State of Louisiana Elliott v. Jumel Elliott v. Wiltz
Decision Date | 05 March 1883 |
Citation | 107 U.S. 711,2 S.Ct. 128,27 L.Ed. 448 |
Parties | STATE OF LOUISIANA ex rel. ELLIOTT and others v. JUMEL, Auditor, etc., and others. In Error to the District of Louisiana. ELLIOTT and others v. WILTZ, Governor, and others. Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
[Syllabus from pages 711-712 intentionally omitted] W. H. Peckham, for plaintiffs in error and appellants.
John A. Campbell, for defendants in error and appellees.
The legislature of Louisiana, at its session of 1874, by an act known as act No. 3 of 1874, provided for an issue of bonds, to be designated as consolidated bonds of the state, for the purpose of consolidating and reducing the floating and bonded debt. The bonds were to be payable to the bearer 40 years from January 1, 1874, and bear interest at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum, payable on the first day of July and the first day of January in each year. The amount was not to exceed in the aggregate $15,000,000. The governor, lieutenant governor, auditor, treasurer, secretary of state, speaker of the house of representatives, and a person to be elected by these officers as a fiscal agent of the state, were created a board of liquidation, with power to issue the bonds and exchange them for all valid outstanding bonds, and certain valid warrants on the treasury, at the rate of sixty cents in the new bonds for one dollar of old bonds and warrants. The bonds were to be signed by the governor, auditor, and secretary of state, and the coupons by the auditor and treasurer. Section 7 of the act was as follows:
By other sections it was provided that any judge, tax-collector, or any other officer of the state obstructing the execution of the act, or any part of it, or failing to perform his official duty, should be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof punished; that each provision of the act should be, and was declared to be, a contract between the state of Louisiana and each and every holder of such consolidated bonds; that the tax-collectors should not pay over any moneys collected by them to any other person than the state treasurer; and that no court, or judge thereof, should have power to enjoin the payment of principal or interest of any of the bonds, or the collection of the special tax therefor. Immediately after the passage of this act the state adopted an amendment to its constitution, as follows:
Under this authority, consolidated bonds to the amount of about $12,000,000 were issued. John Elliott, Nicholas Gwynn, and Henry S. Walker are the holders and bearers of these bonds to the amount of $20,000, and of unpaid coupons due January 1, 1880, to the amount of $78,900. The bonds, in accordance with the requirements of the act under which they were issued, are signed by the governor, auditor and secretary of state, and the coupons by the auditor and treasurer.
On the first day of January, 1880, a new constitution of Louisiana went into effect. A portion of that constitution, called the 'Debt Ordinance,' is in these words:
'STATE DEBT.
'Article 1. Be it ordained by the people of the state of Louisiana, in convention assembled, that the interest to be paid on the consolidated bonds of the state of Louisiana be and is hereby fixed at 2 per cent. per annum for 5 years from the first day of January, 1880, 3 per cent. per annum for 15 years, and and 4 per cent. per annum thereafter, payable semi-annually; and there shall be levied an annual tax sufficient for the full payment of said interest, not exceeding three mills, the limit of all state tax being hereby fixed at six mills: provided, the holders of consolidated bonds may, at their option, demand, in exchange for the bonds held by them, bonds of the denomination of five dollars, one hundred dollars, five hundred dollars, one thousand dollars, to be issued at the rate of 75 cents on the dollar of bonds held, and to be surrendered by such holders; the said new issue to bear interest at the rate of 4 per cent. per annum, payable semi-annually.
'Art. 2. The holders of consolidated bonds may at any time present their bonds to the treasurer of the state, or to an agent to be appointed by the governor,—one in the city of New York and the other in the city of London,—and the said treasurer or agent, as the case may be, shall indorse or stamp thereon the words, 'interest reduced to 2 per cent. per annum for five years from January 1, 1880, 3 per cent. per annum for 15 years, and 4 per cent. per annum thereafter: provided, the holder or holders of said bonds may apply to the treasurer for an exchange of bonds,' as provided in the preceding article.
Article 209 of the same constitution provides that 'the state tax on all property for all purposes whatever, including expenses of government, schools, levees, and interest, shall not exceed in any one year six mills on the dollar of its assessed valuation.'
Elliott, Gwynn, and Walker demanded of the proper state officers payment of their coupons which fell due January 1, 1880, but such payment was refused, the auditor and treasurer stating 'that they could not comply with the request made of them, owing to the prohibition contained in article 3, state-debt ordinance of the constitution of the state of Louisiana, adopted twenty-third July, 1879, and recently promulgated.'
