Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/242

 216 OCTOBER TER., 1907. for Plaintiff in Erw. 20 U. 8. of equity, and  the jurisdiction of the cour to he sad de- termh the cause, for the reazun that it waa a "refit the State, or againat an officer o.f the State, acthg by authority of the State, with a view to reach the State, its treaaury funds or property." By this ground of demurrer defendant attempted to avail himseft of an at of the State of Tcnneasce, approved February 28, 1873, c. 13, p. 15, being �07 of 8h;nnon's Code, which provides as follows: "That no court in the state of Tenneee haa, nor shall heldafter have, ny power, juriadiction or authority to entertain any suit against the State, or any offi- cer acting by the authority of the State, with a view to reach the State, its trcamuy, funds, or property, and all such suits now pending, or hereafter brought, shall be dismissed as to the State, or such officer, on motion, plea or demurrer of the law officer of the State, or counsel employed by the State." The demurrer was overruled "as to that part of the bill in reference to the first tank mentioned in said bill." It was ramrained "as to all that part of the bill in reference to the sec- ond tank mentioned in said bill." The ground of demurrer which went to the jurisdiction of the court was overruled to the oil in both tanks." A preliminary injunction which had been granted was cen- tinued in force. Inspection, however, it was adjudged, might proceed, the fees to be lid into court pending appeal to the Supreme Court of the State. An appeal was taken, and the Supreme Court decided that the suit was one against the State, and reversed the decree of the chancery court. 95 S. W. Rep. 824. Mr. H. J. LIrijston, Junior, with whom Mr. Thomas B. Turley was on the brief, for plaintiff in error: The bill undoubtedly presents for determination Federal questions, as certain rights under the Constitution of the United States are asserted. It also further shows special conditions which prevent plaintiff in error from obtaining adequate pro tection in said constitutional rights except by injunction. This

