfs on soil of because Russia: disagree, .were monarch twenty put. years ago, hundred prodigal England or the his to a Signature piece gratify parchment, /varice ambition of.his courtiers?

The -wantof is further considerations.' maintained by to this-matter, before applicable both arising subsequent decision of the merits. controversy-bn supposed -The merits case on the .of a depends conformity party’s

conduct but, rules of if be no law; there previously prescribed rule, such there can test of merit, s'úch no..decision upon .no and.

them. But,.in to-this, a oh the addition arises question form of. law process. rule- of a state be' before this By. can brought what what, ,the Co.urt, and form of known to the laws, can execution^ of this Court.be cárried effect? into judgment It is that;the to to undeniable direct declare power process, effect, the mode nature- in whictb of the. the judgment (cid:127) executed, Court shall be be de- must prescribed legislative partment.- This done, or reasonable inference. may possibly, by implication made,

It certain, is no .such is In enactment. provision by direct of. 4 Peters, Peters, 284,' New Yo'rk, New:-Jersey the.case 461* this, where considered;' admitted, been is is has that there matter no direct law, but the. to is made to provision summons power ‘ pest on an to individual That of execution is not at analogy suitors. Court, all considered by the contended, is that that was original supposed analogy Now/it states, citizens, to. exist between never sovereign private did The, exist. 11th so article the Constitution-has Amendments Before, under, declared. that amendment, and -broad extent indeed, assumed erroneously, was, power it, in- the character well private corporation; might .a n thought, that aby hypothesis, the-power try party law, rule involved necessity right having known- such into Court for and that such trial and bring party judgment;, to,reach suitors, states,' as it other also reach extended power, might ^uitors, whom and the consti- as the Court construed other tution, there no difference. In the dissenting the opinion 1838. TERM, of.Rhode Island v. The State Massachusetts.] altered, 11th difference; and wh'erfthe amendment there -was a judge, extent, established, this difference so-that, to a constitution, great follow, to the doc- according seems legitimately to consequence- the dissentient. trines maintained (cid:127) once, deemed mere were suit- that states OTdinary. It is true now act, reached states process and that ors, provisions general not to be there was differ- suitors, because recognised reached act suitors. ordinary them.- only process among ence suitors, and the acts States.are not.now ordinary process reaching do' not reach them. suitors, to' only, ordinary ' courts, States, to of the United issüe writs not The power .as are such for, is limited. are They confined specially, prdvided of law. act of Judiciary conformable to the usages principles 1789. ; law, the common law, no There are meaning principles embrace or of a. statutes-of state. sovereign congress, On There is no in such cases. di- contrary,'the usage usage It holds to the adverse. exemption parties; rectly such 1830, In

'This occurred complainants. senator difficulty solicitor, the bill as intro- who Island, from Rhode signed bill, senate a with minute provisions remedy into the duced 1828, the of New intro- In senators Jersey defect. It did pass. for the state with controversy a like bill dimed prepare York; has been New; was not adopitéd. Every legislator It who' the-defect legislation; consider called has'admitted subject, of the nature of because the.' This Court jurisdiction, in the highest degree political; It is in its character political,; suit. ¿vowed character, for the.restitution in .that aby sovereign, .brought the United government of sovereignty. constitution, to cases law extends, only States, equity. n Suits of the relation pre- have English jurisprudence.

The tetms or admi- law not the class equity, are kind, belonging sent of. Black.,Com. 231; 2' 230, 56; 1' Vésey, jr., in

nistered England. 424; 3 Bar-’ India Carnatic Yesey, V. Company, East Nabob where Baltimore; 444. Penn v. ,v. sr., 1 Russell, Vesey, clay was -the and not the subject litigation. right, political agreement, Connecticut, 4 York Dali. New v. See Lord Hardwicke’s opinion; 1789;- the Supreme act of 4. jurisdiction,of By judiciary is a state is a of the United where confined States, party, Court " of a nature.” cases civil COURT. SUPREME 686 State of Rhode Island State of v. cases; not to criminal This qualification contradistinction be, could state, no ánother as a criminal. prosecuted by

for It to .cases not is intended or political, involving -reference between states. v. sovereign power Dauchy, questions 'YYiscart also, See, 325. Drafts of the far‘¡the 2 Dali. Constitution; printed convention, and of the for'their use1 and the succes- only, members made, and in on said drafts;- amendments sive manuscript pointed of the Massachusetts the collection Historical Society. ' his own- It on declaration. is a complainant equity .has books; in the demand, and the fact language Stale appearing v, bill, need the face not be et pleaded., ah Reckford sec. Wade, Story Notes; 17 and the Yesey, Equity, jr.; 1 O’Donnell, 166; Ball & Middlecot v. Lord Beatty, Hoveden v. M£Namara, & 14 91; 2 Scho. Paul v.- Lefroy;

Arinersley, Vesey, jr., & 1 Scho. Hart, *The court will Lefroy, Gifford v. not permit 406.. and wait until the lay subject dispute party acquired become connected value, and interests and with^great diversi-

great relations. fied are to be if the treated in as individuals, this parties

Agaip: states with corporations, only even rights pri- private then bill must be if dismissed, because, it seeks vate litigants, boundaries, without soil; to the such a cause an claim adjustment 2 Haton, Anstruther, Atkins v. is no equity subject jurisdiction, Herbet, 2 Duke of 4S4; Fenham v. Rut-

386; Atkyns, Welby v. 391; Smeaton, 1 v. Bro. land, 572; Ch. Atkyns, Rep. Wilier Kenrick, Bimbury, Ely Bishop juris- is no such case in nor There country, England,- towns or between countries. only diction (f ascertained, is- and the defendant has encroached must individuals the right be ascer^ complainant, (cid:127) law, at common and not action bill in an chancery; tained cases; law, be settled at must, in all before can chancery the right See the cases above cited.. boundaries- adjust the title, to which the can complainant appeal, equity,

The only administered, an applied equity agreements honour, preserve family family peace. intended generally, sister, states, in the American great family Let applied the, has so It undisturbed nation. will leave unchanged, what y, than a Ves. century. more Storkley Stórkley, remained for B. 30. & TERM, 1838. State of [The State of Rhode v. The Massachusetts.} Island: Hazard, for the state of Rhode

Mr. more sir, have been motion, The merits of this satisfactorily might if counsel, we could examined and discussed the complainant’s into it,of motion, had the put writing, have specific grounds be; but with- that should desirous, as we were and' requested out effect. (cid:127) cut It does a motion off one. me, which goes appear ' most branches Supreme important jurisdiction to. a establishment, its first exercised by deprive of that her court of the benefit only- .party jurisdiction,'and she has a to-insist (as resist- remedy‘for right' aggravated injuries, -that motion which would her a -such a deprive ing hearing,) be' it, motion, and the presented specific ought-to grounds n fulness, arid with notice of with adequate' writing, precision to enable him meet and to them, them to the -to opposite party, motion, has to meet. But are now to answer this know what he we. made; it,- and to' seek for the are scatter- ás-they

verbally grounds of in the course of which, and desultory ed argument; through long that it- taken sor different is .not many shapes, those grounds same, to reconcile them one with them easy recognise it 'is not case, the counsel This surprising another. being into of their motion I writing. refused specific, put grounds make however, endeavoured to self with have, ihy acquainted with and, be will decided-, permission, now present real.question I been to take it. as have such views able oyer the of,

Has this subject.matter over bill in now to the before it? and equity pending has- parties the Court now' trial of the proceed hearing a final If cause, and to make decree neither therein? bránch bp there answered in can negative, can question good' motion'; however for thé those -present grounds may. grounds Allow me to consider shifted, or the first multiplied, repeated. It constitutional evidently purely

branch' question. constitution, -and to be tried ‘the Only arid arising Under question,' then, constitution, tb the we find it there Turning, settled declared, shall extend “to.controversies be- judicial' power more, “in states;” two or and that those cases which state tween be a shall shall have original jurisdiction.” party, Supreme-Court (cid:127) constitution; These are the words of and this is a controversy states; of Massachusetts is a it: two and the party COURT. SUPREME, ofRliode'íslanct v. The StateofMassachusetts.] State f.íhe Rhode,Island it; is this of and

qnd controversy the party .state before, the- But is it Supreme'Court. now is.contended pending - do the that words of the embrace counsel, the .constitution although ,not is of it within this "and controversy, yet the-meaning intention instrument;- ex- it the intention its framers to that that of and was Court, This from- the the of such clude controversies jurisdiction Peter, dealt with constitution ás" Martin-and with the is Jack dealing thatcpuld But is the their will. father’s .be only-pretension this-Court, .of im- against constitutional-jurisdiction set-.up and us-to what was intent strictly, inquire, meaning portant'for here, constitution, And in'this respect? of the framers'of for- pr explicit, tunately, nothing, conjecture left'to tradition: constitution framers unequivocal-intention X leave trace is matter authentic record. beg public subjectj harmony -for provision among this .constitutional- preserving- be-, states, revolution, th'e Before controversies all origin. boundaries, or. car- the colonies tween wfere provinces,'concerning settled; council; There

ried were him and. up king,In the' these Massachusetts parties, was such same controversy one between and New "and another Massachusetts Island;, ánd between which, When states assert- were so settled. both Hampshire; course; tribunal, But df ed'their annulled. independence, in its states felt the of immediately establishing, new necessity tribunal of their with full own, jurisdiction over place; conipetent in those And did articles'of dangerous controversies- u 'ninth, confederation; which, of. provides article congress differences resort,, be the last now appeal, disputes shall states, or arise, ’two or which between more may-hereafter subsisting, other cause whatever.” boundary, or,any concerning jurisdiction, fop and de- to constitute a court hearing Congress appoint judges “And and sentence-of the those the.judgment causes. termining described, be shall final to be the manner before court appointed shall refuse to submit-to conclusive; and if .any parties defend their'claim or court, cir to such appear,-or authority sentence cause, shall, nevertheless, the court proceed pronounce ; th’e shall, like and decisive manner, or final judgment, case, in either sentence, and other being, proceedings judgment for acts transmitted lodged among congress, congress, " did, accord- concerned.” And congress security parties “ court of court, establish and called the ingly, organize-the appeals.” TÉRIVfj 1838. v.'The of Rhode'Island [THe State a number decided took juris- And that cognizancé-of, .court ' states;- others, one dictional controversies among was a herself party, Massachusetts acknowledged- its decision. It court,; arid must of .the submitted boundaries, containéd that the territorial-descriptiqñs recollected* and-charters, loose and defec- were necessarily colonial grants settlements,.in. colo- tive;, adjoining that in progress of.the (cid:127) must arise as to nies, unavoidably respective controversies conflicts, such And the certainty greater, .greater -limits.. tribunal necessity peace-

was the impartial an providing article, the ninth them.- just, language able adjustment.of time: the state at read,'is things “disputes descriptive arise between may,hereafter subsisting, differences: now boundary, &c. jurisdiction,” or more concerning two its over retained and exercised court jurisdiction The of'appeals constitution; controversies, until the adoption present these and the provided was exigency when place supplied, with -full of a national over judiciary,

establishment “ controversies; twelfth act for And, section same wá's 1792, it processes,” &c.,-pássed regulating enacted*'“that of the court the récords and of appeals, ap- proceedings heretofore constitution, the .present shall previous adoption pointed, office of the clerk in the Supreme deposited be directed to States,:who is authorized and copies hereby give

United records and any all such person requiring pay- Of proceedings, in like as and other same, for the copies'of manner .the'records ing are, of the said court directed tó given; proceeding's law* other, as all and credit said shall have like..faith copies proceedings ‘ court.” have' that of Massachusetts idea The expressed counsel States, constitution;, with the came into United existence present that'Massachusetts, them; bound as.one-of is\ before .and nothing indeed; Not, This is' that only strange'-conception, date- the' came into United existence with the States, severally; states ,articles thé'first of' the of con- independence;..and declaration “ ! of this ordains, confederacy shall be style federation" ” “ - -a It was to form The United States America.’ moré.perfect convention, the-confederation, union,” and to strengthen formed here are the con- was called .which And constitution. of 1787, words of the recom- resolution

cluding old-congress S Vcto. XII. —4 COURT. SUPREME ¡Massachusetts.] State of Islanil'v. The [The State “For express the call of-the-convention: sole

mending confederation,” The con1 articles &e. revising the purpose'of the,, article, ninth met; changed vention- important revising “ word, differences;”- controversies,” word's “.disputes “ between two or more them words states”” taking they-found (cid:127) was, an course, the'article. tribunal for now changed; ¡which established, was no ex- had department independent ' istence, Not under confederation. per- it-proper, deeming constitution,,to manent párticular, (it might designate existing, states, used the hoped,) disputes temporary they compre- “ all; controversies,” We word them do hensive fully including - controversies, were know that there time, ah the be- any those about than and'if were, tween there boundary; been must have none were comparatively so unimportant; qth&r to be exist, extremities; carried and, therefore, the likely to.

article, after the words,-boundary adds the jurisdiction, merely “ - other, cause whatever;” expression,' general apparently by from'the states precaution.' delegates several knew way and, state.-controversies existed, a number still then that' those ’.arise; and they’were moré how migh fully sensible all-important towas against out. The provide their-breaking great object (as convention was in the expressed the constitu- preamble “ to- union, tion,) more perfect .form establish insure justice, domestic common defence, tranquillity, provide-for ¡promote welfare, and secure the to' general liberty blessings,of ourselves hoiy óur And was to- posterity.” union exist? —-bow do- mestic amidst contention tranquillity, members? How among established, to be if the justice strong-were-permitted to.give to and law the. thé'.weak? how'were individual states rights if left from the be preserved; unprotected encroachments of stronger And what would become of the neighbours? inte- and harmony Union, its-members if-all Were'not in the grity-of protected of"their equal enjoyment rights? But, in addition all this, it is a fact, that remarkable this very (cid:127) now

question jurisdiction, after brings- lip, Massachusetts more than- half a lapse was century, directly'acted and upon decided by conventiondtself; ¡récords from the appears' its its deliberations, proceedings. During was question, distinctly whether brought Up, controversies between states, concerning juris- and boundaries, diction ,fróm should not be excluded the jurisdiction of the courts. And the decided that Convention should not they TERM, State of Rhode Iáland Thé State of constitution, excluded. And the as it then provision was and -is, retained; and this constitution was still was agreed unanimously And, afterwards, all. same was the-delegates. question conventions, and- in the this still was re- proyision discussed of; and and the-constitution tained ratified state. approved by every afterwards, several the eleventh years amendment when And suits .constitution was one of United States adopted, “against state, citizens another by citizens subjects any -foreign state,” excluded from- courts, were of the jurisdiction remain- jurisdiction over provision,, givihg der controversies between two,or preserved states, untouched; more and the thereby states their that and, manifested- continued approbation provision; ac- this been question of'jurisdiction this cordingly, settled long uniform decisions, its practice.and cases, numerous its earliest establishment. - now,

And what is it has to Massachusetts all this ? say I the Court consider whether-every beg single objection, and her whole part, not'been argument objections arguments constitution itself, rather -the against against constitutional -than of the. In constitution, to the- opposition jurisdiction Court? axioms,

come armed with theories political of govern- abstract ment; with the aid of other learned Montesquieu,'and writers, science reason distribution upon government-, ap- the three among propriate powers great departments. to, sir, me,

Allow present summary of principal objections which the counsel of Massachusetts upon 'positions most appear down; that a rely. They lay controversy con- and boundaries, is not cerning political, in its jurisdiction judicial, courts ‘can character; take of contro- judicial cognizance only nature; versies-strictly judicial, political, present concerns and is therefore controversy jurisdiction sovereignty, out of Court; and cannot be acted jurisdiction it, without And, in assumption political ihe power. doctrine, of -their the counsel have read number of support Eng- cases, lish- of learned opinions And English chancellors.

what does amount to? Does it amount to more than -self-evident courts plain, created proposition, that by sovereign to it, subordinate cannot exercise over sove- power, nor if interfere with Let us see reign power, prerogatives?

is not whole substance doctrine., In illustration of their SUPREME COURT. State of Island v. The .Massachusetts.] Rhode.

doctrine, have referred the counsel to the controversies- boundaries, over;which colonies,,concerning English' courts exercised And did. not? why they, jurisdiction. It-Was: tribunal, there which the to. was;a higher becáúse appealed colonies cases, was in made' those himself:. He jurisdiction, the-kjng charters; in them-all grants, gave colonial reserving the. and. to himself. He the colonial allegiance fealty appointed gover- nors; not Rhode Island excepting governor Massachusetts. He,

almost alone her own therefore governors.. king, elected claimed and colonies, exercised over as their jurisdiction feudal But, lord. had he so he have'transferred his pleased, royal might controversies, over those any courts'.- And had jurisdiction his so,.those- controversies, he done whatever their character, and by .called, civil, whatever name or .would political become judicial, decision! proper subjects investigation Another case, much relied counsel Massachusetts, was that Nabob of Carnatic Thé East India against Company; case, the court of déclined chancery taking jurisdiction,because'' was a one parties other, prince, sovéreign (although. óf the virtue of its crown,) charter as acting by an inde-

subjects that, state. It seems in' .instance,- this the charter of"the pendent had it above'the law. But placed its company suppose Charter .that it to the had of the court of subjected jurisdiction equity, any of, controversies have with tbe might any surrounding'princes, character of -the (th'e would-the parties,, prince .to foreign assenting or the nature of the jurisdiction,) have formed controversy, any exercise, obstacle to the. of-that And would not jurisdiction.?' the' of it exercise have been in its strictly character? same embrace' plain- principles exposition dispose évery case and instance which the counsel have brought, in-sup- can-bring of their doctrine. All these cases are port governed by peculiar, institutions of the structure of England,-and its government, her.

-various branches. No such this, as in con- question jurisdiction could; two states of Union, ever arise troversies .between in-the If courts. English is vested the-court,-by the' constitution,-.how is it of the con- to talk .of nature preposterous the character of troversy, .-the Suppose parties! controversy political there reason in wljat any in. then? —Is nature nature: it. should not why and'decision, be subjected judicial investigation much to it are controversy? parties' Suppose TERM, 1838. Island The State of Rhode v: Massachusetts.] [The .in reason nature there why states: then?--Is they two what the' not be laws principles justice, should by governed' controversies, whatever their cha- much All as'any parties? settled, if are and whoever the ever they par-

racter parties, be. force ties not settle must settled either by will them amicably, is,, When the some tribunal.. controversy judgment resort, last sword is the the “ultima-ratio sovereigns,'the is at the of the blood and waged expense contest regum';” (cid:127) if is But thé submitted some lives-of controversy their.subjects. tribunal; tribunal', that call we whatever name

independent It act is not in how must may, my, power perceive judicially. concerned, of'Massachusetts is as7she in the sovereignty alleges,

settlement-of this absolute sub- .question. sovereigns Even limits, mitted their controversies -about territorial to independent tribunals; and ho one ever that the of either imagined sovereignty was affected their doing so.

