terior,21 Commissioner of the General Land Office, 22 the Commissioner of Patents 23 have certain quasi judicial powers some of which are discussed hereafter.

§ 3. Original Jurisdiction and Terms of the Supreme Court. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States is original and appellate. Its appellate jurisdiction is hereinafter considered.1

The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction both at law and equity in all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a State is a party, except where a citizen of the same State is a party, when it has no jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over controversies to which a State is a party is exclusive, except as regards controversies between a State and its citizens, or between a State and citizens of other States. The Supreme Court has exclusively all such jurisdiction of suits against ambassadors or other public ministers, or their domestics or domestic servants, as a court of law can have consistently with the law of nations: and original, but not exclusive, jurisdiction of all suits brought by ambassadors, or other public ministers, or in which a consul is a party.5

A State can sue the United States with the consent of the defendant to establish or to protect a right of property owned by the State, but not one in which the State has no interest although a part of its citizens are interested therein. A State cannot sue the United States without the latter's consent.

A State cannot sue to enforce or protect a right which is purely 21 Infra, § 131. 4 Jud. Code, § 233, 36 St. at L. 1087.

22 U. S. R. S., §§ 446-712, 2446, 2372, as amended; 35 St. at L. 645; 38 St. at L. 742; Comp. St., §§ 690712, 4780, 4858, 5078c.

23 U. S. R. S., $$ 4893, 4904, 4915; 33 St. at L. 726, 727; 34 St. at L. 1252; Comp. St. §§ 9437, 9449-9460, 9491-9494; infra, §§ 146149.

$3. 1 See Chapter xxxvi "Writs of Error and Appeals." 2 Constitution, art. III.

on

3 California v. Southern Pac. Co., 157 U. S. 229, 39 L. ed. 683.

5 Ibid. 36 St. at L. 1087; Bors v. Preston, 111 U. S. 252, 28 L. ed. 419; U. S. v. Ravara, 2 Dall. 297, 1 L. ed. 388; Gittings v. Crawford, Taney, 1; St. Luke's Hospital v. Barclay, 3 Blatchf. 259; Graham v. Stucken, 4 Blatchf. 50.

6 Minnesota v. Hitchcock, 185 U. S. 373, 46 L. ed. 954.

7 Kansas v. U. S., 204 U. S. 331, 51 L. ed. 510.

8 Mississippi v. Johnson, 4 Wall. 475, 478, 18 L. ed. 437; Louisiana v. McAdoo, 234 U. S. 627; New

political. A State cannot obtain an order or judgment compelling a governor of another State to return a fugitive from labor or justice.10

A State may file a bill against another State to settle and establish a disputed boundary. In such a suit the United States has an interest in the controversy, and the attorney-general on his application may intervene, appear on behalf of the United States, adduce proofs and be heard in argument without making the United States a party in the technical sense of the term: but he has, no right to interfere in the pleading or evidence or admissions of either of the States; and in such a suit the judg ment cannot be either for or against the United States.12 A State may sue another State for an injunction against the diversion of the waters of a stream flowing through both which unreasonably interferes with their use for irrigation,13 and at least when the stream is not navigable, the United States cannot intervene.14 A State may sue another State 15 and a public 16 or private 17 corporation of the latter to enjoin a public nuisance affecting a large number of the complainant's citizens; such as the pollution of water 18 or the discharge of noxious gases over its territory.19 Otherwise, it seems that a State cannot Mexico v. Lane, 243 U. S. 52, infra $95.

9 Mississippi v. Johnson, 4 Wall. 475, 18 L. ed. 437; Georgia v. Stanton, 6 Wall. 50, 18 L. ed. 721; § 283e, infra.

10 Kentucky v. Dennison, 24 How. 66, 16 L. ed. 717.

11 New Jersey v. New York, 3 Pet. 461, 7 L. ed. 741; s. c., 5 Pet. 284, 8 L. ed. 127; s. c., 6 Pet. 323, 8 L. ed. 414; Massachusetts v. Rhode Island, 12 Pet. 755, 9 L. ed. 1272; Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 13 Fet. 23, 10 L. ed. 41; Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 15 Pet. 233, 10 L. ed. 721; s. c., 4 How. 591, 11 L. ed. 1116; Missouri v. Iowa, 7 How. 660, 12 L. ed. 861; Florida v. Georgia, 17 How. 478, 15 L. ed. 181; Virginia V. West Virginia, 11 Wall. 39, 20 L. ed. 67; Missouri v. Iowa, 10 How. 1, 13 L.

ed. 303; Alabama v. Georgia, 23 How. 505, 16 L. ed. 556; Missouri v. Kentucky, 11 Wall. 395, 20 L. ed. 116.

