Page:The Supreme Court in United States History vol 1.djvu/130

104 Marshal's hands a sum of money which had been recovered in the last Circuit Court by a British subject whose estate had been confiscated. It was granted with a demonstration to me of these facts; that the Premier (Jay) aimed at the cultivation of Southern popularity; that the Professor (Wilson) knew not an iota of equity; that the North Carolinian (Iredell) repented of the first ebullitions of a warm tempter; and that it will take a score of years to settle, with such a mixture of Judges, a regular course of chancery." At the next Term in February, 1793, the Court, having decided the Chisholm Case against the contentions of Georgia, was evidently reluctant to rule against her a second time; hence on Randolph's motion to dissolve the injunction, while holding that Georgia's claim to the debt was a right to be pursued at common law and not by bill in equity, it decided to continue the injunction until this right might be determined at law in a suit by the State. Accordingly an "amicable action" at law was entered in the Court, and the case was tried before a special jury, in 1794. On the questions of law, the Judges united in the charge, which was delivered by Chief Justice Jay. The jury found in favor of Brailsford; and the State's claim was denied on the ground that a sequestration law did not operate to confiscate the debt or to vest title in it in the State.