But Massachusetts is not now of unlimited possessed sovereignty. became colonies; -the when ceased to be they sovereign All sensible, and remain, But were .couldnot they independent. they, so if remained disunited. knew that was they They did- unite; union their liberties. alone They could they preserve this limited and, to-secure'their they go- established .-gréat object, Union, it with their state portion investing .a vernment in the exercise and at the same time themselves powers, restricting Thus, of certain other both federal government .and powers. both

the state but limited equally governments; government are either, bound and all acts con- constitution: violating by the titútion, are And it is the duty void. constitutional province void, Court to declare such acts whenever question comes it. before constitutionality formation of an inde- federal .republican system, Fctrin.the deemed a was to be

pendent department necessary judicial .branch encroachments, equi- government, prevent preserve just “ therefore, librium; declares, the' the constitution judicial under this shall to all cases in law or extend power equity arising the constitu- constitution.” And decision of Court upon every concerns, of state act, of an either of tionality congress legislature, Massachusetts, to use the their respective jurisdictions. .language does,not it, How contend that the absurd, then, judicial is which the extend to or to jurisdic- political questions questions, SUPREME COURT! State'of-Rhode Island v. The State of is, concerned. The only tion here whether question thestatés, the constitution which formed did they adopted, (cid:127)confer And it not amply SupremeCourt. it, did confer and that declared it to

shown tney explicitly it? be their intention confer is it for Massachusetts this? And Massachusetts gainsay pos- than, sitare1 under the

sessed confederation sovereignity larger she; does under the constitution. Yet she then present agreed the. coürt of appeals, with full constituting assisted powers over this one of .then' controversy.;, very .subsisting state-boundaries arid controversies.concerning jurisdiction, specified also, convention', In the in. the 9th formed the .article. present n constitution,'Massachusetts agreed to invest this Court with the'same And convention, her state which ratified jurisdiction. again,-in tbe of constitution, And, she this du- approved adopted provision. timé, all this had period controver-

ring subsisting Massachusetts sies.with her territorial neighbour concerning .her boundaries this with Rhode particularly -controversy- Islarid, jurisdiction; -another with state' of Connecticut, arid the same precisely character; which last was not year until terminated 1801. Mas- sachusetts, therefore, her acts, own consent and jurisdiction gave Court over (cid:127)to'this far present as her- controversy, consent and it. acts could give it, then, for that it -is

Taking granted, shown that fully “ Court over the matter jurisdiction of, and tbe over subject par- ties to the bill in how before I equity it,” will pending proceed “ consideration,of the 2d to. Has the question: Court now power and trial of this proceed cause, hearing and make final ?” decree thereon

' n Justice My. Hazard, Mr. asked if he could out point Barbour process by Which could the Court carry final decree the cause one; effect, into should it make For if instance, an should application made, Rhode her process Island' in her be. quiet, possession, what could the Court proeéss issue for that ? purpose said,

Mr. Hazard that he had no means overlooked .by that impor- tant but had question, to- given fullest and most itp attentive'con- in his But he power. sideration had that it would thought be.proper to'reserve question for to .be the.last as in considered; point TERM, 1838. State of Rhode Island v. The ' order it to be. he was At desirous appeared present, showing that the Court had full- to the proceed power, ought hearing, and to make a final decree in the cause. n ' And what The Court prevent there proceeding? over the matter and over the

jurisdiction parties; subject are here before the Court. The defendant parties, obeyed the came,in issued more than three subpoena yearis -suit, -tóok the-defence ago; upon-herself put in her term, and answer thereto. At another she plea applied .to for an order at the last upon complainant-to reply;_and, .term, she made a written agreement-with complainant-respecting amend- of-the bill and ments and she is now here in-Court? pleadings; What is there to hinder the cause from ? proceeding it is contended, in the first that consent

Why, -place, one party cannot Court; been give authorities have jurisdiction read to this one doubts, No. effect. appears when record or otherwise, that the has nc Gourt of the subject matter consent cannot confer complaint; party jurisdiction. But when the Court has suit, matter jurisdiction, subject defendant can party .to his appear, appearance 'consent him; conclusive if even he had not he appeared, although might “ not have been reached- -the Court. process ap- the defendants to a a circuit pearance court foreign-attachment States, reside, in a where' do-not is a United ^circuit non-service, of all waiver them.” .process objections Cranch, Pollard “An defend- Dwight, appearance by Summers, ant cures all antecedent Knox v. irregularity process.-” 3 Cranch, 496»

But Massachusetts has number obstacles other. to. raised.a Court’s to a this cause. The I be- hearing.of proceeding following, lieve, contains the of them all: substance 1. are, the Court is They That province expound sole to( law; administer the and that here is no law for .the Court:-to or minister.' has ad act

-expound congress passed.no defining ..That no, it; no the rule which to controversy; try act.prescribing rule of decision. That section of the act Of Í3tb judiciary Court, of-this has limited the where congress jurisdiction nature; state is a to of civil which this contro- controversies party, that,- is not, character; therefore, in its versy political being meant, 'of congress this character from the to exclude controversies COURT. SUPREME Massachusetts;] State of Rhode Island-V. The act no has process 3. Congress passed providing .jurisdiction. its. to Court the case. jurisdiction to necessary exercise enable ,in to a final decree carry Court power

4. That the possesses one;, it make effect should congress, into alleged, having cáuse to do to enable it so. made-no law consider, I will-- of- itself. last these presently,.by objections, if this to them, what be- the rest prevail* doctrinéis

And..'as to vested Court by Supreme expressly comes jurisdiction if itself, and what becomes of the Court itself; the .constitution which, courts, same as die inferior be is to upon footing placed ' establish, cpurse, By power regulate? congress has. constitution, s<'Jtion,.lst

Bth article of the “to congress power has .tribunals-inferior Court.” the Su- constitute .to But Supreme itself, was ordained the constitution necessarily Court preme such court. Other- powers incident possesses defeated, wise the and the might Court Supreme constitution pf the act and but rendered co-ordinate branch nullity by another But to deprive. this. government. congress'has. ho. it's constitutional nor to it-in-the exer- jurisdiction, restrain of that cise And this Court would' unconstitu- declare jurisdiction act of and-,void tional such an congress having object. .Lessee, .to,,, of Martin v. has been Hunter’s case referred some

much stress put upon general Story, Mr.'Justice remarks remarks; the Court that case.- .delivered Those opinion who . words, were which not-read, concluded were but. .in the-following “ with them: do not, however, We ought go any implicit place has.been,stated reliance distinction which ¡upon endeavoured ajpe But shows that the what counsel conclusively illustrated.” in their re- wholly mistaken understanding meaning those tha marks, fact, the case of New York, v. New Jersey was before this Court after fifteen that of Martin v. years Hunter, one, hon. took judge only case,, the state of York had refused although New jurisdiction' ordered,-, but decreed and that the appear, subpoena case been returned before the return sixty having days day executed thereof, and the defendant not be at li- appearing, complainant berty ex proceed parte;. time,

But it is I-fear, to such dwell when wasting objections, been so were and in- shown these' cases clearly expressly included in the this Court the constitu- tentionally TERM, Island The State .of State of [The, Ehode understand I at a loss to what was meant “a was quite by tion. decision;

rule of until the counsel bys” arule the.case try enlight- how, an ened me without act of the Court inquiring by congress, was to ascertain state was which' right, wrong; alleging that, no such the Court act, there could not being proceed by law, rule of the common or that of the law, civil or of state any law.

This is a novel idea. Such an idea was beyond concep- quite who tion the men framed the articles of . It did not confederation. heads that

enter into their more was any done,- thing necessary than to meet the establish exigency, court, with competent suffi- to' call the them; before cient and to parties deter- powers try .and in the same' mine these controversies manner aS woUld they any other it any And seems parties. that controversies ,its constituted, thus had appeals, same court idea pro- duties, no them; vince ánd found difficulty performing govern- and rules of themselves by principles justice, ing equity, good conscience, and that different -rule furnished any dreaming law, law, or the the common civil state -by law. any by section act has been turned judiciary again 34th -as decision, had furnished rule -of showing congress again, law; but no is.called, in cases at common such rule for cases like This is use of that short section of present. making strange whole lines, four of which is to to the purpose give local efficacy laws, law, at common in the States, state “ trials courts the United is, where in cases section. That cases apply,” says under local law shall Thus, that law. arising governed laws descent of real estates, or the rate of inte- regulating state rest, instance, courts, in all the cases ought, govern arising under laws. And those this is whole th”e section. meaning have contended, The counsel if suit all could have been at any Island, at have been a suit common instituted ought law and not in But law such a suit could equity. apply com- and there are suits more at. any present.; very many, than mon law which are not state law. governed (the

An used in 13th section expression word-civil) act is also an counsel, suspected important same containing secret have discovered. They the counsel think they meaning, “civil,” insist that to take the use of intended congress word kind, controversy, and all out of the same Vox,. T XII. —4 SUPREME COURT. .698 Rhode, Island v. State The [The n the counsel Massachusetts

this Court. must feel Surély, them- a undfer for inferences, selves necessity going great way ones, value to draw upon a them from very.slight set great such sources, these. The relied ás are-“that upon, .words Supreme of all have exclusive' controversies of a -Court jurisdiction civil sh.all &c. nature, whére state is party,” Df was to withhold from plain congress inferior object in controversies two or mofe between states. And

courts.jurisdictioñ this, to exclusive they Supreme;Court in gave to jurisdiction do cases, instead it had those original jurisdiction merely, is used, The word--civil because all' properly constitution. con- do or exist between two or more states, can must be troversies other; nature, and unless none in war, which they engage a civil bound constitution not to do. have themselves not mean amicable peaceable; civil does actions of word trespass n is are Civil civil actions. technically general- arid ejectment to. criminal.1 in contradistinction There is not the used slightest ly word, was intended to be used in supposing civil ground to would taken never have so political. Congress contradistinction so effect such an blind a way, unintelligible object futile,, wish to effect. of Massachusetts Nor can such distinc- counsel is If so it a is con- controversy, be made. political tion civil And if.such á could be forced the words, distinction troversy. left, to this construction: that the Court is section bring

it would from the derived in this constitution, its jurisdiction original states; not does controversies exclusive other' like take them, of this section of virtue act. judiciary jurisdiction there, is in the front of this’ section, another word But, part think, I is much which, common more sense plain, meaning, in than the counsel. which the have tó word endeavoured significant is so Cabalistic. And that the word all—all render controversies. word, in another same used place, all-import-

This thought has .been ápd to it has b'eeii shown ant, Massar respect counsel of great extend, Constitution, “the shall By judicial power chusetts. “to constitution,” in law and under

all cases equity; arising “ tp all ambassadors,” &c. cases of ma- affecting admiralty cases to which the United States shall controversies jurisdiction, ritime &c,. two states,” or more to. controversies between party, &.c. word all is not because repetition, kept Up

And throughout section, con- is inferred intended to whole constitution TERM, 1838. State, State of Rhode Island The of-Massachusetts.] fér a less extensive in some of the jurisdiction cases'enumerated than others.

Now, act, congress, framing not deal judiciary did. such far-fetched no inferences. saw such Congress meaning constitution; óf the. section and therefore in this same declares pf 13th act, “that shall section Supreme Court have exclu- sive of all nature, controversies a civil jurisdiction where a state is a did not intend alter the constitution.’ party.’.’ Congress It what it merely understood be the expressed the sec- meaning tion referred I Now, to. with quarrel although word civil, I-should the word all, for it. willing give exchange But, sir, that so much effort is used to why induce this Court to it.

believe- that to its unfriendly oven congress these nor, cases? is not to the very This veby láwyerlike, respectful, Court.

This will look for its constitutional to the Court constitution powers itself; 'and will allow to construe that in- any other department .not for cases, strument them. In this Court de- many have accurately- fined, not own and duties, its but those of only constitutional powers as; ¡executive*,' departments, constitu- legislative it, occasions; tion And, authorized bound to do let proper me'ask, if such this congress over possesses power jurisdiction Court, to make why was it for the states necessary themselves 11th constitution, to amendment for the purpose, taking away suits one of the States citizens of in jurisdiction “against another state?” state, But, Of a citizens or subjects foreign -it is riot this to There unfriendly congress jurisdiction. true (cid:127) is no has instáncé in'which manifested'such single congress On, of'the disposition. same contrary, section judiciary act, the con- where, by we find it jurisdiction, conferring exclusive stitution, the And Court had only any without original jurisdiction. seen this its has fronl

appearance disapprobation', congress in these establishment, powers its constitutional exercising earliest rules cases, Its and in others which a state was a adopting party; orders practice applica- and its proceeding, general,.permanent them; ble to and the and return its prescribing processes, service of them as occasion required. .no

The third forms of is, that has provided congress objection This to enable the powers Court objec- exercise jurisdiction.

tion, I writ think, should small The size. reduced tó very, was or- issued, subpoena general served returned agreeably COURT. SUPREME of Rhode Island v. State of And the Court. that' obeyed process of' the defendant der suit; and I herself under- took appeared, defence that he should not say, her counsel urge objection stood And, if the Court. had Massachusetts refused this proceeding in its would have had to have fully Court power- pro- appear, did in that of the cause, as it state of New in the Jersey ceeded has York. But Massachusetts and is now New appeared, against. then is now to enable the further Whát process wanting

Court. I of the cause. know of to the none. to proceed hearing

Court Yet. insist that the cannot still of Massachusetts go the counsel me then What an act of inquire: congress. without Let a step ? 2.- What has been done by been congress upon subject has done Court? 1789, at first session of con- act was 1. A passed judiciary session, which, the same with ad- act at many a--process gress; and a second act Was rendered ditions, process passed permanent act, which 13th section of the. 1792. The exclusive judiciary gnes cases, Court in these been already Supreme all the “that beforementioned courts section,enacts The -14th read. to issue writs of scire facias, States shall have

of the United power writs not for by all other provided habeas especially corpus, exercise of statute, thq respective which may necessary law.” principles usages agreeably jurisdictions, beforementioned courts of enacts, “that all-the section 17th make -and States shall necessary United establish courts, business in said the ordinary rules for provided conducting of the States.” not to the laws -uch rules are United repugnant and act, section, enacts that “all writs processes 1st issuing process test,” bear &c. a circuit court shall .and from a Court or Supreme seal of the court.” clerk, and sealed with be by shall signed writs, “that forms of executions and enacts, section other- 2d in forms mode of suits and the style proceeding their process, be,” &c. in those law, of common shall .“and equity, those in-those, to the and maritime according, of admiralty jurisdiction, to to courts equity, principles,'rules usages belong from courts as courts of-admiralty contradistinguished respectively, for been act law; by so far as have provided common except may States; how- of the United courts subject, to judicial establish courts as ever, respectively to such alterations the-said additions as such or to discretion, shall, regulations their deem expedient; TERM, -1838: JANUAit† pf Rhode Island'v. The State of States, Court of the United shall think Supreme

thfe proper, time, rule, to to time to by circuit or prescribe district court con- 18th, the same.” The 24th and 25th sections of cerning the judi- act, to, first’referred ciary recognises-the of the Court to issue upon its executions decrees. judgments

Thus much has been done it by is that congress; apparent that considered department always had been that everything on its done, to enable the to part, necessary court's all their perform n judicial fully duties; and to exercise all their -functions and saw that the courts were powers. Congress in the exer- proceeding cise of those without or powers difficulty and that impediment, further action was called or for needed. And legislative have the so In the case courts v. Southard, Weyman 10 Wheat. thought. considered itself of full possessed power over whole in suits in from their commencement to

proceedings equity, final termination satisfaction of the decrees or judgments.

It -the has been counsel, that suggested defendant’s congress has omitted the exercise provide branch juris- Court; because did not that it intend should be diction ex- This ercised. is fidelity constitu- impeaching congress -But, tion. fortunately, imputation unfounded. It is wholly, also, 1789,-has that alleged, congress, act judiciary pro- all, in' vided rules nearly ordinary cases proceeding but none in law, which can arise at common in admiralty; such could cases this. This is as an .error as well be com- palpable In mentioned, mitted. the case last v. Southard,'which Weyman at common were law, case made objections process,- it; service and execution and was contended that were not act of But authorized by any congress. proceedings after over all ehanceiy power court remarking in suits from their commencement proceedings equity, termination, their final were these unquestionable, proceeded a reason for the words: —“ It be solicitude would difficult assign the Court, all the as a proceedings sitting congress regulate- would court of or of equally admiralty, require equity, as a when court of its should sitting regulated proceedings find, while the equity common law.” Thus we powers been a- Court in placed beyona these cases considered having doubt at of1 cases com- powers, acts parallel congress, mon law, reasoning. sustained inferences required SUPREME COURT. 702 of Rhode. Island v. The of State Massachusetts.] in to; the last- case referred that of

And it-was decided in Halstead., 10 54, States Bank v. these United that powers Wheat. must, in their be They are character.. simply not legislative then? and, character; must be in incident to necessary, if. .their

judicial powers judicial- functions. what has been done in me now the Court inquire Let by- pursu- its In -1791,'the of legal-powers; ance Court constitutional'and " viz., Court general‘order: That consider following

adopted bench, court of and of in king’s chancery, Eng- practice outlines for' the of this. Court; and that practice land, as affording time, make such from time alterations.-therein'as cir-' they-will, 8. 1796, 1 Cond: In render necessary.” Re,p. may eumstances established, orders, rules, or were viz: permanent general following- “1, la\v, when common or at in Ordered-that process equity,-shall the same shall be state, served upon issue governor, against, and the of such- state. attorney executive- -magistrate, general chief Ordered,.that out of subpoena issuing 2. Court process on the-defendant before the sixty- shall served days suit equity, if And, farther, defendant, of the said process: day return shall not at the return subpoena, appear day service on such be at ex therein, complainant liberty proceed shall contáined 1 320; Peters’Cond. These several Rep. 3 Dali. ge- parte.” rules, force, been are still full practised orders, neral time of their Cáh there from the Court adoption;. constitution, and thé are strictly conformity doubt In of The State to? of New referred Jer- ease acts congress 1831, Peters, York, remark, State New Court v. sey The “ of our suits were insti- history, early period At a very its -questions in this against concerning tuted were mode of considered.” necessarily proceeding, to review a number (The Court then cases proceed preceding “ (cid:127) it, in which a state So before had been party. eai-ly .was Justice, Chief opinion who delivered (says August, awarded, at was the.jprayer an Court,) injunction of-the 402; Brailsford, 2 Dali. Georgia .State stay Georgia; Brailsford, a recovered British subject, a sum money under her This acts was claimed Ge,orgia, confiscation.” exerqise and no doubt of -the an original jurisdiction was ever considerad. propriety State New the case Oswald v. The York February, 1793,

In TERM,-1838. JANUARY. v, State of Rhode of Island The State [The 2 on; Dali. 402. This was a suit at

came common law. The state not on the return of the made; appearing, process, proc'lafhation the the Court: order entered Unless the following by “ state term, the- of the- first next cause to show the con- appear day will be entered default the said state.” trary, judgment against term, samé At the like order was made in the of- case Chisholm’s ¿t v. of .term, 1794, Executors The State the next Georgia; judg- ment was in favour rendered of -and a of writ plaintiffs, inquiry 1, The 320; awarded. v. State :3-Dali. Grayson of-Virginia, Peters’ Condensed 141. This was a bill in and it was Rep. equity; in this case that the Court two last orders before- adopted general mentioned. of Carolina, v. The State South 'In. Huger service of been Court détermined the'subpcena having proved, at -was ex He liberty proceed, parte. accordingly- complainant commissions, for, and obtained to take thé moved examination of witnesses in several of the states. Dali. .1 371; Peters’ Cond. The Court also cases of 156. Fowler al. noticed et v.

