As  early  as  1793  it  was  held  that  despite  the  broad
language  of  the  Constitution,  the  cases  and  controversies
over  which  the  Federal  Government  was  declared  to  have
judicial  power  because  of  the  citizenship  or  the  nation-
ality of  the  parties,  or  by  reason  of  a  State  being  a  party
to  them,  were  limited  to  those  of  a  civil  nature,*^  and  this
conclusion  was  affirmed  and  illuminated  by  what  Chief
Justice  Marshall  said  in  Cohens  vs.  Virginia.^  In  Wis-
consin vs.  Pelican  Insurance  Company,^  the  Supreme
Court,  after  a  full  view  of  the  authorities,  held  the  prin-
ciple applicable  to  proceedings  by  a  State  on  the  civil
side  of  its  courts  to  recover  pecuniary  penalties  for
infractions  of  its  laws.  Such  suits  are  so  far  civil  that  in
them  verdicts  may  be  properly  given  upon  a  fair  pre-
ponderance of  the  evidence,  or  may  be  directed.
In  the  last  cited  case,  the  defendant  was  a  Louisiana
insurance  company  which  had  carried  on  business  in  Wis-
consin and  had  there  subjected  itself  to  certain  pecuniary
penalties  for  which  the  State,  in  its  own  courts,  had
recovered  a  judgment  for  fifteen  thousand  dollars.  The
company  had  no  assets  in  Wisconsin.  The  State
brought  suit  upon  the  judgment  in  the  Supreme  Court  of
the  United  States.  The  Court  said  it  would  look  through
form  to  substance,  and  as  the  claim  was  in  essence  for  a
penalty,  it  must  decline  to  take  jurisdiction.     For  the

S7.  Chisholm  ts.  Georgia,  2  Dal.  419;  1  L.  Ed.  440.
28.  6  Wheat.  264-398;  5  L.  Ed.  257.
29.  127  U.  S.  265;  32  L.  Ed.  239;  8  Sup.  Ct.  1370.
