Grayson versus Virginia

Grayson versus Virginia. BILL in Equity. 'The fervice of .the fubpasna in this caía being proved, Leivis moved, at the laft Termj that a Dif-tritigas might be awarded, in order to compel the State to enter an appearance ; arguing, from the analogy between a State and other bodies corporate, that this was the .proper mode of proceeding. TheCourt,however, poftponeda decifion on the motion,' in confequence of a doubt,—whether the remedy to compel the appearance of a State, íliould be furniihed by the Court itfelf, or by the Legiflature ? And, in the prefent Term, Levjis argued, that the Court was competent to furniih all the ■ r.eceiiary means for cffeftuating its own jurifdi&on. On the isth of Auguji, the Chief Justice delivered the following opinion. - " [MAJORITY — By the Court] By the Court :—After a particular examination of the powers veiled in this Court, in caufes of Equity, as well as in caufcs of Admiralty and Maritime jurifdidlion, w>e colled! a general rule for .the .government of- out proceedings; with a diferetionary, authority, however, to deviate from that rule, where its application wou’dbe injurious or iinpradücabio. The general rule preferibes to us an adoption of that practice,.whiqb is founded on the cufíoro and ufage ofCourls of Admiralty arid ■ Equity, conilituted on fimilar principles; but ftill, It is thought, that we are alfa autbórifcd to, make fuch deviations as are ne-ceffar'y to adapt the procefs and rules'of the Court to the pecu- • iiarcircumftances of this country, fubjedl to the interpolation, alteration, and controul, of the Legiilature'. W e have* therefore, agreed to malee the following general Orders; and the Cdunfel, in the prefent cafe, will take his meafures accordingly. • . ' I.. Ordered That when procefs at Common Law, dr in Equity, ihall iffue- againft a State, the fame íhall be ferved upon the Governor, or Chief Executive Magiilrate, and the " Attorney-General, of fuch State. 2. Ordered, That procefs of fubpcena iffuing opt of this Court, in any fuit in Equity, fhall be ferved on the Defendant fixty days before the return day of the faid procefs : and, further, that if the Defendant, on fuch fervice of the fubpcena, (ball not appear alt the return day contained therein, the complainant fhall be at liberty to proceed ex parte. Lewis the.n obferved, that the fubpcena in this caf-, had been iffued on the fame principles j but as the orders could only operate in futuro, he thought it beft to withdraw his ¡notiomfer a difiringas, and to pray that an alias fubpcena might be awarded ; which was, accordingly, done. Seethe Judicial Act, f. 14. The Act to regulate Procc.%s.ih the Í'ediíra'Courts, iV ». ■' ■