Rep. Lind- 411; 1 et and Fowler v. Dali. al.'; Miller, Cond. say Peters’ 3. Rep.

189; The of New York and the case Staté v. The State Con- 1; It-1 necticut; 1'Peters’Cond.'Rep. then,” 4-Dali. pro- “ “ Marshall, ceeds Chief Justice been settled our on predecessors, deliberation, this Court exercise great may origkial jurisdic- state, in tion under the authority conferred the con- against suits stitution and- acts The rule existing congress. process, respecting served, whom it is and the persons time service are to. fixed. course of thé on the of the failure appear, service, after due also And, been prescribed.” has- accordingly; Court made the order, first procéed,;and part did .which-has read; been order ‘«And it already thus concludes: is fur- .Which ordered, that, ther- the defendant, served with a unless being copy this decree the' before next term sixty days of this ensuing August ’Court, shall on' the second of the next- day term appear January bill, thereof, .and answer this Court will complainant, pro- céed to hear the cause on the and to complainant, decree part But, the matter of bill.” before the cause came said a'final decree, the state of New York with- compromised controversy the, New state of to the the latter state. satisfaction Jersey, same, character, ease now before the is the all the Court it, involved in as that of New and New principles, York. Jersey COURT SÜPREMÉ The State of of Rhode Massachusetts.} case, in this Court decided proceed should Why apd to its rules and orders? that; conformity subsisting proceed now Court, will óf the to consider proceed With .1 permission raised has been by,Massachusetts juris- last objection she Court;. and mainly appears upon rely, diction minds Court. That an .effect objec- for producing a final decree in cause, make will is, should tion it into carry effect. power to When, con- the constitution explicit provisions are blear sidered, and the several laws Subsequently passed congress, I cannot the fulfilment those provisions, aiding purpose can Court to doubt how exist conceive those, which, decree, it may effect b.e any provisions, into carry And, alone, if to the stood and bound constitution authorized make. universal'axiom, the same It is a that entertain opinion. I should still facto, minor, includes in it all the ipsó óf power, principal the grant for the as necessary main power, exercise powers, subsidiary, aWhat construction-Would it be to" it.. to the put upon inciden} that instrument, that the had ordain- constitution, to say people, to of, take cognizance established tribunal. ed and determine controversies, which, over for that purpose, they, enumerated certain but the so full and tribunal- to it that express jurisdiction; had given its for want of duty, not to cause perform could power established* ? be into What would to carried the have people decisions effect should render a tribunal to such an ac- to to which them say a right such án services; rather, excuse for or, the of its neglect count its duty? to whether, here in is it not consider- inquire, important

But hear, this to Court try, question jurisdiction present ing the cause, it can be a final decree this at or*' make all necessary the not, what or to further Court powers may; may inquire useful future, distinct or not may any application, may exercise upon Court; which new and made to distinct Upon be. hereafter made, will be the Court then such decide should application, laws, ánd constitution If, by existing it shall deem right.- cause, hear, decide-if; over try, Court have jurisdiction bound, that when to: and to exercise jurisdiction, appealed it not this unquestioned to decline exercising Court . jurisdiction, ought hereafter, it be asked do may, possibly an from apprehension in its which, not more, may power possibly, something TERM,. 1-338. State of Rhode Island v. The State . York, said, the case New Jersey do? In New has,been no final decree pronounced, judg- that] “inasmuch-as nt instituted nu heretofore in this Court in'any'suit against rendered state; decree,-will 'a to a.final be consi- question proceeding dered not until the cause shall come oft be conclusively'settled, heard in chief.”- Thus-thé. Court determined cause hear chief, what its final be; without much anticipating might decree . remain, done, what, if to' be after the -decree. any thing, might less, did th'én decree, And the Court at complainant liberty n “ “ further decreed, that, ex unless the defend- proceed, parte;” would ant hear Causeon state„appeared, proceed the'Couft decree on the and to matter of complainant, said-bill.” part in which-decrees in There are crises cannot.be chancery many fully, n if at'all, executed; that has never been considered reason why wjiich it has should decrees pronounce the power not to pronounce. shall not dwell these

But,.I because longer questions; there which, if I think sound, is .another position entirely the, obviates Of the Court power want objection beyond cause. final decree making is,

That of a final position decree the-pronouncing will of all coirnlete exercise cause and will be a

cause can final,/conclusive require; permanent ter- This mination'of the much controversy. position, upon reflection, tp I sound; *'Ibelieve should.' venture certainly to advance Court; it before as'I do, honourable entirely own upon' my re- or as to its soundness unsoundness. sponsibility, ' A will final in this cause have no resemblance- a decree to- judg- ment'of for sum of to bé collected'on. a money execution; nor a in tó be followed an for judgment ejectment pos- execution No would follow a necessarily session. final decree in process this n cause. We of Massachusetts; ask no no damages delivery pos- session: no her to do or.undo process compel any All we thing. decree,

ask is a line ascertaining settling boundary between states. two . Mr. Justice Mr. asked Hazard the bill did Thompson if not con- a tain further that be prayer; Rhode prayer might Island restored to her rights over sovereignty territory And, question;, quieted of them ? that her enjoyment part Von. U XII. —4 SUPREME COURT.

.706 State of The State Massachusetts] Rhode-.Island read, that it bill did contain such being appeared pray.er, prayer áddition to the that the line the two states boundary be ascertained and (cid:127)might established.

n had latter bill said that the prayer part Mr..Hazard him The Court would y but it the bill. have did vitiate escaped so much of the think it In fits they might as grant' práyér and es- All Island asked-for was a decree Rhode ascertaining right.- true, her-and Massachusetts. boundary-line between tablishing decree, that When is settled sove- rights-of jurisdiction will'execute.itself; will follow: the decree necessarily reignty - When -the line is' no exist. can controversy boundary longer all lines; as settled, it he the same other established will Rhode be Island and and the relative situation Massachusetts will states. other of all adjoining the same be not Rhode should the same placed upon

And'why footing, should her sister states? her Why in.this respect, jurisdictional with encroachments;1 she be left dispute, exposed boundary -line of this kind -been other controversies have when settled? lastingly ,the sustained, taken, not- I here I position Am men who framed the and acts con- the learned articles opinions decrees the court enacted .the They appeals, federation? it, should final cases over which

in-the. jurisdiction‘was givep it.was their conclusive. And than a more opinion nothing and, therefore, be necessary; would for-no provided (cid:127)final decree n what, And, to'be is the fact, conclusive further ought proceedings. of- in such were made number cases although decrees

that- and no ever further difficulty court appeals; experienced, found to be ever necessary. process \Vas settled, do -true,

It is that after line Massachusetts'may other to Rhode'Island remedies may which-other necessary; wrongs other about she so may. to;'apy controversy state: line, Massachusetts be at an end. encroach will" Should hereafter be a new the same as"if Island, Rhode that will she' aggression; upon state, distant; or encroach near upon Should .same York, Connecticut, of New should upon if she encroach Hamushire; Island, her or, eastern New again, x>n all of has had contro- with which states Massachusetts boundary: been found boundaries,, about her the- always ag- versies But boundaries ascertained the.com- those were when gressor. TERM, 1838. v. The State Rhode Island were at an end. When Rhode tribunals, Island, all difficulties

petent n juris-' decision,, council, under her received king, and her towns of Bristol, her Little .diction, county Tiverton-and had Massachusetts exercised over long jurisdiction, Compton, from that obstructions Neither did no New met with sh’e state. with Massachusetts; was decided controversy whose

Hampshire, Court are told Still the tribunal. Massachusetts same' that. effect.. sir, decree into Allow me ask, canndt carry they can it in her to defeat Massachusetts have way what possible' that, decree? decree itself, effect of it. moment or evade a new state will establish between Massa- things is pronounced, And what áre the means Rhode Island. chusetts and Massa- to, to that decree from résort full'effect prevent chusetts-cán taking- I be should force hear operation? its -own glad attor- inform the Court what it is that that Massachusetts ney-general to do tb set the decree Court at going important de- this render, erect, ? it a Massachusetts is not fiance, nullity going to, of land; statkm a line of nor strip .along military batteries hostile If she should, to take it would possession force there it. for which is an in the 4th arti- invasion;, ample remedy provided And of the constitution. 4th Island would be

cle .section to this Court for an necessity, under no apply injunction-in such shows the And case. of thé ex- again meaning propriety used controversies,” “civil bjr and, no doubt, congress; pression constitution.; I ask then, what meant can again, Massa- do to a decree of this Court fill! prevent chusetts taking effect-by ? do can She can operation own nothing. She only say forcé this district, the that she will over decree'notwith- retain-jurisdiction But let us examine what she. can-make-this amount to. standing.

Massachusetts, státe, as a is not the of this- proprietor land.. strip will, If land there she of course, she own still own and any retain it; will, and title be held as sacred as and her right those np

owners the soil. There is shire town within this district; and course, probably, public state. If buildings belonging are, there will still be her property, though appropriated the same uses. will therefore, There which Massachu- nothing, can setts retain the of, which she will be possession re- required Jurisdiction over the district it will be out of linquish. her power to exercise, it; for she will not that (in will be her) extinguished What, the decree, facto. ipso after decree, can jurisdiction, SUPREME COURT. State of Rhode v. The of Island State [The Massachusetts.] exercise? She cannot number the she inhabitants-of this as district militia;' of her or of her for will not be part population, they so-any more than the of the of county And, 'Providence. inhabitants tax'them, lands, more or their or other she cári for property; they not to her Her laws. subject' tax-gatherers, cad'collect no will. .be her taxes; ministerial officers execute no within procese that district, for it will1be out of the of their And, state. should jurisdiction they will so, do no Massachusetts attempt they carry with authority over line established the-decree them of Court. be themselves to the

They-will trespassers;' subject penalties and- for of With as provided trespassers. much punishment right Massachusetts send' her officers into any of the might state part this; but the authorities of Rhode civil Island would have no dif- with such offenders.' would dealing be ficulty of They violators land; laws of only laws of Island, of- Rhode but of of, States, the United the 'constitution and of the acts congress, authority of which the under decree of this Court would have They could not been made. and escape punishment. conviction And countenance-Massachusetts to them would any might-give ' the offence No aid from punishment. this Court aggravate laws would be needed. .The furnish existing would a perfect remedy to be done. for attempted wrongs th.e’ officers, sheriff,

Those Massachusetts’ tax-gatherers, whatever would have no to demand aid might-be, authority from the they of the in Massachusetts. Nor is county adjoining people proba- of those (riot ble that bound to any people, obey such being demand,) concern would have any state, another violating rights es- Union, decree of the Court of the Supreme tablished But officers, on occasion, those with any them a carry sufficient should Massachusetts, to them, of men from enable for the body time, to seize property persons any inhabitants Island; of Rhode (of state this district then Be a would part;) into'Massachusetts before could be escápe they arrested, they ajike criminals, And, would such. punishable article, second section constitution of the United fourth States, that of thereto, the congress passed conformity executive au- state of Massachusetts, on thority demand made the exe- by.

cutive state Rhode authority Island, would be bound and to deliver those compelled criminals up removed trial to of the crime. And here having jurisdiction Rhode again, TERM,-1838. The State of Island v. without the remedy interposition have of this would perfect have it in her Massachusetts power, Nor would effectually, Court. officers of Rhode civil Island' in the'

obstruct magistrates arid officers, their official functions. Those magistrates execution duties, within the of their lawful in the performance jurisdiction, have, state, would own their authority under nothing ap- Should them be seized, from any quarter. lawlessly prehend Massachusetts, still carried within would decree of this Court, the laws apprehend. nothing and the constitution and acted, laws of the the state in which they save them would States, United sustain harmless. These autho- rities, Massachusetts, tribunals would not respectable judicial defiance; should, at and if they judgments set proceed- and corrected would be here. revised ings speedily out of 'the

Thus, wholly find that of Mas- we it'would of a this Court from' sachusetts, final decree full to prevent taking effect, its own force and operation.

I when I heard could not help surprise, attorney feeling great of Massachusetts and so solemnly portentously general warning anxious that if it bis consequences, expressing hopes, Court Massachusetts, will, should decide for the honour of against gnd be sure to find Court, the honour some country, for way decree.. What! Does Massachusetts threaten? to execute its Is. to become a state?

Massachusetts set ready nullifying up to will, -own of the.decrees of this and of the d-fefiance her will make a Masr itself? Court against constitution This decree n.ot it shall that the constitution authorizes Sachusetts, unless be satisfied to And for it. it, that requires expect Massachusetts equity^ a decree as it deem consti- the'Court such may making prevent is, formidable Court how she tutional and equitable, by telling she to.be'in her defiance and lawless means how contumacious decrees; me, as deficient in this, almost po- of its appears take as it is But let Massachusetts own licy, modesty. her it wilf no course, be, whatever that excite may apprehension Island; a noble state should Rhode she that so although may .grieve a and well in such manner as to tarnish her merited conduct high If, sir, the I have endeavoured renown. positions principles I sound,’and established, must are been establish have think reach material the coun- all the they dispose objections sel Massachusetts has raised against jurisdiction .SUPREME COURT. .Rhode Island v The State Massachusetts.]. were number objections,,or suggestions There great (cid:127) counsel, some of I which will made.'by

statements how ad- just to; I -do not consider them vert .although- having upon hearing before the Court.- It‘is that the five in- the.question alleged thousand know, of the district in!' question,, (I how there many habitants suit, to be to this and are If have not. this was parties are,) right no would Court. it' he- objection so, ‘ -that were they would' take made care before it parties pro- Court- But all' the are further.. Court. This proper ceeded here parties no,+ to soil and freehold. controversy .titles jurisdiction, about thpse however, that I if- inhabitants consulted, were suspect; they to', defendants;, not consent be' made would but.would .rather join n with state.-- are-taxed hard-in complainant' They Massachusetts, state taxes in' Rhode And,- Island. at one pay would number of the time, dis- very inhabitants large respectable trict, the' state Rhode to be petitioned Island legislature into to. which claimed jurisdiction, rightfully received belong. also,

It is 1. the' bill contains objected, matter That bar the bill- itself. admits That 2. That was never in and that the suit is barred (cid:127)possession, That the proscription.- settled, has been These' controversy matters might- proper discussion and are not be, and cannot for not proof (they yet, proved one of them is trial true,) causé; but, have' upon-the evidently, do withthe Because nothing'to- question jurisdiction. it.appeared that the Massachusetts charter of'1.628, facias scire from* bench, revoked and 1685; was and that -king’s annulled she did not' until charter her that 1691; new aget counsel stated Island, Rhode her while abandoned' and surrendered colony, up charter; This,.is a mistake. .Connecticut and Rhode never Island did charters; Surrender their were they demanded, although efforts made .to of them. The' Connecticut great possession obtain (oak was charter the hollow of bidden the venerable old tree .at .Hartford; and Island that Rhode also was seeurefrom preserved , enemies, its and is now in her office at The Providence. Secretary’s his, I (in Mas in- Sport, suppose,) fancy indulged describing .counsel Rhode Island she would have been had claims ter- her upon set on the east, west,' ritory, up by Plymouth Connecticut been true;.and successful.- been would have Very Rhode indeed; with. stripped Massachusetts herself especially helping miles more of her I territory north, Ave which suppose

