BINNEY'S CASE.—2 BLAND. 135

executed works were directed to be made, is not such a final judg-
ment of this body politic itself, as precludes this Court from taking
cognizance of the matter, and determining, whether the application
of the funds, to defray the expense of such works is an expendi-
ture for corporate purposes within the true meaning of the Act of
incorporation or not.

The next ground of defence is, that the extended works com-
plained of, are altogether within the District of Columbia; the
government of which, as regards this matter, being independent of,
and alien to this Eepublic, this Court, therefore can have no juris-
diction of the matter. It is said, indeed, that a judgment has in
fact been pronounced by a legal and competent tribunal of the Dis-
trict of Columbia; but, that is of no importance, according to the
broad ground taken by the defendants; for, if this Court has no
jurisdiction; because the matter belongs exclusively to the judi-
cial authority of the government of the District of Columbia, then
it follows, that this Court is alike precluded, whether the tribunals
of that government have already, or may hereafter adjudicate upon
the subject.

So far, the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company has been con-
sidered as a body politic, deriving its corporate capacity altogether,
and exclusively from the State of Maryland; as one of the artificial
legal entities of this Eepublic; and as standing fully and in every
respect within the jurisdiction of this Court. But here, an exemp-
tion from the jurisdiction of this State is claimed, on the ground,
that it owes its existence to other governments as well as to this;
and that its works do, in fact, compose a part of the territory
belonging to those other governments, over which territory this
Court can exercise no authority whatever. It is believed, that this
matter has never before been submitted to the consideration of any
of the Courts of this country; and yet it presents important ques-
tions, * as to jurisdiction, which may, in the progress of
things, frequently arise, since there have been many bodies 144
politic created, like this, by the concurrent acts of several State -
governments with property lying, or extending beyond the juris-
diction of each one of its creators. In Maryland there have been
several canal, bridge, and turnpike road companies constituted in
this manner. 1799, ch. 16; 1809, ch. 64; 1813, ch. 126; 1815, ch.
33; 1818, ch. 73; 1829, ch. 42, 67.

The legislative enactment of Maryland, by which The Chesa-
peake and Ohio Canal Company has been incorporated, distinctly
authorizes, so far as it can give any such authority, the extension
of its works beyond the confines of this State; and over territory
belonging to other, and, in this respect, independent and uncon-
nected governments. Bach of which has communicated to it the
same powers. The Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company must,
therefore, be regarded as a corporation, one and indivisible in its