OCR Text |
Show - JL.L4.fc- ~ Definition From an analysis of compacts which have been made over a period of one hundred and forty-five years, it would appear that an interstate compact may be defined as a cooperative covenant between two or more states to settle particular difficulties involving the adjustment of political rights not susceptible to federal action alone. The Supreme Court, in Virginia v. Tennessee, II4.8 U. S. 5^0* saidj Compacts or agreements--and we do not perceive any difference in the meaning, except that the word "compact" is generally used with reference to more formal and serious engagements than is usually implied in the term "agreement"-cover all stipulations affecting the conduct or claims of the parties. Distinguishing between the steps -rchioh may precede a compact and the compact itself, the Court continued: The mere selection of parties to run and designate the boundary line between two states, or to designate what line should be run, of itself imports no agreement to accept the line run by them, and such action of itself does not come within the' prohibition. Nor does a legislative declaration, following such line, that it is correct, and shall thereafter be deemed the true and established line, import by itself a contract or a greement with the adjoining state* It is a legislative declaration which the state and individu- als affected by the recognized boundary line may invoke against the state as an admission, but not as a compact or agreement. The legislative declaration will take the form of an agreement or com- pact when it recites some consideration for it from the other party affected by it, for example, as made upon a similar declaration of the border or contracting state. The mutual declarations may then be reasonably treated as made upon mutual considerations. The com- pact or agreement will then be within the prohibition of the Consti- tution or without it, according as the establishment of the boundary line may lead or not to the increase of the political power or in- fluence of the states affected, and thus encroach or not upon the full and free exercise of Federal authority. If the boundary es- tablished is so run as to cut off an important or valuable portion of a state, the political power of the state enlarged would be af- , ' fected by the settlement of the boundary; and to an'agreement for the running of such a boundary or rather for its adoption afterwards, the consent of Congress may well be required. But the running of a boundary may have no effect upon the political influence of either state; it may simply serve to mark and define that which actually existed before, but was undefined and unmarked. In that case the agreement for the running of the line, or its actual survey, would in no respect displace the relation of either of the states to the general government. There was, therefore, no compact or agreement between the states in this case which required, for its validity, the consent of Congress, within the meaning of the Constitution, |