' Ú\ JANUARY.-TERM, of Rhode Island State'of.Massachusetts;].' .The , venial, was thinks while quite attorney Massachusetts general-of .as free plunder. Hut upon "territory Island’s .was-looked. 'Kh.ode .territory.of "Island, Rhode on the east'arid claims upon those .-the. unjust.- was And' to be- .and- west, were found decided Massachu- county.' not herself; Plymouth; setts trie gotqjpssessrorj Which:had afe; jof Island, bptbrementioned, within -.theelimits towns Rhddé- was she which, compeHed and from after strjiggLé, faint fb- retreat a small will tljat- no state unreasonable make- probability, There ' /large ones.-- claims,' ihuch less'encroachments (cid:127) asked the Court of Massachusetts" have considér counsel the-character, pf apd the. colonial nave original pas- feadv charters, ¡those show and defective, how History,.to loose from"Bancroft’s sages how,difficult if now be Charters-were, to decide would contro-' ¡them.. n That-a a'.difficult'oiietQ case1 Vérsies out growing will offer; settle, nbt a-court’s -¿.'verygood taking Cog-» ieasori.tw ¡casé, no of it. But difficulty whatever cari present hi.zánce ¡Rhode-Island source, arj'se both of from The. charters such a in this Massachusetts, -Rhófip are intelligible ;partiéulbr. clear‘and thesputh charter,'is north Island by her bounded* fine Massa- line, Massachusetts'charter, ivas chusetts; and that to:be three river; miles, of'the Charles rimst'southerly, part south sole is;a therefore, be-settled; question,of,construction that question, , , Ope set of the the Massachusetts charter. Massachusetts paft of. line with .Rhode- to,¡.Settle,this Island, re- appointed

commissioners to their which each ported correctly construction .legislature construction'was, relied npbn. .Island most' ¡river of Charles itself, southern proper is, pari .fiver —Charles f‘ riypr,” name of was known Charles Hhe by-the 'point! wftat. Op pifies.- which off.-thethree hand, to measure Mas-' source or southerly spring insisted- saehusetts head most wa.y Cjharles of water, northerly and running finding run into. ¡be; ¡Charles ¡taken, river, .most river, southerly part, Was- qs Brook, , a- brook, And called Mill' they found accordingly which river; they run from the south .into This tracen to' a up Charles the.brpok .¡then Pond,” called run; which pond, Whiting’s out .of apother south end of found brook, the-pond, they going, called Brook, Jack’s tbits they .traced head, Pasture pp south spring riyfer. called, arid this the riiost southerly part ¡Surely Charles charters, can by'the difficulty deciding there these constructions is the These are the merits of the correct one. case, SUPREME COURT. of Rhode State State I have no am.sensible upon question bearing ju- Court. But the risdiction counsel of Massachusetts have before the merits; and I introduced is not repeatedly presume improper him so far as to state them me to follow correctly. same was decided the' than an question more Precisely hund.red controversy in the Massachusetts New years Hamp- ago, of Massachusetts is The'northern defined and lim- shire. terms-as same her charter,

ited in southern her She boundary. north the most miles was three northerly part the Mer- .¡he set same claim up rimack river. New Upon upon Hamp- Rhode Island; does shire, she now upon her construc- the whole have-taken New tion, she would Hampshire, and the (now state) Maine. province her greater part preten- But to be were unfounded wholly sions unjustifiable; and decided herself within to draw her was charter she limits. compelled And decision, and contented respected she not herself why with the south as on 'north ? limits on the same also, had

Massachusetts, same precisely with controversy Connecticut, about the westerly part this same line; that Island, charters about the (granted same both bounded time, 1662-3) being northerly upon same straight due east and drawn west line, But throughout. Connecticut the encroachments would not Submit Massachusetts. And, al- into a had entered written with her, she agreément establish- though was; then and that agreement line as it had been ing formally confirmed both states, legislatures (which ratified Connecticut with .-us;) the case yet proved, never misrepresen- had been her practised tations impositions commissioners an.d line; in the of that and she running Mas- government, brought and obtained sense from her a justice, sachusetts large part, which the whole latter had territory arid wrongfully- now, limits. And look her whenever taken within you upon any three or tiiat of them, see part map including you Con- is miles in advance-of necticut northern line that of Rhode Island, it; a continuation of be. which ought Mas- government caused, has not cannot cause sachusetts any survey map to be taken or that fine state without published; anew and recording her encroachments Rhode Island. emblazoning unjust dpon was made to honours, A-singulaSP in the appeal your tones of gentle persuasion-by counsel Massachusetts. remind the Courf They TERM, 1838. v. The State State of Rhode Island .of Massachusetts.] [The do not which the countenance'family that courts of quarrels, equity of families well. exposed Very honour and may injury. feelings Massachusetts, surrounded state of six And here is the important deference, her states, other all wrhich show respect great n manifesta with But desire to continue strict her. Mas- harmony encroaches, with She and encroaches is not satisfied this. sachusetts is exhausted; after until their patience long her upon neighbours another, to one after her are complain forbearance compelled, here comes And called Mas- and seek redress. thus upon, aggressions over, matters talks undisturbed, and to smooth about’ sachusetts quite the relations between honour, and and family neigh- family disputes, to listen to their tri- states, make it sister improper bouring other; and so she advises that the com- each fling complaints against this, But did not and sent home. answer plainants reprimanded council, nor before tribunal of the the-Ameri- before old king ’ last of the Island, Rhode can court appeals. injured unredressed, entertains á alone remain re- whose high' grievances But I'take sister, myself, for her-elder Massachusetts. spect it think itself bound' Court, should to assure this honourable will not be offended favour, she nor to make a decree in her justice must be the decree it; resp'ected against although complain elder sister. more with remarks seriously, me to conclude my

Allow Massachusetts have off talked The counsel matter more important. between the three de-

much of the division great proper powers executive, and judicial. government; legislátive, partments not the department that the is proper insist And they heard you Pray, these controversies. have cognizance is the proper of the other out which departments them point there is to' exercise tribunal ju- or what other one; appropriate with executive jurisdiction The idea risdiction? of investing civil, between kind, whether political controversies any over man. the head any into entered individuals, has never states or can- such controversies evident, over And is it not jurisdiction of any department be exercised consistently legislative not of the federal structure when the And, well-balanced government? limi- other, the partition, relatively

and state each governments, considered, is tation, and of their powers, respective adjustment still,more glaring. of such a incompatibility legislátive per- States the United therefore, the And, constitution Vojl. XII.—4 X court. súfreme The-State.,oÉ Stateof Islandv. Massachusetts*! thq exercise of such any either the jurisdiction. legislative

mitted op ,if has' but. conferred- thé expressly department; upon- exécuti-ve from, alf the’ objections lay,against.the free judiciary", then, ? mfeapj does mean What Massachusetts Roes. two. she. any -is;, with' sister states, -controversies .of-her she' that in-her not- thereas, np before tribunal.? —Arid that any amenáblé-to re- justice, state', ah- may sister sufferat. injured wrongs- medy for she there shalTberro her hands? .without-a. .That wrong .-is remedy^ in.,all, free, Is an axiom- governments.' .principle, this the cou-n-' first that, justicejs. in which try fundamental-principle great right ? to be -abandoned first the Justice the

Mr. .delivered opinion'of Baluwin Court:' term óf this Í 8 a bill At the January 32, the-'plaintiff-filed: ifi ri,-the a case fro under various .charters equity, presenting arising Plymouth -the 1621;t'o:MasSa- crowd and' Company, in of-Engl to chusettsin, in 1629; 1663'; to.Rhode Mas- the'new charter.to sundry, in sáchusetts 1691: intermediate together Drocéédirigs with vest; in 'the which .was-to councihof -Plymouth: fesult-of Of and colony. king;,all propriety, rights Massachusetts ánd. -to corpa* .granted political company

government previously also set out charter of bill' original; ration.. repeal in the scire court facias, in chancery Massachusetts England, and -the of a -new acceptance by colopy crown graht charter Rhode subsequent'to Island. fo charter^ the-bill, anti in acts are. at specially All out need these set but large cause be thé not in referred to. iri stage detail. They territory irycontroversy claim the plamfitf presentthe trie., states; charters, two virtu'e

between the according'to of .thes.e therein-described, boundaries 663, claim thé «hartenofl the nlain- -Independently undef the,-Indians; arid from iri previous tiff asserts virtue-of. right grants asserts, acquired; under a 'also title thus settlements-made and of -Rhode'-Island-máde -titles, both the inhabitants settlements' under the.,.boundary two south between- immediately on -the thé lands con- asserted; were.so made and wbíéh settlements colonies'as-now un- Indians, beforé; time of the purchase from the. tinued the line was ter, aftérwards, char not defined" arid though der I disputed (cid:127) be* of. fhen bill procéeds. controversies existence The. settlé'which;com- colonies;, at a very early the two. period;

tween TERM, 1838. gltate Massachusetts,] OfRhode Island v. The State each were in Í709, missi'oners at. Various appointed colony forth, 1809; down to sets periods of thte Other proceedings óf fhe colonies before the revolution,'and commissioners the states afterwards, down this,

For the casé, present it is purposes, necessary only refer matter these one subject proceedings during period, whole the bill in' the' same .presented in aspect throughout; 17Í8; is the of 1709, and subject agreement the'acts pur- done suant thereto, .which are at recited the bill. It then state's large in of the commissioners of the colQnieSj two line 'the-agreement’ that-a be run and-marked their which Was a sur- boundary, done; should vey made and returned, with all the together proceedings legis- colonies, latures the respective Massachusetts, as* accepted by Island; avers, ratified accepted This is by. Rhode bill .charted, now cláimed .Massachusetts; whether line that; is the line trufe two boundary Jinfe between the right is the this case. only point c'ontroversy bill was -The this line are- agreed'on consequence avers'that to those 'of commissioners by Massachusetts’ presentation Island, that in had Saffrey Woodword ascertained point, which, river; milefe south of of.'both by the-charters, three Charles form common colonies, line to boundary by east tun That Woodword Saffrey and west therefrom.. had stake up.a set ¿s Plains, southern at that the' true point Wrenthám Massachusetts; commissioners, That the Rhode Island confiding that had been such ascer- representation, point such truly believing than and that such stake was no more three tained, from Charles miles and made south;-entered into the river, 1710-11, agreement -which both the sides. executed commissioners on was the, is this clause: That- stake set

In up by .agreement Wóod'- the 1642; artists,, in since word ánd that re* Saffrey, and often approved N., in lat. 41° 55' three of Challes newed, English'miles'.south being its southernmost to the river, in letters to Mas- part, agreeably patent sachusetts, be accounted and allowed as the commencement the - colonies, line between the and continued between them as decy- in the in Woodword and on record the plan phered Saffrey, Mas- sachusetts government. stake,

It is or bill, no monument then in the that then mark averred existed Saf- which the which Woodword and (1710-1.1) at place ascertained; to the be set stake could that alleged frey up were SUPREME COURT. State of Rhode The State to none of the to such that the no parties place;- sur- agreement.went made, run, or meá'ns taken to was line ascertain where vey any it ,more was; river; whether was three miles' or Charles from was, run the line, Woodword and or whether whether ever Saffrey colonies, the true line between to their re- boundary the according That charters. Massachusetts took spective possession wrongful in which Island never territory question, acquiesced, Rhode and to she continued never to assert her claim agreed; bill, time of to the of the all the agreement, filing embraced charter, in her and and territory jurisdiction sovereignty it, within and over as claimed the bill. bill denies that, line run and in 1642; Was evér Woodword avers Saffrey, 1710-11, it, unfair, were agreements'of adopted inequita- ble, and as to material executed under a -mistake misrepresentation line run to the colo- that the is .not charters facts; of. according nies; miles south of that-it than seven the southernmost more was made as- of- without the part river; agreement Charles to hold sent of the Massachusetts has continued wrongful king; exercise of territory, prevents possession disputed Island therein. The sovereignty rightful jurisdiction of the bill ascertain establish northern prayer between the that- sovereignty rights jurisdiction restored and the en- confirmed plaintiffs, quieted thereof, title; for other and further relief. joyment bill on the this and attorney general On governor service to a this Massachusetts, rule of the legislature passed agreeably suit, resolution, appearance authorizing to defend counsel by rights governor, the-employment In obedience to resolution governor after-reciting the state. &nd make state, the seal of the appear

it, counsel under appointed Court, or defence; either objecting by- .this discretion, should most otherwise, at his as he judge answer plea, proper. entered; and at Jaiiuary an was appearance Under authority, it was' filed, in which was bill bar. plaintiff’s term, plea erected fixed l'642, a station or That monument averred: line of boundáry believed, be on true southern at a point Connecticut line therefrom Massachusetts, and a continued known, was well which,station monument westwardly; ri-ver, and Saffrey’s' since been called Woodword has ever notorious, and TERM, State Rhode The State Island v. station, It the Wrentham then sets Plains. up agreement 1709, and at that avers the whole merits large; subsequent proceedings case, as in the bill, heard, set forth were plaintiff’s fully tried, and in the determined, and the of the Rhode by judgment heáring commissioners; fair, that the was and legal, be- agreement binding the was tween that it a valid and effectual settlement parties; the cover, fraud, matter without controversy; misrepresenta- tion, with full and of all. circumstances both equal knowledge by That such is still in full parties. force, no way waived, agreement abandoned, or and held, that defendant has relinquished; possess- land, and ed, and occupied, ac- enjoyed propriety, jurisdiction, and to the known discovered of station Wood- well easily' cording run word and the line them therefrom, and from Saffrey, date time, wihout hindrance or present moles- agreement tation. then sets forth the subsequent two plea agreement

colonies, boundaries, 1717 and their 171,8, touching running thereof commissioners, respective appointed marking who, of finally controversy; purpose settling that the stake of Woodword should be the Saffrey, point agreed run, line from should which forever the dividing between the two governments; for- notwithstanding’ any That this controversy recorded, mer or claim. was rati- agreement Island; fied, Rhode assembly confirmed by general no false made to their commissioners; was representation faith, with fairly, was full and concluded agreement good equal has never been parties, respective annulled, re- knowledge was in abandoned, and scinded or pursuance completion of 1709. The commissioners is then report set agreement west, run in 1719 and marked line 2° out, they south stating at of Wood met, word Saffrey, stake as Island in approved by same boundary; report the same then makes averment these year. proceed- plea and‘1719, relation 1717, 1718, as it did in to those 1709, ings and-1711; both unmolested agreements possession pleads defendant, time, from their dates to the respective present bill, or further relief bar the whole any therein; against whether defendant shall prays make judgment bill, and to be dismissed. further answer defendant, Then his waiving, relying plea, way supreme 71'8 court. n ófjthoctff.Islaniby; State, (The 'Massachusetts.] answer, of; and :m. bar that' bill,- the- ás.a to the- avers support plea Were valid settlement a and effectual the-whole

both-agreements case, in the in is on the controversy plea. insisted matter withdrawn, a To this plea replication 'put 'afterwards in* that.the,cause on be down For hearing would giveii put- and notice ;he term.; at last cause was the the plaintiff continued gave the.plea: should, the that he at term to amend the -bill; move notice before -for .consideration, is us the casé no.w a.motion defendr to bill for want of aht, dismiss the in the cause.. late, Hpwever .made, .’been or Objection-has may made-in cause; United-States,, an or it in the .'inferior ány appellate court ,ihustibe one fur decided,{before court can move considered cause'; in the movement therstep: is'necessarily flteexeireise -any .powér .of, the is to determine Jurisdiction the jurisdiction. he^r controversy, suit, to a to between parties .adjudicate subjeef.matter .them'; is, over the any judicial power question or. whether exercise op Oourt, á is Or before judicial' extra-judicial; action casé with, law,.to'render Of a or’ de* authority judgment without the. or ’ law- confers the partios. upon ¿rights cree . If. litigant ..the . court, a decree, has jurisdic or. judgment then to:render between, tion; be. .shall and. adjudged or .what parties, decreed ±h,ecáse,.is action, whiOh.is ,right by-hearing judicial with 6 Russell, 415; 3 Peters, 709; Peters, 203-7. 4 determining,it. cause, djsmiss to a .courts.of A the United’ motion. pending State's,,is a-plea-to not-analogous jurisdiction'’of court.of courts, there the- England; superior equity-i:n law-or common , within, realm, over- all general -jurisdiction and. persons them, ,of matter, causes .It.-depends subject action between Of law be exercised court the.-jurisdiction whether shall it can court,, hut appropriately, belongs, equity’;, act apd suit; of the unless shalL upon party subjeet Judicially to the court that the determination made apparent the', cóurt, of been general jurisdiction, case withdrawn has that the one. is necessary and limited It inferior presumption an case, when no- can given general.jurisdiction cour.t-of act ; rule hence-has-arisen appears contrary thing rea- set out its exemption from must party process, claiming an that; show some abatement; -in and- sons .a interior special plea n case;, has. the exclusive court or. cognizance equity .law court virtue general must superior otherwise'the proceed,; TERM, 1838. 719 YÁNÜARY State,of ítiiodeIslandv. The'Stateof [Th© Massachusetts.} rulé, jurisdiction. prévails.both This at law 1 Ves. equity; sen. 204; 307; dismiss, sen. A 183. motion to therefore, Ves. Mit. Can beentertained, a, not as.it does éxcep cannot'disclose not.and ease:of ,must in,, acit biorií .and out ifá-pleá put abatement only make point, hut exception, to. which particular -court case (cid:127) belongs. A-pIaintiff from-court equity, inlaw be*driven if pleas; ,seeks tO'eóurt such writ, or-dis quash defendant .a a. one, plaintiff.a a-hill for cause, miss he -must better give the such -Shan, hr a court, never plea second the' jurisdiction put which, to. driven the his plaintiff he Ves. sen. plea. classes'of,,

Therp-aie cases -other where objection-.to' jurisdie* nature, of á's on a bill in- tion-is a chancery; Subject different the ,in council, matter is only the end. not by cognizable king by.any defendant,..can 1 sen. 445; Ves. or .that power, parties, the court;; their, on of brought any municipal, not before account character, the off he .and nature 1 controversy;: sovereign- Ves. 2 the 387; 60; or in

jr. 371, which very jr. Ves. common cases the to a whether court properly.belongs cause present the.question, , such, abatement, cases, jn plea of To a be. law not would or-equity because, sue, in-an inferior applicable, plaintiff could not court the iurisdictiop objection municipal to.á- the a goes denial-Of court -and, cases; in one -to.the jurisdiction any-court equity class .of fit n : in/thp last, or law other court decides-according -the on which .to. objection jurisdiction, An the ground . legal'discretion. of, süit-jis, .the court' thé exemption.from process ict.which a is-brought or'lhe. manner defendant brought, in.which into-it/is' 473; Peters, and- 10 to- by appearance

waived issue. pleading, Peters, 12 300; wheq but -the Tolandv. -to Sprague, objection goes subject -matter, power of the^ the over parties, .court -or. not; need he cannot defendant a better-writ or plaintiff give: inferior, have, Where -no can- bill. court law a-case in jurisdiction in, objection-is equity, the- not ground, by plea abate or taken , exception otherwise, ment, case, as. an given-, general court; Cure the defect of appearance, iu* jurisdiction does power; answer,-demurrer,: relied by plea, bemay dicial goes trial or at to the hearing,...unlessit bringing manner of court, process. into defendant which- submission is waived bv As matter of the' suit subject over bet- a.denial over., realm., tween whom the court has parties within which , to act, an eourt-of English general cannot power, ju-- be'.successful SUPREME COURT. 720 y. State of of Rhode Island The consist- like the could not foesustained

risdiction; a motion present constitution. But as this' Court with its principles ently must its action one of limited special original jurisdiction, cases, controversies, and Over parties confined to particular to-act; authorized it and laws any proceeding have constitution its non action limits is coram prescribed, without judice, want, 415. whether the Peters, P. 4 474; 10 Russ. And S. nullity. or is apparént

or excess party, power.is objected action, Court, it must surcease proceed extra-judicially. must, therefore, in this cause we inquire we can

Before proceed . be determine the matters in controversy hear and we can whether \yithin. Union, of this who are two-states sovereign tween parties, boundaries, they power their respective portion save h,ave each to the federal foreign government, granted So been considered for all federal purposes. term; cases, series of years present long through which, in the case of The Bank of the United States v.