All the taxes allowed by the new constitution have been levied for the year 1880, but no proceedings have been taken to levy and collect the five-and-a-half mill tax under the act of 1874. About $300,000 is in the treasury of the state, collected under the levy imposed by the act of 1874 to meet the coupons falling due January, 1880, but the treasurer refuses to apply it to the payment of the coupons, and claims to hold it only for the purposes to which it was to be appropriated by the terms of the new constitution. There are also taxes levied for former years under the act of 1874 which remain uncollected, and which are subject to future collection and payment into the treasury under the operation of the collection laws.
In this condition of things, the appellants Elliott, Gwynn, and Walker, on the sixteenth of January, 1880, commenced a suit in equity in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana, against the several officers of the state composing the board of liquidation, and the prayer of the bill is that it may be——
'Ordered, adjudged, and decreed' that the act No. 3, of 1874, 'so far as your orator's interests hereinabove declared are concerned, was all the time from its passage, has been, and, at the time of the rendition of the decree herein prayed for, is a valid and subsisting law of the state of Louisiana; that the act aforesaid, the constitutional amendment of 1874, and the several bonds and coupons of interest held and owned by your orators as aforesaid, separately...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bowers v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Act, Inc., Civil Action No. 97-2600 (D. N.J. 11/7/2001), Civil Action No. 97-2600.
...(1991) (citing Sugarman v. Dougall, 413 U.S. 634, 647-48 (1973)); Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, 344 (1972); cf. Louisiana v. Jumel, 107 U.S. 711, 727 (1883) ("[T]he political power cannot be thus ousted of its jurisdiction, and the judiciary set in its With these principles in mind, I tu......
-
4115,4116,| United States ex rel. Miller v. Clausen
... ... CLAUSEN, State Auditor of Washington. SAME v. BABCOCK, State ... Lewis (C.C.) 14 F. 65; U.S ... v. Louisiana, 123 U.S. 33, 8 Sup.Ct. 17, 31 L.Ed. 69; ... 173, 59 L.Ed. 316; Louisiana v ... Jumel, 107 U.S. 711 at 718, 720, 721 & 722, 2 Sup.Ct ... ...
-
McElroy v. Swart
...489; Railroad Co. v. Tennessee, 101 U.S. 337; Railroad Co. v. Alabama, 101 U.S. 832; U.S. v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196; S.C. 1 S.Ct. 240; State v. Jumel, 2 S.Ct. 128; Hans v. State Louisiana, 24 F. 55; Harvey v. Com. Virginia, 20 F. 411; Ex parte Dunn, 8 S.C. 207; Treasurers v. Cleary, 3 Rich. (S.C......
-
Morrill v. American Reserve Bond Co. of Kentucky
...nature. Reagan v. Trust Co., 154 U.S. 362, 14 Sup.Ct. 1047, 38 L.Ed. 1014; Smyth v. Ames, 169 U.S. 466, 18 Sup.Ct. 418, 42 L.Ed. 819 In Louisiana v. Jumel the holders of certain bonds coupons issued by the state of Louisiana brought suit against certain officers of the state to compel them ......
-
Table of Cases
...v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 702, 98 S.Ct. 1370, 55 L.Ed.2d 657 (1978), 1175 Louisiana v. Brenan, 772 So. 2d 64 (2000), 1284 Louisiana v. Jumel, 107 U.S. 711, 2 S.Ct. 128, 27 L.Ed. 448 (1883), Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. City of Thibodaux, 360 U.S. 25, 79 S.Ct. 1070, 3 L.Ed.2d 1058 (1959), 6......
-
Electronic waste control legislation: observations on a new dimension in state environmental regulation.
...its treasury or perhaps even government buildings or property which the state administers on the public's behalf."); Louisiana v. Jumel, 107 U.S. 711, 728 (1883) ("[T]his is very far from authorizing the courts, when a State cannot be sued, to set up its jurisdiction over the officers in ch......
-
Pleading sovereign immunity: the doctrinal underpinnings of Hans v. Louisiana and Ex Parte Young.
...board held property on behalf of the plaintiffs with a specific, mandatory duty--but it was first made explicit in Louisiana v. Jumel, 107 U.S. 711, 725-26 (1883). See also Collins, supra note 42, at 226-28 (204.) See Jumel, 107 U.S. at 725. (205.) See McComb, 92 U.S. at 541. (206.) See Jum......