|
<br />[ 27 ]
<br />
<br />
<br />(1.62) 11. K, 1, 21) ; in the act by the Legislature of 'rexas author-
<br />izillg' the appointment of its eOllllnissioncr, the ('olllbined reprc.
<br />senta.tioll of the two Governments (State and National) is desig-
<br />nated H "joint ('Oll1lnission" (1HZ U. R. 1, 78) ; oy the art author-
<br />izing the :omit" between the United Stah's Hnd 'fexas (26 Stat.,
<br />81, 02, chap. 182, Rce. 25) the commission formed under the act
<br />of 1885 with tho State of 'rcxas is designated as "the joint boun-
<br />dar,v commis;Rion under the act of Congress," etc. (143 U. 8., 621, .
<br />(22) ; and by the ad of 1885 "n joint commission was organized"
<br />(14:1 U, S" ()21, 63()) ;
<br />
<br />Without fUl'the1' multiplication of examples, it would appear
<br />that where two representatives of the United States and of a
<br />State a1'e duly appointed for the purpose of settling a boundary
<br />or some other dispute, such persons arc "commissioners" and
<br />arc collectively n "joint commission," and as' the court said, (162
<br />U. S" 76), "Under the act of Texas of 1882 and the act of Con-
<br />gress of 1885, the two Govcrments appointed commissioners,"
<br />and the body so constituted was a "joint commission."
<br />
<br />This exercise of the trea.ty-making powers of the two separate
<br />Governments (National and State) necessarily proceeds upon
<br />the -fundamental fact that there are two separate and distiuet
<br />Governments, eftch having its attributes of sovereignty. Of this
<br />we shall make mention in a separate memorandulU.
<br />
<br />COIHPAC'l'S BID'fWEEN S'l'A'l'E AND NATIONAr~ GOVERNMEN'l'S.
<br />
<br />Oontroversies arising between two States or between the
<br />United States and a 'State 01' States ma)' be settled by.compact
<br />01' agreement 01' by judicial determination by the United States
<br />Supreme Oourt. Diplomacy failing, the suit before the court is
<br />the substitute for war. J n either event the high contracting' 01'
<br />litigating pa.rties pl'oeeed upon the hasis of sovereignties, each
<br />exercising' independent alld separate powers, and each exelusive
<br />within Us prover sphere. As said by Mr. Justice Harlan in
<br />United States v. Te,xas (14:J U. S" 621, (46) :
<br />
<br />"The submission to judicial solution of 'controversi.es arising
<br />between these two Governments, 'eaeh sovereign with respect to
<br />the objects eOllllllitted to it, and neither sovereign with respect to
<br />the o-bjects committed to the other,' 11cOulloch v, State of MaI'Y-
<br />la:nd (4 Wheat, :JIG, 400, 410), but -both subject to the supreme
<br />law of the land, does no ,'iolcnC'c to the inherent nature of sover-
<br />eignty, 'I'he States of the Union have agreed, in the Constitu-
<br />tion, that the judicial power of the United States shall extend to
<br />all cases arising under the Oonstitution, laws, and treaties of
<br />the United States, without regard to the character of the parties
<br />(excluding, of course, suits aga.inst a State by its own citizens or
<br />-by citizens of other States, or by citizens 01' subjects of foreign
<br />States), and equally to controversies to which the United States
<br />
|