.during fundamental Court has declared this be a Daniels, principle it in and so we shall consider on the deciding pre the (jonstitution; Peters, 590, motion sent states, in their

Those highest capacity, the-convention sovereign whom, revolution, thereof; on people prerogative crown, and the transcendant parliament devolved, act, ahd by any in a controllable unimpaired plenitude authó-. 584, 88; Wheat. 651; constitution, 6 Wheat. adopted

rity, the made to United States a which they grant respectively judi- two more cial controversies between states. the over By power institution, was ordained that this in cases power, where judicial this Court as should exercised one of by was'a ori- a state party, from, their states waived exemption judicial ginal jurisdiction. and- 378, 80, as inherent 6 Wheat. by original sovereigns

power, of its exercise over themselves in such own their by grant right, would not cases, any By tribunal.. inferior giant’to over the has acquired parties’ this jurisdiction gránt, and as their own-consent cause, authority; their delegated by of the United States- in the for power executing judicial agent to submitted the pro- has Massachusetts' appeared, cases specified. of the in bar and plaintiff’s in her capacity, plead

cess legislative asked; is of the Court on which the action, certain judgment matters well rest, as are thus at all doubts over parties jurisdiction TERM, 721 State, Island The State Rhode as the submission of the- people, tbe power by legis- grant on Court to its exercise lature process; calling juris- bill, case answer. by. plea, diction presented .the be, will we Our next whether of the inquiry suit, to hear and matters determine-them. subject states,

That it two cannot be denied; cbntroversybetween not, terms, the constitution does extend the though judicial power to all between two controversies or more it in ex yet terms none, cludes is,- whatever be their nature or It may there subject.

fore, construction, whether the in the controversy question pre sent case The solution of this grant judicial power. within (cid:127)must constitution; the words necessarily question depend and intention of the convention which framed and meaning pro it for and ratification to the convéntions of the posed adoption people states; several with a reference such together sources are resorted to judicial information courts construing statutes, arid to which this Court resorted in always construing the constitution. It left necessarily power legislative Court, to define its organize Supreme with powers consistently constitution, toas and to distribute the original jurisdiction; residue between this and the inferior courts, power establish, it was bound .ordain their respective defining whether powers, which and how it should original appellate, by .be exercised. In of the obedience constitution, injunction their exercised so far as congress power, they thought necessary under the seventeenth proper, section, clause first eighth article, for into execution the the consti carrying pow-ers vested tution in the as well as all other judicial, officers of departments of the United States 389. No Wheat. government depart could ment itself; the constitution for the organize provided organi mode its exercise, zation but it legislative power, delineated outlines only Wheat. great' judicial power; 326; 4 Wheat. 407: details to in whom was leaving congress, vested, by express all laws power delegation, pass necessary into proper execution all carrying powers own. except The distribution and exercise appropriate must judicial power, . therefore be made laws and cannot be as passed congress, sumecTby .other else, the department; concurrent being in the legislative and a conflict between them judicial departments, if not probable, unavoidable, would under constitutibn of go-

Vol. XII. —4 Y

7m COURT.. SUPREME Rhode Maud Státe Massaohhsetts.l [Thtí. made it the duty decide'ah judicial power

vernment which it, cases law odder laws and treaties equity passed, or. or. arising made by'its authority. act- thejudiciary United system, judicial

By State? powers defined}, was. courts organized, brought different manner-pf action, into' The 13th vand-the ¿regulated;-,' exercise exclusive, ju- provided, section “That the shaft Supreme Court aft nature,-'where risdiction 'par- controversies- átate is a of civil ty, except á state and its .also between except citizens^ latter, case, a-state and other-states it Which citizens-of or-aliens; jurisdiction.” shaft Laws, have-original} nbt-excTusive but' Story’s n 59. to;, make provision into congress power carrying ijx pow'er been, such thérjudicial cages,

execution- we has newer ib,b think be.Quéstioned; and dn' Con- taken connection .cannot 'with stitetibp, this .cause, is- presents-thd One of great question-in which and- exclusively construction b'f appropriate pow-er, ju* diciál acts cognizance,dift Vide again -Upon legislative'- it. 203; Peters., (cid:127)3 whether the .case is In embraced present deciding, constitution or excluded act, if-is and judiciary whether a case lawful .of- bv this it -is original cognizance tbe-exeroise. must, be of'the Court, fbf-it discretion' jurisdiction; the-legal bjlb or-dismiss the -Act as we -plaintiffs. may feel to'retain' do, no there-is our -duty sávé'-to appeal judgment, our constitution; can amending power only-its annul itself. So that- the trúe judgments, is necés- question so our sarily,.Whe'thter-'we--will' exercise. jurisdiction-as to--give"a- pn'the'merits of the case-as judgment who presented parties,- law;or áreeapáhle -suing Court, in being- sued'i-ri-this equity, to1-the-natureof cáse, according between-the controversy re- .'states. spective the constitution a's>to

This'Court,.in-construing the grants-of State?, power's'to the-states, United restrictions has pver pf .held, that exception an -any particular case,'presupposes those are not are excepted within grant embraced pro have laid down as a hibition: rule; general that Wher-e ex-' made terms, ception none-will bfe by inere-implication fnade -construction. 6 378; Wh. Wh. 489, 490; Wh. 9 Wh. 438; 206, 207, 216.

Thenthe only is, question whether this case-comes within rule. 723 TERM, .4838. The State of Rhode Island.v.- Massachusetts.] [The of construc principles an according exception, presents

<ir. the Gourt, cases expor acted involying tion. adopted are States, and laws sition of the constitution the.United or' 12 as other ppwer instruments..granting property... construed' 740, That some 437; Peters, 738, Wh. of'implication 6 degree im is a words, must be proposition adoption:- universal given intention, is but apparent, term plication meaning another i£ 4 the consequence,’? évident -judicial inspection'; writing, the 250; Bl. Com. some “or necessary resulting consequence 351; an the con law,” instrument;' 2 .or words of Ves. the sen. inten which, words, the-context,

struction subject, them, tion of are -to be taken into Wh. 4 person using view. which, 445; 6 the common Peters, 739, 741. Such is sense “ books, words or-necessary -impli used in expression express taken, on, connection, cation,” the'words, arise cother with such mer,e construction; sourcesof but not by conjecture,.supposition,-or or intention of the rules reasoning-on meaning writing. All should, if have; would subverted mere extraneous matter effect the* law, a or supreme neces interpreting differently-from obviolis 9 Wh. 188, &c.; as4p so, sarily sense:*. implied apparerif to.be Vide “-Controversies, used; 6 two' dverruíe betw'eén Wh. -words or “all a states,” nature,where civil controversies'of<-a more staters terms; .are broad a-party;” comprehensive meaning' obvious title', nect-^ary implication, excluding-those relate-to-the - or a Wh. 378. boundary, 6 jurisdiction, state. sovereignty’ - The act makes certain judiciary exceptions, only which''apply cáse private persons, cases cannot embrace against state; established rules to such exception forbid extension - a, cases,-if civil nature. are they.are “controversies What.then nature,” state, between state more ? than two states civil

We did must mean from our presume exclude congress controversies', tbose had. states decision-of which consti’-, are.bound, confided to.the judicial power, and give tution laws harmonize, as will such make un meaning them less, there is to be an conflict' between fairly implied apparent their In the respective provisions, constitution, construction of the we must look to the times, history and examine state of when things 354; it'was existing 12 Wh. 6 .adopted, fr.amed Wh. 416; Peters, 431-2; ascertain the law,.the old mischief It is remedy. of part, of-the public history United SUPREME COURT. State, of Rhode-Island State of of -which we

States, cannot judicially .at ignorant, adop- constitution, of-the were controversies between there existing tion states boundaries, their which arose under respecting eleven charters, and had continued from respective! first settlement of the .colonies. New and New York contended for Hampshire Vermont, which is now until territory of the latter as- people sumed their own state, of a and settled the power'the position -.themselyes taking to as the controversy, by disputed territory, .thereof. Rhode Island are rightful Massachusetts and sovereign us;\Connecticut now before claimed of New part Pennsyl- York vania. She Trenton, submitted to the of the council of 'decree acting of the confederation, which decided that pursuant authority Connecticut not the had. jurisdiction; she-claimed right 1800; controversy till' New soil had. New Jersey York, with' in was before this Court L832; which and one subsists yet between Jersey New Delaware. were Maryland Virginia contend- about boundaries when- suit was ing in this pending Court;' and an one. dispute yet open Virginia North remaining contended for till 1802; Carolina and the boundary South Carolina and settled their Georgia, April in. boundary pre- convention, ceding meeting framed general -which 1 constitution. Laws U. S. 466. the full (cid:127)proposed With know- were at its ledge adoption, there only existing controversies between two states but between one state-and singly, others, two we find the words of the to this applicable constitution state things; “ between two'or controversies more states.” It is not known-that there were such controversies then other than any those existing, which relate to and it would be a boundary; most forced construction hold were these excluded from cognizance, it was tt>be confined to controversies to arise prospectively This becomes the more when subjects. we apparent, consider context and those of the constitution parts which bear directly states; boundaries of by which it evident, that there remained states to power,in settle a contending controverted boundary themselves, between as states to act competent autho- their-.own op the matter, or in rity subject any department government,- if it was not in this. the first the tenth clame section of the first

By article of constitution, there a positive prohibition against any enter- “ alliance,or ing into treaty, confederation:” no under the power TERM, 725 less. (cid:127) of Rhode Island v.- State Massachusetts.] act'valid, an the con sucir dispense-with could make government is a In next clause the- prohibition- stitutional against prohibition. with'another “into or compact

any-state- entering apy agreement or with without the state, congress; consent a'foreign power, or in ad invaded, unless imminent war, actually danger, engaging of no this surrender'd' before delay.” mitting By power, pf State, of the constitution was vested adoption every settling boundaries, of their these sovereignty contested plenitude ipor war, could them settle neither by peace, they, might; the new or. without permission; treaty, .compact' agreement, legislative, státés into -eXistence the; -by,then- brought If and several con conventions respective gránts people. their restored to consented, the states were in this respect then

gress original sole limitation inherent SUch sovereignty; being consent .were .constitution, when left the states-as they .given, -imposed before, 11 Peters, 209; tbis Court in -held Poole v. Fleeger; their became of- settled force, and whereby compacts finally binding them; with effect as'a between the same” boundary operating' (cid:127)so, is, between -That that .the treaty sovereign powers. and fixed nations, become

estáblished compact conclusive all the thereof, andbind and are subjects rights; and-eitizens to be-treated to' all intents and as the true real boundaries. purposes, 209; S. E. 1 Peters, 448, 9; sen. Wheat. -The eon- Ves. considered, struction of :such is-a was so compact judicial.question, and this Court in' Irvine, 425-54; the-Lessee of Sims 3 Dall. and in v. Silk M'Donald, Peters, 2, 18; & Barton v. 3 Williams, Marlatt Wheat. 529 &c.

-In to the of this clause of practical construction the' .looking con- to stitution, and states, in: relating compacts sub- agreements by the those which relate to to boundaries for mitting its consent, congress consent, its and the action of this Court giving upon them; “ manifest, that universal consent action,the most and agree- word^s “ are construed -to compact,” ment” include those which relate to that word is not .-boundary; yet used. No boundary one has ever imagined were excluded, compacts because named; on the are expressly held contrary, they states, be congress, included by necessary-amplication; the evident from their consequence known resulting object, subject matter, context, and historical reference to the state of the times No such country. exception of, has been it thought would SUPREME COURT. State, of v. The State Rhode {The esne- practical purposes; a.perfect nullity-for render'the. clause constitution, intended Une- ciallythe evidently giving .to Not to power compacts. prevent congress dissenting such boundaries, af- the' their so far own merely states from settling other, relations to each their but guard derange- against fected Union, ment of their federal other states relations with affeóted, if the federal be government; might injuriously at act contractingstates plea- their-boundaries might upon sure. construction, to this with equal reason

Every applies led. force to to the over the .clause power granting ,to com- states, as to that clause which relates controversies make an we cannot controversies -pacts agreements: exception boundaries, without same rule to relating' compacts applying fo them; nor refuse include them within settling general .one' béen in another. Con- included they uniformly .When tebm, about troversies boundary, are consequences serious more in'.their to, the' Unión states, and their relations' contending If than the constitution-has compacts governments, and'agreements; must, them, settle remain .to given department power interminable;'and as the states can take large powerful possession of’ their ac- claim, the extent and the small weak ones must and submit to quiesce physical power; possession large, state must be peaceable consequently uninterrupted;'prescrip- and, be asserted, tion will and whatever be the may right justice there- can be he controversy, no.remedy, though may just-rights foot, the, violated. Bound hand and of the constitú- prohibitions tion, treat, state can with its' neither complaining agree, fight consent resort adversary, the-judicial to. congress: without -a. means left for is the-only legally adjusting, persuading

state which-has- enter into an possession .disputed .territory, Féw, to a if boundary, controverted agreement or.compact*,relating jvill made, it is be -when any, pleasure poS-- left when session; can decide known on the but. .that some‘tribunal probable mpst it is’ controversies com- rights by- will settled pact.

There cari tribunals under the who two constitution act .can or the boundaries legislative judicial power; former, is dissent, limited to assent or a com- express terms where is referred states; them the the.latter agreement pact by. TERM, 1838. -727 , Statp Massachusetts.], Rhode. Island V. Tire -,a this^Court, exercised when -a .state only is party,

can.bé or it here, is cannot For these reasons cannot we (cid:127)ppwer exist. that it coüíd intended-’to-provide have been for the- only

persuaded ' boundaries, Settlement when could;agree; altogether states to-decide controversies which states power could Withhold the-most presented call for not settle- agree, imperious speedy ment. . constitution,

-There is another in. the clause1 which'bears ontthis -The extends “controversies between question. citi “ states;” of different zens of the samé between citizens state-claim know, under different We cannot ing lands grants states.” necessarily that’the latter classes of-cases must- arise1on judicially, and that if few arise boundary; ever other source. If from.any states, there is a between it settles the compact Jine: 'original it is the law thé case states right; Citizens, and'its binding-op-the beep1 as if it contested; had if fully never there no compact, is then the be settled, must contróversy the’-line of adjudging where rules ’boundary.oughttobe, appropriate-to. case. laws-and 6 2 It 393; Peters, 300. is recollected" Wheat. such thaivany-' “ arisen, have ever cases btetween citizens of the same as the state/? ,for. provision made this have judiciary acts of. -this"un exercise doubted not/-necessary constitutional it is for jurisdiction; tne eause, decision whether a-law is this inquire necessary “ cóntrov';,rsies for- th'e other But class' purpose; eases between states,” different' the’eleventh s.ectiojn citizens of-rthe1 act judiciary makes codrts in their the. circuit provisión; and- áhd this? original, Court in. décided -on appejlate jurisdiction; boundaries' of states, under whom' the Claimj-whether parties respectively there ' ornot; a'comp&ct been Th’e the drciiit court in , n such cases'was asterted distinctly Court as expressly ,by S. P. earlyi-ás Miller, v. ; Dall. 5 Peters, Fowler 411-12 17.99^0 . 290 In Lessee v. Handly’s Anthony, circuit court Ken tucky decided oii Indiana, between that state aiid thfe-boundary in an and thé'ir Was ejectment parties; judgment between-these affirmed Wheat, —18; 375; this Court. 5 S. Wheats P. Harcourt 21 2 Gail lard, 12 Wheat. 523 boundaries can states deí be.thus When individuals, cidfed suits between we collaterally cannot,.by anyjust rule that this 'interpretation,-declare adjqdiyate cannot question ni a contro boundary, presented -directly, when versy two or more ih only, point cause.