12 Florida v. Georgia, 17 How. 478, 15 L. ed. 181.

13 Kansas v. Colorado, 206 U. S. 46, 51 L. ed. 956.

14 Kansas v. Colorado, 206 U. S. 46, 51 L. ed. 956.

15 Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U. S. 208; s. c., 200 U. S. 496.

16 Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U. S. 208, 45 L. ed. 497; s. c., 200 U. S. 496, 50 L. ed. 572.

17 Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., 206 U. S. 230, 51 L. ed. 1038.

18 Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U. S. 208, 45 L. ed. 497; s. c., 200 U. S. 496, 50 L. ed. 572.

19 Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., 206 U. S. 230, L. ed. 1038.

maintain a suit to redress the wrongs of a part of its own citizens,20 for example, to enjoin a railway company from charging unreasonable rates within its jurisdiction; 21 nor, to enjoin the governor and health officer of another State from enforcing unreasonable quarantine regulations, which interfere with commerce between these States, 22 nor to enjoin an officer of the United States from failing to collect the proper duties upon imports which compete with the product of such state.23

A State cannot file a bill in the Supreme Court of the United States to enforce a penal statute, such as a bill to prevent a railway company from violating such State's prohibition law; 24 nor to enforce a judgment for penalties rendered in its courts against a foreign corporation.25 A State cannot sue another State to collect bonds and coupons of the defendant which have been assigned to the plaintiff by its own citizens in order that it may collect them and pay the proceeds to the assignors.26 But a State may sue another State to collect bonds that have been given to the plaintiff absolutely.27 A State may sue for an injunction against the collection by citizens of other States of certain bonds of the United States which are the property of such State, and for the delivery to it of such bonds, and for a declaration that the contract under which the defendants claim a title to such bond is void.28 A State may maintain a bill against citizens of other States to enforce its title to a railroad.29 The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction of a suit by a State against a citizen of the District of Columbia; 30 nor of a suit by a State against one of its own citizens,31 or to which one of

20 Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U. S. 1, 44 L. ed. 347; Oklahoma v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 220 U. S. 277, 55 L. ed. 465; Oklahoma v. Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co., 220 U. S. 290, 55 L. ed. 469.

21 Oklahoma v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 220 U. S. 277, 55 L. ed. 465.

22 Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U. S. 1, 44 L. ed. 347.

23 Louisiana v. McAdoo, 234 U. S. 627.

24 Oklahoma v. Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co., 220 U. S. 290, 55 L. ed. 469.

25 Wisconsin v. Pelican Ins. Co., 127 U. S. 265, 32 L. ed. 239.

26 New Hampshire v. Louisiana, 108 U. S. 76, 27 L. ed. 656.

27 South Dakota v. North Carolina, 192 U. S. 286, 48 L. ed. 448; infra, § 104.

28 Texas V. White, 7 Wall. 700, 741-743, 19 L. ed. 227, 242, 243.

29 Florida v. Anderson, 91 U. S. 667, 23 L. ed. 290.

30 Re Massachusetts, 197 U. S. 482, 49 L. ed. 845.

31 Pennsylvania v. Quicksilver Co., 10 Wall. 553, 19 L. ed. 998; Min

its citizens is an indispensable party.32

The United States may sue a State in the Supreme Court.33 The fact that a State is a stockholder in a corporation by or against which a suit is brought does not make the State a party to such suit.34

The Supreme Court holds one term annually, at Washington, beginning on the first Monday in October, and such adjourned or special terms as it finds necessary for the dispatch of business.35 In case of a contagious or epidemic disease, a term may be held at another place.36

83a. Practice in the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of the United States considers the former practice of the courts of Chancery and of King's Bench, in England, as affording outlines for its practice in the exercise of its original jurisdiction.1 It has made a few rules regulating the same. In suits to which a State is a party the practice in equity is followed; but the ordinary rules of procedure applicable to cases between individuals are not always applied and great liberality is extended to the State affected.*

It is the regular practice to obtain from the court, upon a motion, leave to file the bill. The motion is usually heard ex parte,5 and where the State is a party, leave is ordinarily granted as of course; but under special circumstances, the court will require

6

nesota v. Northern Securities Co., 184 U. S. 199, 46 L. ed. 499; Washington v. Northern Securities Co., 185 U. S. 254, 46 L. ed. 897.