728 SUPREME COURT* State The State..of oí Island v. [The Massachusetts.] reference, another of from to the yet source 'ascertain

Tbere trué construction constitution. of adopted ninth of the by article confederation

By'the legislatures states, States, the it United in-con- the “.That provided, several is. on assembled, shall be the last resort in disputes all

gress also appeal, differences now may orwhieh subsisting, hereafter arise or- more states, two any other concerning-boundary, jurisdiction,-or It whose tribunal, the of a cause directed appointment whatever.’* . to It conclusive. also congress should

judgment filial gave judicial tribunal ón a either power appoint petition decide who¡ states, of two or more the.párties, land under claiming grants boundaries, their the made had had adjusted grants previously the the One of most evils controversy crying, .of arose. was, without confederation it power created ap- arid aetion body confined power pf congress; of courts trial of for pointment committed piracies and. felonies seas; on the in for all cases high finally determining appeal, on. for the before captures; referred adjustment controversies ;io. Yet defective as was confederation- other respects,' there was'1 full two power settle controverted finally boundaries tbe- cases, by of its by.a,-state, citizens. petition one This an-appeal from its given was conviction'of necessity, the’universal to preserve states; order even harmony confederated among dur- If ing pressure this state was. revolution. things, of. deemed, to. indispensable create-a special judicial-power,-for sole express and. purpose boun- finally settling disputes concerning arise how.they when dary, might; this-power plenary, judg- ment while to. conclusive the-right; powers delegated forms, one in- cprigress, shadowy mere conclusion at. least is were That which emanated from the evitable. constitution' directly in, states, conventions in- people, in. several could not have' been tended less give 4he.judicial power jurisdiction, extended less means (cid:127)'f fipal action, efficient articles than confedera- adopted tion states,.had mere by legislative power of -given tp tribunal special. whose were appointed by congress, members the-mere creatures and representatives legislatures,'appointed them,.without any action the state.. people This. exists direct from their grant the people, judicial power; themselves, exercised their- selected authority, agent purposes specified; the states the'people'of they respec- 1838. 129 JANUARY TERM7 pf B,ho'de v. The State .of constitution, became to the lively parties gave judicial power of-the United themselves, over be controversies State’s,-jurisdiction tween between citizens of the same or different states, claim lands under their within ,ing disputed territory. conflicting grants, No-fact was more none our could have been .prominent history, more on the members and state strongty general impressed conventions, than1thát lands of the.crown, contests for the vacant long threatened the confederation, dissolution which existed prac 1781; when, common after tically by. consent, five years discussion,.it was of all the-states. .ratified1by the legislatures This Court has fact, Cranch, Wheat 142; 5 attested Similar boundaries, imminent, from controversies about dangér was between states, tijl their decision,,‘with wás made for a provision “That state proviso, should.be for the benefit deprived territory of the United States.” U. Laws S. 17.These-two provisions taken in connection, convulsion, an end to fears of put any by of1states about and when boundary any contests .jurisdiction, could, by tribunal appeal, bring powers congress judicial and the not take land into.activity;, States could1 vacant any United within the of a state. Hence resulted the principles-laid down .by 12 Wheat. thrt Harco.urt and Gaillard? the boundaries thé were the external boundaries of United .of States states; several the United States any did acquire territory by in 1783. treaty peace,

Yet made to though was controverted express .settle provision boundaries by had no over com- judicial power, supervision congress pacts save agreements between states.as on boundary, grants .to n madebefore did, and them the states could settle compact; so without the whom, consent as no express power congress, or over their such was subject compacts delegated, dissent could not invalidate the law of the 'Such was confederacy- them.. a common war,

dúr-ing external could not.suppress dariger when dissentiops;. dissolution from danger internal when owing states reserved for imbecility of ..the congress, powers being legislative and the judicial purposes; power utter.want United States to states, on on the directly act people rights of the states them) those the sub- (except controversy-between matters, on which mere had but ject they shadowy delegated juris- diction, a radical necessary. became change government constitution, which of'confederation; superseded the articles erected

Yol. XII. — 4 Z SUPREME COURT. of Rhode Island v. The State it into distinct departments, organized new government, assigning, the, and to power to'each' its powers, pass appropriate congress n lawsfor each; into execution so that powers granted carrying Union could enforced own the laws authority, its. matters, over

all-persons subject granted pf States., the United government department, officer when 'in a time with peace powers, It operate foreign was. to bond of union was not in itself some pressure foreign be.imminent; to ex- domestic sources

states, ahd might from danger ,and alike over judicial persons executive power, tend the legislative, their own the ehumerated subjects grants. their exercise, its waived agreed states submitted sovereignty, settle, other, their with each Court to controversies borne to this confederation; So 'had none agreed terms. excepting terms disputes- not only express including, hot-excepting, and differences whatever. is a declaration constitution front of the sovereign In the “ emanated; ordained, in order to that was Which it

power tie, tran- insure domes union, form perfect justice* establish more best to effect these objects Whether calculated quilhty,’’\&c, it. was incompetent power utterly jby making exercise. to- the consti- old congress delegated

jurisdiction'expressly tuted, court, plenitude over boundaries, .states .in yet legislative granted power* only absolute this Court by states,; powers granted'to;

several whether states, of all taere construction ought;-by implication,, people creation, not of its capable held for the objects, be “ inefficient more, states; the direct two or are justice’’-between establishing before, us Without into for consideration. further going questions Which is one on the there -consideration .can- subject, any general be-overlooked;,and, is its results. not imperious their con- confederation, the states Were Under settle free kind compact .agreement;

troversies whatever under of con- without consent enter into they can none constitution an amicable making in the gress, of.its political power;.thus exercise of the' determination a for political matter .adjustment concurring matter of and ,its, judicial cog- states-and construction congress, nizance, had, be- may resort court which -the appropriate by any. the judiciaryact. ' - states, and of courts has been done in uniformly This TERM, 1838. pf of Rhode Island v'. The State [The.State such,an

Union; ho one has ever deemed exercise to be power palled or* case which it to be coram non extra-judicial,; jüdice.

When, therefore; the court the articles-of judicially inspects -con- federation, tlie constitution, preamble with the sur- together, render, -states, of .all bythe to settle their contested bounda- powér with the ries, express Court; to this we original jurisdiction grant feel not authorized, but only, bound to declare that it is capable this, its applying extent at power; least: as-the' To act 1A substituted the constitution in that place tribunal existed' of.

(cid:127)at time of its- controversies,-and to a adoption, like same 2; effect. . Of As substitute tile own "their contending made in most grant; their" sovereign capacity; pre- conferring relation' their own existing power, boundaries, Which had n surrendered legislative department; thus -.separating political each. power, exercise from judicial defining There is bútone in this Union power that which, paramount-fo -by in our opinion, jurisdiction must be beéngranted, brought into action'if it can. That has been "exerted the 11th in. but while took

amendment: from this Court all jurisdiction, past, future, 382, present/and of all controversies between states 3 Dall. individuals; it left its exercise those between states over as free before;

as it This, too; had been with the full of the decisions view this Court, act of and-the exclusive ,giving nature, .all controversies civil where a state is a there party; cám-be no on which can act with subject judicial power more and certain to effectuate the tendency, of its great, in objects direct stitution, ope us, than before If we cannot “establish justice” states, as the to which -between these tribunal litigant they have both submitted, the of their controversies, it adjudication respective will be a to all are deep Who desirous each regret source depart of the Union should ment have' the capacity government' of. orbit, within its as the instrument appropriate acting .appointed,by constitution, so execute as'to make this bond agency between the states more union enforce the perfect, thereby do each and pf mestic all.. tranquillity thus convinced we have an undoubted fully

Deing jurisdic- cause, of this as we have tion far proceeded examining-whether, laws, a true and construction the. constitution and just it is excluded, ór included in the for grant power, any purpose; COURT. SUPREME The State of of Rhode Island v. ,we exerted; how,that shall be to' inquire jurisdiction now proceed or. the bill. to retain complainant’s whether dismiss pf our the on.which over any. This matters depends jurisdiction (cid:127) If our there is asks one any interposition. subject

the plaintiff y bill act, we the must can be so true inquir retained: the that extent, 1 Ves. but the' existence is, nob as the of any jurisdiction. 203, 205; 2 Ves. sen.

sen. 356. 1. For boun- The hill the and the ascertaining pfays; establishing states, the the order of Court. line dary That

2. the plaintiff the sovereignty right her, and she restored territory theedisputed may quieted re thereof, thereto; her title for further in the enjoymept other for, relief IF can decree any called specially w® lief. with; in the the .we'must relief, consistently prayer, proceed specific 228; 10 Pet. Pet. cause. is, first establish boundary. prayer -Haying ascertain and the is' our within our opinion subject

expressed extent, it to some and on we must exercise some matter jurisdiction, it; and on the> with; or as the bill is dependent, Connected Court, it he done must side according principles equity court, of aof equity. and Usages hill; crown, are forth various. from the cnaxters from In- set -1691, and 1621, to sundry proceedings grantees relation, also' thereto; crown, as agreements-between, parties boundaries, .their adjusting proceed- .colonies and commissioners, of their in relation respective legislatures ings- from-1709, to 1818. The relies-on thbreto, plaintiff .charters rule, settle on the boundary; two-coíoniesj her assertion as her well,by-the charter, continued rights, pre- Indians: purchase denying'altogether Validity vious were proceedings; the-agreements subsequent averring as'-to material tinder facts. On misrepresentation made mistake, hand, the as a pleads bar; defendant agreements other ratified have been that the so plaintiff:- binding, they,.are and. oh his case rests question original boundary, unaffected

plaintiff ,the .defendant on. without agreements, rests by-any agreement; boundaries. us to annul, charter original One-asking regard the; claim, one continual averring agreements; enforce the. other.to Unmolested more than for. possession setting up qyiet, line in the to, strict conformity agreements’. a century, TERM; 1838. 733 of State of Island v. Rhode The State -be,, Our first must our the boun- inquiry-then .power settle dary: in of words, decide what territory other dis- portion .to or the -to' other,, the1one' state pute the’ line belongs according nqt in fact, which is their is .common There boundary. by any be, law can does' not to One or any territory belong which state;' so is, bp-' that the which the Only question territory This must on the each depend longs. right claims Both under territory claim ter- question.1 grants of'contiguous in whom the absolute ritory,'by do- full the-king, propriety ov,erit; minion in Peters, 745, 748; 9 8 595; Wheat. th:e out,in\.his lin'e'.drawn,, is therefore which is that grant, pointed ill two charters as 5 designated both. common boundary 375., Wheat. ascertained,

The line matter of fact, is and,.when locality one separates the'other;'.for territory state can neither its territorial It follows, right beyond boundary. whe.n it is a place boundary, is. of a part territory state; within inseparable -are incidents, title;jurisdiction, sovereignty, and ré- and.

main so till makes some the state cession. plain The lahguáge this Court in 3 Bevans, The United States v. Wheat. 386, et seq., 6f saves .the on this The necessity any reasoning subject. question is then is the extent of put by jurisdiction .Court —What answer, a state “We without hesitation, the possesses?” jurisdiction of á state is coextensive with its coextensive territory, with le- described, power. place gislative within unquestionably is, It then, Massachusetts. territory within the original jurisdic- been, Massachusetts, .of tion unless that jurisdiction ceded “ United lb. States, the' 387.” by”) is. A-cession es~ territory (“ a cession lb. 388. Still the sentially jurisdiction', general juris- (to diction over the to this of power, place, subject grant United adheres to the .States,) as a territory portion sovereignty yet! ”, 389. lb. aWay. given This is embodied in the .sixteenth principle clause of-the eighth section, article of the constitution, relative to district; 'forts, f\rst arsenals, 'dock,.yards, magazines; to all ac uniformly applied States, United quisitions territory by virtue cessions states, or' 5 5 particular nations Wheat. 324; Wheat foreign 375; 388, 89; Peters, Wheat. Title, jurisdiction, sove &c. are -therefore' reignty, dependent settled when questions, necessarily boundary ascertained, which the'line of being is-the territory, .734 SUPREME COURT State,of Maasaohtisettjid, Ríate .[The (cid:127) óf so over it: art3 great questions

Une facts;. <be, two, sovereignty in- this case oh may. depend simple I. Where is southernmost Charles Where is. point river... a, it; sputh line, miles in When drawn from English three. point, ascertained, áre the terms are called these which by those points both, charters;.then' an- line from second point,.is east and west if- the states; two charters necessarily the' it; govern can,' in a If this case of. where both par- Originaljurisdiction, facts, case on ties plaintiff proceed-to rests'his appear, these them; are as- there an end of cause they ascertain must he when certained, then) if the issue between- is the Open original right reason, We think it does not or boundaries. charter require prece- a at dent, to show or without that we facts may jury, ascertain with discretion, courts, do, as circuit and all our the the-ordinary others cause, our examine the in the evidence equity: power course itg effects, fact, a cannot on ascertain however thereby depend' the in their soveréighty of consequences. Whether important the state', individual, or the of an States, of a depends property United or the tree, stpne, of a a whether locality right on the water-equrse; charter, cession, deed; a or Commoii oñ á treaty, compact, depends small, extent, it, or over tois territory great the-.right the fitle of a state is sove- or property; ofgovernment private either 3Q0, 301;. dominion; 2"Peters, the title absolute* full and reignty, it and-law the state it's such makes grant individual aft on between- boundary acts differently-in* deciding Ño court tracts of land: if there uncertainty lines between is separate on than if.there,is the a confusion is; line natüre boundaries'by the Where of, marks, the obliteration intermixing grants; interlocking accident, effects* proprietors; fraud, under. different possession á causes, is ease equity. time, appropriate kindred -or .commission, boundary awarded; or, directed, a is law- at An .issue ' without, either, what and where the; decree* satisfied court'are if state, shall is and farm, manor, a or'a province, be.. boundary it as When, a decree settles boundary, matter -other affects decreed; man in the same at the place right by-original having",bgen or compact; settled treaty where stated ner b’^en sen., 448 to 450.' 1 Ves. when-boundary*is; settled are rights dependent cage, locality on issue in this anwas therefore, there If, river, of Charles we the southernmost point south of miles three point TERM, . Stateof Islandv. ofMassachusetts.], BheState [Th® it; where, decide should boundary be. decree competent between the states was 1.663, dates of- .in at their're- 1629/and charter's. spectiye

On these it becomes to decide principles, the re* on "unnecessary of the billif first, and maimng prayers grant we settle Boun- othérs. dary,the. follow; if'the that, obtains as to plaintiff relief other; forms, extend; wants no he: 'The'established decrees such’ or every thing;in to' way 'manner establishment necessary .final true as the1 line of boundary, power. right parties.

This, however, is not case is an where there issue on original that'fact, does hot rest'on boundary; a' puts plea defendant .in an setting up Between the agreement compact p'arties coloniete,.and actual of a line on,' run, establishmént while agreed marked, and both colonies, and a .ratified long .possession; right' line, such, by prescription- north’of This territory all. pre- sents case on an side, on one to- be conclusive agreement. .alleged on other, .to be.in- every bill; complainéd matter If valid the reasons this matter of .alleged.,- sufficient plea law,..arid fact,.it cáuse; if not respects, ends true .both so-i.n then the Thrown back on- their parties .original rights, according are territory their. claims respective in-question; by charters/ then, at all .Indians. wé can On the purchase act If/ must, case, we decide this state suf- pleadings, legal next, true, to it; of-the if as on a off ficiency the plea, demurrer 'truth averments; its of it bars of. and thén decide whether complaint ..the then, and it we not, the does must ascertain all.relief: if plaintiff, the.

fact- the whole the first aspect turns. of on which controversy In case, it a ofThe most presents common .undoubted question of a which' the of ah defendant equity; court agreement sets as bar all relief, and the asks to be up plaintiff; conclusive declared, most, void, on- of the and appropriate grounds cogni- clear of A zance in law.: equity; not false re» in a court cognizable other; as- to made- offe- confided in by presentation party, .a. execution, on fact the whole causé which depends; agree- , ment, and a it, Under founded mistaken óf on proceedings bélief therefore; the truth of the fact fWé must, represented. do-something in the cause; have, objections, unless in their made defendants exception out this to be an in. its to- usual- equity, course of action questions boundary. SUPREME COURT. State of Rhode Island v. The State-of is a It is said not civil between political, controversy not .constitution, so or section within parties; thirteenth ' the judiciary act.. it-been alone, it is is. the bill had As viewed ipiles a as a- to,

demurred three locality Controversy, point river is the south of .which point Charles only southernmost oh the under the charter. the case arise Taking can. question is, onWren- Whether bill and the question up the-stake plea, set., .1642, Woodword is the Plain, Saffrey, thám point true .and line, east west as the from'which-to run compact an case,.it a of the on* In the states. aspect depends first between .the second, the law whether the is dn fact; of equity, agreement neither political controversy, or valid: present void nature, of occurrence one„ of an ordinary frequent suits judicial ' n betweenindividuals. cannot be then, political This Controversy, one, it becomes so éffect.of unless by:the settlement boun- the con- fact, or because on the the.agreement; a decree dary; by unconnected power, test between political rights states boundary. compact .with the original, .who conducted the colonies

We not impute will men .at in the three hóme, and in declarations rights pre- congress, 1774, to revolution, 1776,. of the to the consummation vious an- declaration of the then act, rights arid .final boun- an of the effects territorial ignorance worldj nounced of the thein, both déclaration Every between capacities. dary if the line of not to falsified, held territory old wouid congress line of first, been, power. from: property which, framed and recommended the.articles cdngress, several legislative adoption, confederation if that a final in a of'fatuity, they were strifes; thought acting spirit op boundaries, not deci- state equally .was judgment conclusive state; power by the-exercise making right- political sive line. but void within', beyond adjudged ful conventions, were alike of the

The meinbers general know the effect fatriitous, if did. comprehend, themselves, to pow- controversies subiriitting states constitution, if the members er; congress so were the.first its know, read, not understand see, plain and not pro- could théy frame. in its visions, of them when:many assisted know, but what has .not could our government founders TERM; 1838. 737 .. The State of Island v. familiar, been, and to

ever statesman and that all every con jurist, nations, are, sense, between troversies political, not judi ’ but cial, as none can settle In them. sovereign1 the declaration states, assumed their independence, station' equal among earth, asserted that could powers do, they .of what right “ do; other states could declare independent war, make con peace, alliances;’'’ of with, tract consequence, settle .a controversies ,no or1 themselves, power, which state, and foreign among 'power could do-for them. did an They France, alliance contract with.

1778; other, and with in 1781: the each of both object de fend and states; their asserted fights secure surrendered they tó congress, appointed power; its' right settling their, controversies;, mutual thus them /making7 judicial questions, whether arose on or boundary, “ cause jurisdiction, any other of, or,reason There is whatever.” neither for the .authority, laW. nations states, between is,-in

position, nature, its any or more a than c>nwhich political question, .they may subject' 'contend., be Without None can settled War or which is treaty, by po litical but under the old and.new poivet; cóuld confederacy,they can be themselves, court constituted by as their own settled 'substitutes, states, to do that which'statés authorized could alone true, do befofe. W are thus1 line pointed between bpundary -A political questions, and-judicial power, sovereign decides o,wn his will, own is the law within his supreme boundary; to, 9 Peters, 714; Peters, 748; court, decides judge, or according the law prescribed by and that'law is sovereign power, the-rule The; for- to, judgment. submission sovereigns, court of law or them,' of a equity, controversy without pre decision, rule of scribing any decide gives7power according law-of the (cid:127)appropriate case; 294; Ves. depends on the sotifce nature! of the Claimsof subject.matter, the parties,-and end the law which them. From time such governs submission, ceases to be one, decided question a'politieal sic volo, sic the cpurt comes jubeo, political power; decided discretion, judgment, solemn legal, consideration rules of law nature as a to its appropriate judicial question, depend on the exercise of itás is bound to ing power; act-by,know;n and settled of national principles municipal jurisprudence, case requires.

It has never been courts of contended that admiralty prize juris- ' (cid:127) Von. XII. —5 A SUPREME CÜÜRT. 738 Massachusetts, of Rhode The State of j State Island'v. [TE.0 them, they' before diction, not.strictly de or questions, judicial; are. treaties, ofnationS, the law of war and peace, question®

eide nation, alone are they, by capturing which municipal.Jaws a constituted solemn fortiori,(if a .such constituted; courts were únjdér máde, whose was state authority capture between treaty the, suffer or All' state capture. whose subjects citizens the . oyer the. of-such courts their.subjects, háfións jurisdiction submit final, 6 Cr. conclusive decrees rights'.of property. ánd hold-their 5 . 284- to the considerations lead .-ofpolitical.and These judicial definition thát a the former .which state sovereign'Or q'uestioris; power exerts, by 3 authority,as confiscation; or its Ves. his reprisal Own s latter, 429; is' i a or which 4o judicial granted tribunal» .court are in states;, nature- politick!, So-of-controvefsies'between when, or. state oii loitselft-he right reserves sovereign deciding “ to- settled as -a.treaty, it; subject makes-it'the between states’ ’ “ from the. foundation of independent,” .representations , them This equity, adjudged parties is'pólitical state.” ádmití,i®terédiby a selves, Contradistinguished j equity, as. from udicial et bonum of thé cáse, let who.or .equüm' decreeing justice, court m. the the definitions Jaw be the before These as parties are what Russell, 3 Ves. Of case 435; in the Barclay great'.Marylánd made v. been, settled, Their arid correctness they, have'long established.. hqtested by.a..reference ’.boundary, question.of original 'Will constitution ever has been,and'yet bythe .England;, as.it i® Colonies; 588; as'it revolution, was ours'before while Wheat. 1788,..and from since

was here 1771 con thence. to 1781, Cou^t, as expounded by this stitution ' If -quéstion concerning pieces bf contiguous boundaries..of manors; realm', within 'the lordships; counties arises land, pSdatin,e; in the in an cognizable high'coúrt. 'chancery, appropriate wa® mere was question defined casé; only part, cognizable, any. of'title'to. or real action in oftawj either : by. were ejectment sen. Ves. 446-7. If counts case "Pala questions.. 1 but; hot involved tine, boundary only sod, right highest of.

, to théláW ex known the same England, jura-regdia,. to franchise as the tent Pala king right crown-and'royal jurisdiction;- till, 24 qualified tine sovereignty, abridged 24, 380, 382, 638, Seld. 1 838; H. Tit. Hon. Black. 8. ch. Com mentaries, 19; 108-17; 7 Co. Cro. 240; 4 D. C. D. 450, &c. The El. ÍERM; 739 *838. jsknd StatVoiMassáchusetts,] Kftode [TRie apd ;the law equity appointed count of eourts'-of judges- king’* , in* hisn^me, into his run. .writsweré writs-did :coupty; dictmepts his "his -Yet peaép,Cb. 204-18. against jurisdiction; Inst. his, oy &c., accord existed royalties,, jura regalia1, disappeared, ' y. Baltimore; Penn should to boundary. cháncellor ing as decréeas 1 had no boun 448-9, Ves. sen. &c. over* jurisdiction- king' he'had; dominions, his realm,, without dáryWithih must, absolute, ,all owner, the' .title and whom territory, 76; Com; 322; D. C.D. flow; Litt. 1; Co. Hob. 241; Bl. Cowp.205—11; b., .saye a a limited jjowér legislator; supreme 7 Co. s.the t in in could unmake He -part make parliamen .and boundaries exercised, He of ¡dominions; in .proprietary provinces. his -except polonies the to the 1763, as in Mis power by :by treaty, limiting South by proclamation; sea.: sissippi; whose-charters extended .the 524;, 12 which Florida law,’as in’. and Georgia,. supreme was Wheat.

1 council; Laws as Massachusetts S. 443-51; by. order in U. all the But in cases was cited-in New-Hampshire, argument.', to dismember which was by-his, royal; political competent power, or if on the 'chartered was not though proprietary, provinces. exercised council, Ih Johnson, 8 580. the v M‘Intosh king . Wheat. . 1 447 He decided on had no sen. ap Ves. original- power, judicial' boundaries, in of his courts, colonial- settled the peals virtue if there is a but where was there prerogative, agreement; disputed therefore, the it, council the cannot decre'e agreement, king .the contract, foot rerhit .it to be another determined in place', . 1 where* there of his was no Ves. sen. In virtue . prerogative, 447 acts, as a ad 205, 1 not Ves. but agreement, king sen. judge, his,counsel, the ihembers tlie 'whereof sovereign acting advice npt 3, ch. 1, the statute 20 do and cannot sit as E. By judges'. .££ fp his

declared,' that hath power delegated 'judicial whole king 1 laws,”' to the Ruff. all according matters judges, judicature therefore, none to exercise: had, he 70, 4 Co.Inst. 74: 246; in council, not members of did judicature, judges, though .sit ás his merely advisers. ' colonies, courts had no over pro- persons therein, cases; colonies and two provinces being.cor- perty except 'amenable to 3 were Under- Ves. porations patent, letters is a bench, warranto, which prerogative king thp king’s quo writ; the letters which facias, and-a scire patent, to.repeal chancery, cases, court in such is a of that- part statutory jurisdiction 740 COURT. SUPREME y. State of The-State 'of .Rhode-island-

the court also in virtue chancery, royal prerogative, which the But, charter was not-act made. could onboum chancery : in the- or chartered colonies it act on could royal pro darles lords when Were'in ivere- prietors realm, they where provinces,, they in their were they dependen! provinces Subjects; though sovereign, on-the crown and the Acts only parliament. general supremacy did not them, unless them parliament expressly, extended bind 1 had sen. by, necessary consequencé, They all. Ves. of'counts soil, and the powers palatine, pow absolute propriety ers, of restraint them legislation; only was-by powers to-the his letters crown- king patent, reserved allegiance in-matters prerogative granted.' parliament -The op the American of. revolution, -to the Was, confined principle commerce;” “external regulation though by English principle, -it extended to cases whatever* Yet were sovereign as they those, of thé all-things,'except relating powers king parlia ment, coqld between, chancery di.d-act'oh them as to agreements boundaries, Baltimore;’ in the case-of.Penn v. it could not though so stood at have done case arms’ in.which length-; kmig had alone, -could have decided council anon original boundary appeal, Ves. sen. 446. also could-and-did decide on Chancery Man, a feudal Isle óñ a bill kingdom:- title title, and tithes, relief rectories discovery was mere franchise,-A plea overruled. 1 was v. jurisdiction, Derby Athol; Ves. 202;. P. Sodor & 2 Bishop sen. S. Man E. Derby, Ves. v. 337, 356.

sen. In each of'these tó-the were cases, objections made those .this, similar were overruled;,and but the- neither mbde either have been authority or on con principles of questioned^ the have been and trary, they .courts which recogniséd adopted the ,of course of the follow law each the involved England;' yet-' same as the In the first, decree as boun question present. the settled by the collateral dary 'consequencé and dependent,questions title, and of- the jurisdiction, sovereignty, disputed and over terri last, in the two on a . the title to a suit tory; tithes, and rectories y feudal a was. but kingdom matter, settled. dependent .'was b that the had a deciding bishop He claimed. The right titfies was same settled case of the Nabob of ..principle the; the Carnatic East jt The India Company, to in though referred commonly of position. favour contrary TERM, 1838. Stata v. The .Massachusetts.] [The'State for;an

Qn -the on a was the'case account original pleadings; bill on two andM787; founded in..1785. parties, agreements.between The ánd under their charter,' defendants plead privileges their rights limits; to' and war that the power maxe peace plain- (cid:127)with within that the stated-in the bill agreements tiff a.sovereign prince; was were made 'with in their one as dn absolute, him capacities, respective the other as a that qualified com matters sovereign;, therein war, thesecurity aiid tained of their related to defence peace respective territorial possessions. was considered* thus chancellor; and.overruled- plea 387, Ves. 371, answer, An

exercising extent. jurisdiction to. as in, same .matter then put plea; Containing adding, were, of a federal agreements parties between treaties cha both 1787 was .sovereigns;' agreement being racter* thereof, were, ipatters and, therefore, thé final-treaty; cog subject nizable court. bill law municipal nations “ It was dismissed on this is a case treaty mutual ground; that'instance, other; of each as States persons'actings independent eircumstapee.that the East are mere Company India subjects to do with with that. -That this .country, nothing relation'.to , into with as a was entered neighbouring independent treaty them state is'-the was a between-two- samé treaty sovereigns;- [f not q. consequently-is subject municipal-private, jurisdiction.”’ ¿hat It beep thus is manifest, if merits, answer had there miist been the dismission from the l'esulted new -decree:' frpm added, matter as is on.the" evident chancellor theiopinion answer, lord plea; and his .Eyre closing and.of commissioner declares; remarks, which he that the case wholly “ was.considered and was decided on independent plea, judgment on. answer, that it was not introduced matters mercantile showing nature,

in its decision therefore the stood political; wholly clear of the 2 Ves. judgment, jr. plea.”, That, a sue in an court of. law or may foreign sovereign English was settled in cases Hob. equity, 113.. king brought Spain, That á sue in such foreign may chancery, by government agents-as it authorizes to bill them, served, on whom a cross can be represent with such will defendant, them do process compel justice was Rothschild, decided in the Columbian 1 Government v. Sim. Spain

104. These in Machado, cases were The v. recognised King lords; held had house who that a same king right 742 SUPREME COURT. Stale V. sue, but when he did in other person, ehancery, as.

süe suitor, who or submitted its sought jurisdiction; as any decide 'the treaties could on validity that it construction and allied of. on Europe 1614;, sovereigns between’France of a between France and the validity private and-separate, treaty Spain. both both considered wére. questions; fully

The case involved chancellor, lords,, in 'decree affirming overruling 560; demurrer, Russell, that the for assigned cause plaintiff put made had a case auourt-of any'’relief equity, n'ot for. reasons, that a could argument; foreign assigned sovereign his court yirtue sue prerogative rights; an English of, these would hot out France, with rights, accruing treaty enforce with the which was-inconsistent’ each of relations existing between those'countries, 'and. (France .of Spain;) king England; series, 44, 46, 50, C. 60 new Bligh. P. , of. bench also will consider the effect of court the de king’s ¿etion in an treaty.

claration on a bond. independence peace, & E. 3 D Folliott v. Ogden, , view, of- the From this law of clear, are England; results settlement of. in council, the- boundaries''by-the his king- is by pre whiefois rogative; political power,acting political' question a. between-dependent corporation^ his proprietaries, dominions -' without-the,-realin. When it done in it is hfiancery, judi the; law,’-’ cial in-<£ power, according judicature necessarily whether relates the' judicial question, .provinces; Baltimore; to an owners, between as Penn agreement according v. title to a feudal in a suit kingdom, appropriate equity, feüdal the' appears'.and as in case of pleads, the Isle king

wh.erethe Oroh Man; ah and the agréement-hetween East foreign sovereign in their mere India-Company., corporate capacity. But'.when of a assert company'assumed character sovereign, ágréement to be' ^federal treaty,” them plaintiff, as neigh-, each and the independent, to be b'during Sovereigns, matter subject war, in-its nature, on no political court peace mifnicipal to; nations, can act law of by the chancery has jurisdiction, bill. dismiss .the because it 'Not' on a is founded but becausé treaty; defendant .refused submit toit power: for, had the not-made the answer,"1 Company objection, court must in The King Spain Machado, and decreed proceeded .as TERM, 1838. Island v. The State of State of Rh'dde court, the the well as treaties. construction of validity, as the foróe a defendant to case, not subunit sovereign' .one could the merits, other, but in he their wás .the cáse the cognizance; when a and defendant, a .was Who plaintiff, appeared plead, and the subject whole the decided matter of was by judicial power, subject pleadings is-the been, and and settled judicial question; course as-.a such in, equity England.

. In the-colonies, -was there tribunal could no 'settle judicial which them-; boundaries between the-.court úne could .adjudicate .for thp another, unless as a to do 'rights plaintiff. only power it;,remained in the was king, where-there agreement-; and.in one, so chancery,where was parties appeared; there that sp a,nd was till partly remained political partly judicial, question the declaration of independence. -Then being . indepen- dent; reseryed to power themselves their settling own bounda- ries; was matter, and so necessarily which apurely political continue*! Then, 1781., till the whole'power over contro- delegated states verted’bduodaries decide, congress,' as appoint court to a it, final as-a judge's, sentence-and.-judgment judicial gjve- settled, a question, by- specially appointed power, judicial substitute, council, thé court of in a king chancery case; .proper before-the .one arid other as a a-political, judicial question.

Then constitution, came-the which divided the-power between political departments, after -incapacitating states jttdicial from their com- upon any subject, by settling or-, treaty, controversies’ pact, agreement; coriipletely reversed established long- eourse Jaws were Compacts, agreements and. England. to the

referred to the political,, power. controversies judicial This this .and presents All part very plain cáse -simple aspect of their decision controversies to states have transferred it Court; each demand of. right had exercise had made confederation of 1781 ppwer judicial .bythe that we do that states 1788; should which' neither congress could do, settle them. We should between controversies forget we our to declare to that had states duty, high litigant determine

over but not hew and judicial, political con- nature, troversies: was of a a civil and.not political that one; and dismiss the bill from without plaintiff’s our records, even We consideration.. giving equally should forget .die- COURT. 74 i SUPREME. The State Rhode' Massachusetts.} [Tte tbjstt' reason, rulé .law; drawn by.

taté known fact ponfc capnot pature ofia oversy pr.states, kings judicial; decision, final it is of where,they resérvelo themselves/the not that has'been necessity by political power; inherent to; judges,'as, judicature, according delegated' matte.rs . These rules and

law.. been principles adopted.by a' early

from very period. (cid:127) down, it .was could not at In laid' law though sue as. there an incorporeal right, of-sovereignty.arid jurisdiction; ho ocluid had.in reason,wh'y remedy That equity.. one another, lhe file a- bill to be. as to quieted boun .state-may agairist Court commis daries territory, of'disputed -might'.appbint sioners, it is them; since monstrous to of to ascertain and report talk t remedies. Dall. In correspondent; (cid:127)e^istirig rights,, 413. Withou ¡whether .was, in -thé casé Wilson, v. only, question New 'the- Jersey -from,'taxation. "held,.certain- lands In 164.. 'Wilson 7 Cr. exempt held,, the the'Court óf-thé v. judicial power .that Virginia, Cohens States, .¡must be- -of any judicial United .capable .deciding question jin eases, arid That one out'of class cohstitution .'laws'. fhe .of growing “ ,'the is the the' of case nature parties every the of thing, character of, the; nature; case other,-“the in thing, the nothing;” ..every .'the. That, character, tp. the elause. the nothing.’-’- relating of cases parties treaties, constitution,, under laws, Or in law the equity,^arising terms, “thé of condition the regards party.” or exception makes it is' If exception, be.implied' a'gainst'tlie there- express n -the second class, article. In jurisdiction;depends “the of.the Words “ Contro- entirely parties,” comprehending the character'of “ be, states.” two: If parties, versies between these mofe it. whát Be may entirely -subject of-,controversy.. unihrportarit have; these to come*1 what constitutional into may, right

.it parties, jVh. of-the-Union,.” -6 384, 392-3. .the.'courts that the Cases of

In course appear, will following Court ip has been accordance with thé fore boundary, 'on the subject arise as it in a rules; case in or a let question may, equity, going ¡it law, .nature; or criminal arid whether in- civil base affects statés, or States, United individuals,’of depends thé fights'of laws, Charters,- treaties, which relate to bo'uhdary. compacts, cessions suit involved Campbell, Robinson v. In construction made, Carolina, Of. 'between North Virginia compact on the 1802; and: whether question, in,-controversy turned land :745 TERM,-,1838. v; State Rhode Island -The State-of [The! Tehnéssee; limits of was which the Court always-witbin original 213, 218, 224. States v.Bevan, was decided. ‘The'United Wh. the, miirdér; an indictment for for the questionsicer'ti'fied Opinion 1st, fhis Court Were: the- Whether -the Offence at was place which committed,, was 2d, -within'the arid of-Massachusetts;, jurisdiction- was whether'it committed circuit court within (cid:127) decided; district. as a question -considered ft Williams, 3Wh. before stated'. Burton 'boundary, 339,386, Jn a'collision, of the case interest Carolina, involved between North Tennessee, States, and' the United under thé! cessions the former to the two this Court reviewed all the' aets of con latter, on the the two-states and motives subject, par gress'and arisen, ties, had" to ascertain the basus ever whether foederis the compact involved construction Tennes case-also ip States, made hse lan- see ahd- the'United (cid:127) , it: ’to -“The the'American members family güagé' .relation we, constitution, defence 'means '.of -ample under possess' to come' But our domestic. har will'verify! happily, hope-ages taken, each other is operation against mony, -power aggressive other means of defence ex difficult to what imagine .It-is '-away.”- thoseyhich con case,'unleás süch .a Court adopted, by isted. states; thfe recited, the acts Contracts! independent

struing territory contracts boun relating those regulate fuleswhich ' Chamberlain, In Croix 538. De La v. 533, 3 Was dary! 529, Wh-' “ two held, boundary'between that of aquestion sovereign, disputed nations,, is for properly independent subject diplo indeed/more If than-of the treaty, matic-discussion and of judicial investigation.