32 Minnesota v. Northern Securities Co., 184 U. S. 199, 46 L. ed 499; Washington v. Northern Securities Co., 185 U. S. 254, 46 L. ed. 897; California v. Southern Pac. Co., 157 U. S. 229; New Mexico v. Lane, 243 U. S. 52.

33 U. S. v. Texas, 143 U. S. 621, 36 L. ed. 285.

84 Bank of U. S. v. Planters' Bank of Ga., 9 Wheat. 904, 6 L. ed. 244. 35 Jud. Code, § 230, 36 St. at L. 1087.

36 U. S. R. S., § 4799; 39 St. at L. Comp St., § 1207.

§ 3a. 1 Supreme Court Rule 3.

2 Supreme Court Rules 3, 5.

3 Georgia v. Brailsford, 2 Dall. 402, 1 L. ed. 433; Kentucky v. Dennison, 24 How. 66, 16 L. ed. 717.

4 Virginia v. West Virginia, 234 U. S. 117.

5 Georgia v. Grant, 6 Wall. 241, 18 L. ed. 848; Washington v. Northern Securities Co., 185 U. S. 254, 46 L. ed. 897

6 Mississippi v. Johnson, 4 Wall. 475, 478, 18 L. ed. 437; Washington v. Northern Securities Co., 185 U. S. 254, 255, 46 L. ed. 897; Kansas

7

notice to be served upon the proposed defendant; and leave to file a bill has been denied.8 Written authority from the governor of a State is sufficient to authorize a suit on behalf of the State.9

All process of the court is in the name of the President of the United States.10 In a suit by a State against another State the service of a subpoena sixty days before the return day is sufficient.11 Service should be made on both the governor and the attorney-general.12 In one case a subpoena served upon the governor by leaving a copy at his house and there showing the original to the secretary of state was held sufficient.18

The filing of a pleading by the attorney-general of a State who has been admitted to practice in the Supreme Court of the United' States is an appearance on behalf of such State.14 The rules concerning the time for pleading in suits between individuals do not apply to suits between the different States.15 The State of Massachusetts was allowed to answer an amended bill of the State of Rhode Island one year after such amended bill was filed.16 If the State fail to appear, or if the State withdraw.its: appearance, no coercive measures will be taken to compel its appearance, but the complainant may be allowed to proceed er parte.17 A State is given full opportunity to comply with the

v. U. S., 204 U. S. 331, 337, 51 L. ed. 510, 511.

V.

7 Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U. S. 1, 44 L. ed. 347; Minnesota Northern Securities Co., 184 U. S. 199, 46 L. ed. 499; Washington v. Northern Securities Co., 185 U. S. 254, 46 L. ed. 897.

8 Mississippi v. Johnson, 4 Wall. 475, 18 L. ed. 437; Georgia v. Grant, 6 Wall. 241, 18 L. ed. 848; Minnesota v. Northern Securities Co., 184 U. S. 199, 46 L. ed. 499; Iowa v. Slimmer, 248 U. S. 115.

9 Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 700, 719, 19 L. ed. 227, 235.

10 Supreme Court Rule 5; New Jersey v. New York, 6 Pet. 323, 8 L. ed. 414.

11 Supreme Court Rule 5; Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 419, 1. L.

ed. 440; Grayson v.. Virginia, 3 Dall.
320, 1 L. ed. 619; New Jersey v.
New York, 3 Pet. 461, 7 L. ed. 741;
S. C.,
5 Pet. 284, 8 L. ed. 127; Ken-
tucky v. Dennison, 24 How. 66, 16
L. ed. 717.

12 Supreme Court Rule 5.
13 Huger V. South Carolina, 3

Dall. 339, 1 L. ed. 627.

14 New Jersey v. New York, 6 Pet. 323, 8 L. ed. 414.

15 Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 13 Pet. 23, 10 L. ed. 41; Virginia v. West Virginia, 234 U. S. 117.

16 Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 13 Pet. 23, 10 L. ed. 41.

17 Massachusetts v. Rhode Island, 12 Pet. 755, 9 L. ed. 1272; Oswald v. New York, 2 Dall. 415, L. ed. 438; Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 419, 1 L. ed. 440.