n United'States had settled this- by ánd before dispute treaty, Spain Floridas; claim 'of Spain United States the extinguished fixed, all. have concluded Such treaty par would boundary by Gailliard, Wh. 600. 12 v. -Accordingly,-in ties.’^ Harcourt thé'case, Court 1777, thé a British on .decided arose madein grant of the of;1763; acts before tb king reference treaty the the the bf revolution, and' declaration,of-independence, !the treaty effect of . the die be original‘boundary in! order to áscertaih. of peace'-in-178’3, whole case turned. 12 the on which Florida tween Georgia; arose, and Poindexter, samé'point In thé the 524. Henderson v. Wh. in 1795, boundary.'with Spain was course the taken;

same treaty of. Well, cession 'by as Georgia Court;-as considered the Was also by- the of on the acts congress 1802, the United States ánd thé to various B Yol. XII. —5 COURT. SUPREME v.TheStatg of Massachusetts.} of [The, the Jenckes, 534, &c. 12 Wh. Patterson v. title 530, In

subject. the,Chefokees; and the between boundary, Georgia on depended territorial, state, the the. limits was, as to of. accord the only question defined, state, Court them and that which the treaties to with ,the ing Peters, &c. 225-7, pre Bo they had decided accordingly. 2 on the cases, arising boundary, done' various viously 9 Wh. 25; 155; Wh. 2 Wh. and the Cherokees. North Carolina Neilson, & Elam two questions 380. In Foster Wh. 673; 11 1803, the of the of Louisiana treaty ceding 1. On : arose Floridas, by the of the before States, cession was to United as.it fhe 1819: The construction eighth the 2d. the by treaty Spain, of a the north territory lying treaty. Roth article claimed Missis- Iberville,'and from the from the east extending line drawn The,title.to the claimed the parties; by the sippi land Perdido. within the disputed the lands Spain to'grant .right

depended plaintiff; at date' Spanish grant th.e territory; of, then within. it, under aS He, territory Spain; being claimed treaty cession:^ defendant absolutely by confirmed held, On the first the Court on his .that question, possession. rested to,be it-was contested the the United States .boundary, so long-as df Court; two and-not by by governments, settled held between France she been-settled boundary bad while Louisiana* she,held .Tjnited.States ahd Florida, thé Spain while Spain 1803; had then boundary'after could decide agreed*on Cob# " On the-title plaintiff as directly matter thé. bearing the' had held, that as up question,- government .second a mere be treaty article eighth construed time by future "Spain, n thei stipulation previous grants confirmation act, confirmation, some' not a by to be presént legislative made itself, tmd final mere force .'a treaty supreme absolute different land, bound give law .con- construction", was, whom'‘thé'con- question Gn struction. held, Gpurt shoúld bé thé words firmation treaty máde: act legisla- executed an the.language contract, tó be tur.e, course éxercised at power; congress political act. the Court’ discretion; on Court could not But thé. distinction, hetween án executory'treaty, distinctly recognised -carried into the nations, a mere to execution between he contract an treaty, the sovereign parties, and. executed respective and defined itself the effecting line objeet.to accomplished, TERM,'1838.. 747 State of-Rhode of J^assachugfetts.] Island v. {The thus: declares a '“-Our- be the treaty-to between.them constitution 0f;thé law land. It he consequently courts regarded .of jus tice, as an act of the .equivalent-to' legislature, whenever operates itself the1aid without But when the legislátive provision. terms a eontract; when stipulation either import the par a- act; particular addresses,itself stipulate perform treaty ties not and the political, department; judicial, legislature contract, become a must rule for the Court.” before-it.eañ execute and the .Adopting given construction bqundary being by'cóngress, n disputed,in 1804,.when made, the grant the.Court considered -both-to and held questions; them be political, cognizable Peters, 306, 309, 253, 299, 314, 315. by.judicial power. theAll case, in this principles laid-down w-ere.folly considered-and affirmed the United which Arredondo;, States V. arose an act of con under this, the final decision Court submitting gress, controversies States and all in Florida, lands pérsons claiming United &c. rules under its grants, Spain,..and deci prescribing, for “ sion, was the of any- which &c. Thus among stipulations treaty,” Court, under the acting authority by congress,.the held delegated construction article 1819, eighth .treaty Submission judicial-power, became and' questioh; held, consideration, as a operated perfect, present, fullest and. of all absolute. come Confirmation within its the,grants That act provision. political department to be .remained- done; latid, that it was an law .a executed'treaty, rule' 710, 741, 742, the- Court:' 6 743. In Peters, United ,on v.,Perclieman, the' States considering, necessary effect been construction, that which had given Foster repudiated ' Neilson; In cases Peters, & Elam v. numerous" since, arisen to be an has taken executed one, been treaty of title under it to be and-¡property, questions arising and. rulé -of action the Court córigress when judicial; confirmed ever, York, the Court In New unani pecessary! Jersey New were mous between these considering disputed be within reaffirming their .original .jurisdiction,

of the circuit courts, in lands cases between parties claiming under difference different Was the-only opinión states: grants whether, as one one of the New point, York judges, suggested'by not, had award process, compulsory could appeared, cause, not.arise éx need proceed which does parte; point in-ihis COURT. SUPREME 748 ' State, of v: The of Rhode.Island Massachusetts.]1 State as in its Massachusetts stage; ap- present considered has to be merits the.'bifl. to ánd plead

peared to- settlé what is the line 'be- is competent authority, If judicial it questions, from.this power, appears political tween .judicial the- courts of the as law, administered England :an<f (cid:127)view done, to the1' been. decision any one have. without United States* time, Third. statute refer- of: Edward from. contrary, to make our constitution like all-questions to, judicial, red operated power, n ;by submitted parliament were Eng- wlpch these or or and when land,' congress; people legislature constitution, done been reference disputed has this now, letter if we did not be a dead boundaries, will exercise to; referred cases done in Court’has this made it for the Court to the argument necessary The course has taken. that which befen Having disposed, leading pursue we will the others. to jurisdiction, examine objection counsel, defendant’s been the- the declara-

It argued became a state over sovereign independence, tion of Massachusetts ip her charter possession, territory all. the which. she(claimed n agreement; she cannot disturbed:' in thé be which- enjoyment are-two there obvious By To objection answers: .1st. .this confederation, the states.entered into mutual league article thir.d of their their defence 'mutual and sovereignty, general wfel-. .of, revolution, in the settled thus allies War fare;' princi- being nations, as laid down this one prevented ple law Other; at the of' from expense .12 Wh. making acquisition continued, 1788; when; ailiancé war till péacé, 525-rb. This ¿d: her-own boun- surrendered-the.right judge-of Massachusetts submitted the controversy, dary, deciding concerning 378, 380, 6 Wh. 393. tóit this.Court. said; that the

It is people disputed territory, inhabiting ought are as their It1 parties, rights made .affected.. might-with.the* (cid:127)to that a treaty boundary, objected, Compact

same reason settling Valid, the assent a1decree the people make-it ánd-that required was-void.; article -the confederation authority under-the. ninth .of. ‘ The samé n it was make derived legislative power'only. ’ Baltimore; was overruled in Penn v. Objection Poole Court-decláred, an Fleeger, ,agreement'..between states*'con state; boupd the citizens each' by copgress, .Thére.are sented Of protect-theih in of nations, two law the' would principles 74s TERM* y.-Tlié [Tlje- of MasssiéhttÉett?¡,3 State" Rhod? -That de ,facto,.di' property: grants-by government, 1st. parts in- its/possession,-.arfe a.dísputed territory valid against, state- ’(cid:127) 12 Wh. 600-1.. 2d. the-'right had That-when-a territory

,is cession; oy acquired treaty, bv oí even'conquest, rights the.in sacred., hábitánts to add 8 property,’ respected. 589; Wh. are 712; 535; 6 Peters, Peters, 8 Peters, 445; 867; Wh. 9 Peters, 718, &c. Peters, 133; 10 n It contended, been thkt Court cannot has1 .proceed, in this. somq

cause; rule, of 'and prescribed without decisión appro process' the-case; -to ipriate but-no Can- question process on arise .‘on these ha,s now the is pleadingsy-n'One necessary,'as defendant appeared, and in without, which itself first in the plea plead, point cause; the .makes any is, that Whether shall .plea, be proceeding-; the allowed additional if, sufficient in law to the or. complaint, overruled, bar. be notbfe law, a bar true in fact. the ing though case; in it is In. - of. Nabob v. The East that the where India the Company, plea was áji overruled the defendant ground;-whereby to was-pub., additional to á grounds, to motion dismiss;' sustain answer,-,assigning allowed, or is the-defendant must .next plea the prove, thetrüthbf that-is. Court done, set. thé.matters When the must decide Up. ac law of 1 Ves. 446, 203; to: 'the cording- equity;. sen. whether/the shall-settle, leave the .agreement plead settlfe-., .or -boundary to' open ment -the law of by, .nations, Quyjudgmfent) the charters according.to the-.'crdwn claim,-aS-in -5 under hoth/parties which' from Wheat 375; law of as cláimed the defendant, prescription, the oh been for the action' of.this which rules same-principles the,case 453; 1 9 Peters, sen. 760. Ves. -

It the Court though-., render,, dbjected, may -is.further’ they act of without an execute-.adecree congress cannot maid. diffi; there can be no In-testing.this-objection-bydhé-cómínon’law, ag mufatig mutandis; -Baltimore; Penn vi ficulty decreeing, valid, is thé.-agreemeñt. binding between-the,-parties; That ap ‘ therein, .to ascertain and mark line pointing design commissioners Bated; be to to 3 proceedings order-their the Court-; returned- Dali to, note;- thát the 412, decree parties should quietly.hold-according, ; articles; side- of citizens each ’the should line.- be ..the áo far than the bind bound .ahd.no' could them thereby, farther the- assent Peters 209 1 (11 with compact, ;) congress, Ves. hy sen., Belt. 195, 197. 3 sen. Ves. Or if 455; supplement any dif-. 1 occur, sen.; should as declared Ves. if

ficulty do want parlies 75(1 COURT. SUPREME Island-y. g,t'ate, of Massachusetts.] Rhode' [Tfió .tcf, done, resort be jurisdiction, more must another

anything bunch", to the causé .complaint, king’s appropriate Cranch,115, 135, 5 Peters, council.. Vide United States kingin' Qlmsteád; without to the (United make' prejudice case the decree :oould bind. And in persons-whomcthe parties States;) riot. any obstruct, the execution of the' person,,should agreement; case tipie time, -to Court. to be at liberty, apply 1 party 195, Or, 3. sen. as the is one 454; Ves. only question jr. 196.: Ves. divide, will-not will Court’ the'y retain

of jurisdiction, hill,, and .a forrim collateral decide .parties .proper direct 205; 204, Ves. sen. 356, 357; 1 454; 1 Ves. sen. Ves. questions.. sen. the.other, hand, Cranch, On should agreement Court will the boundary binding,-the decree be ascertained .held of. charters, tbe according-to alteredcircunistances agreeably established; the ; case rights, being which-the it will and the iti parties, adjudicated, párty adjudged whom be. case; appropriate civilly-;or

may prócess enforce eri-:. state, in-which the aet which minally, laws of. according, to. cases, In ordinary violates the is committed.- right boundary, final de fundi,ons of a court consist settling by-a of equity Cree, arid it when run. arise, Exceptions,as they defining confirming (cid:127) to the circumstances. according must acted .on. to a

In will be administered England, -right subject against writ, a but by. as not.upon compulsion, matter of. :king, grace; fqr 1 Bl. 243; or chancellor, petition Com. writ pfo cess can the. reason 4 against plain givenin king,.for issué Co. 3 78; 255; Com. 83; D. .“-that! 55, a.;7 Bl. by Day; Dig., Prerog. Com. on a himself.” exeeution out No .goes judg command cannot king him, on monstrans droit or p-

ment decrée petition,Of against de favour; his of an which had been taken in or traverse inquisition fight, á reason, as the. benefit for this law-gives,him prerogative for. is to do a 255, BL he his Com. never wrong, presumed subjects,.! is a a he to have done the thing

or refuse subject;, presumed right done; decree' decreed, courts that it such shall by .decreeing his it is rendered; as soon as process is lgw though executed by from is. to maké the never taken complete, Out record made 83, 9 C. 196; 98, a.; Ent. D. D. party office. Co. 7 Co. for lands made, king á decree removing

whose favour unlawful a Or a seizuré declaring possession subject, actual instanti, is, de eo writ, libértate, a awarding deemed JANUARY TERM. 1838. 75Í ,v. State of The'State ' qf . .thereof; that a. feoffment; seisin, so -with possession made livery before it is is as made taken, afterwards. Cro. El. actually valid if . 523; S. P. 46 3 was, Thie same principle^ adopted by eminent the re jurists

. in, volution, the confederation, ninth article of.' that the declaring sentence of for, in the should be final provided .cases .the, ip-the conclusive,,and case, with be transmit proceedings ted to acts, arid congress, lodged among for-the.security concerned, parties further nothing being deemed necrissary. The. , this* a was indeed

adoption of necessary-effect principle, revo d lution, which on each- state the df . prerogative devolve king he had colonies; 651; held it in the 8 Wheat. 588; Wheat. the, ánd now holds it the realm of within- Englarid; .subject pre ' Jaw, attached to it the’ common

sumptions gave, which it be exercised. must This Court cannot presuriie,.that any qf which holds citizens,’and state its prerogative rights good agreed constitution that tnose Other state Of. shall has. .each, as its enjoy privileges, do, rights, immunities'.in .own t vyould. do to a dqny either sister state or .its' citi wrong, righ decrees, zens, Or.refuse to those to-submit of'this rendered' ,its to, own when' in' pursuant delegated its monarchy, .authority; fundamental law declares that such itself. decree-'-executes When? too, the’ courts of a most nighest soleirinly kingdom-have .declared chancery the, when the trustee, a court of will enforce king is.a execution of a trustée; Seri..4.53; trust by royal Yes. that' a- ais in court of equity, plaintiff, when can dd-com king foreign terms it thinks has him plete justice; impose any in its power, proper; completely under its control and jurisdiction;' 3 P. C. 57; Bligh; state,of to doubt as to-'the course we-ought not of á this Unión; as-a contrary endanger peace, one would its if not its existence.- In the case of this Court if -Qlmstead, state' expressed opinion, legis States,' latures th'e courts of'the annul United máy judgments becomes a therfeb-y solemn accquired,,the rights constitution its' mockery, nation ’is.deprived of enforcing meads' So, laws,- its- own -fatala result must be' deprecated tribunal. all; must interest in people arid every deep resist- feel so Union, and in ing'principles conse- averting .destructive 115,13,5. so fatal to quences 5 Peters themselves: n motion of is, therefore, The the defendant overruled. COURT. SUPREME , Stateof v.-TEB-State Rhode island MásBafchuseítd.]

Mr. Chief Jiistice Taney, dissénting: ,diásen,t Codft, to' I of 'the opinipn -.the dis- the'.motion' has; Court,, I this. It been find, bill. practice in uniform miss pn from- the Court who. constitutional-: ques- differed justices (cid:127)to I In this tions, conformity to- 'their proceed express usage, dissent. n principle; differ, I not,.in which but do staté'briefly .on think it to enter into the fully óf the. proceedings, stage necessary' fou'ndedj' final, is my opinion upon' hearing reasoning a',more.fit Court; ali the facts are before the: would be case, -fhé. when n for' n éxámi’hingr the, In various points stated opinion of"th.e occasion l-dp ih'which Court; ífot concur.. n pf. dp to hear doubtsthe’ tBis'Court determine and a. 'between, individuals, states,, in- relation

licontrdversy' between Where, states; the suit is to try brought the'boundaries right soil, :or which is the. sub- 'any right properly, property and,which and,;decision, óf depends upon cognizance judicial ject, true’, line. United the courts States'’by to' given powers

But''the and -to'those are powers;, only; subjects, extend constitution and n not. to those which-.-ar,e character; are .their -judicial the suit of' And'whethef states political, indi- is.between be one whieh the 'Sub- -sued-for-must the matter viduals, properly control, in and order to give jurisdiction cognizance .judicial; ject n the,stuff to-' and decide'the parties to the Court try óf flights" Island; bill filed by- Rhode prayer, stated.io object between your follows: That the'northern boundary'line a’s .com- the order -and de- Massachusetts may, by arid the'state of plainants established, and .honourable ascertained of- this cide that, your complainants sovereignty, the-rights mentioned, de- land, tract of. with whole appurtenances or letters Chapter the said patent scribed, and granted, plantations, Island and Providence here- said colony line north, east west an, running forth .set inbefore of. river;'or of said any' of the waters south miles Charles drawn three confirmed to com- your be restored and may or every part1thereof, full and free may your quieted' plainants, Complainants same; over the .sovereignty her jurisdiction-and enjoyment Island, of Rhode óf the said state title, sovereignty jurisdiction; anfi esta-, same;, be confirmed over Providence Plantations com- honourable.Court; aiid your blished decree TERM, lé38. 753 of Rhode v. The State of Massachusetts.] [The have; such and' in the premises further relief plainafits may othef meet, to and consistent with seerh honourable'Court equity this shall arid good .conscience.: bill,

It of the that Rhode fróm appears statement object Island claims of in the soil of the con- no right, property territory'in in, to The title the land not her and troversy. dispute between Massachusetts: The matter which seeks to subject Rhode.Island Massachusetts, from in'this'suit,-is, recover “sovereignty juris- diction,” to bill: And dine described -in her up boundary she the. states; dcsireifto establish.this line between true for the entitled purpose she Mas- showing recover sachusetts now* Massachusetts sovereignty jurisdiction n holdsover the in' ahd territory question.'. Sovereignty jurisdiction ¡matters of thb in allegiance terri- property; disputed ate Island; therefore, a matter of sues tory cannot property. be. Rhode the. matters in arid for political They only rights. controversy, .are be and if she in this .suit; she' only succeeds things recovered¿ over .the which are .will recover political rights question, territory now withheld from her by Massachusetts'.-

Contests -for betweeft states rights Sovereignty not; are particular over'any territory! my, judgment,'the subjects be control,- recovered enforced judicial cognizance ; an are, therefore", ordinary riot-within grant judicial suit contained iri the constitution. Iri the case of Dallas, 4, 4 Connecticut, the note, New York v. “ To have the benefit of the justice Chief Ellswprth-says, agreement the ¡states, below, who aré of New defendants settlers York, must as well as state'herself;' Court apply'to equity, in no cáse .but can a decreed, unless be there is specificperformahee a substantial of soil, not a mere right political right jurisdiction,'to enforced,” protected be

In State, the case of The Cherokee Nation Georgia, Peters, 20, Chief Justice Marshall, in delivering opinion “ .Court, said: That of the bill which part respects land occupied the Indians, the aid of prays protect Court pos doubtful; session, be more may The mere question right might, Court, perhaps, case, decided in .a'proper with'proper par ties. But the Court is askéd do more than the title. decide The bill us to control the and to requires re legislation Georgia, strain the exertion of its forcé. The such an physical propriety Von, C XII. —5 SUPREME COURT. State of Rhode -Island v.The State be well may questioned-. too

interposition savours It much the exercise political power Within the proper But the oh the department. province opinion point makes it parties decide respecting this question.” unnecessary tp In the before case called We are on. and' en- protect' bf, the mere force Island; political jurisdiction” “ bill of the effect, asks us‘to complainant, control- legislature of Massachusetts, and to restrain the eXercisé of Its force” physical within the re- disputed'territpry. opinions above According to, ferred questions these belong judicial-.department. do. construction is,

T-his constitution in my the true-. judgment,; ,1 think one; and therefore this case to be proceedings in ought dismissed for want jurisdiction.

Mr. said,' Barbour that- he _ in the concurred Justice result’of in this case. That- this opinion Court had settle the jurisdiction 'to the two boundary'between -before But' disputed it. he litigant understood, wished as not .which adopting reasoning-by at arrived . conclusion. had did not Justice-Storv sit this Mr. case.

On considerationuf made Mr,.Webster ion motion a-prior op term day present of-this to- wit, Monday, the l-5th Court* D.1838, A. day January, bill- the-complainant’s dismiss filed case want of and of the jurisdiction, for. of counsel arguments had; as .in thereupon well support-of, the said/motion: against It.

is noW here ordered Cohrt, said adjudged, mo- tion, overruled; be,and the samé is hereby

Case Details

Case Name: The State of Rhode Island v. the State of Massachusetts

Court Name: Supreme Court of the United States

Date Published: Feb 21, 1838

Citation: 37 U.S. 657

Court Abbreviation: SCOTUS