Tbe plaintiff brought this suit to recover damages for the conversion by the defendant of 500 pounds of lint cotton, upon which he alleges he had a rent lien, under the laws of North Carolina, superior to any title which the defendant might assert.
Defendant filed no answer and a judgment by default and inquiry was rendered by the clerk of the Superior Court on 26 April, 1937. Thereafter, defendant’s attorney, before the issue as to damages had been submitted, entered a special appearance and moved that the judgment be vacated and the cause dismissed, for that the defendant, Emergency Crop & Seed Loan Office, is an agency of the Farm Credit Administration, an agency of the United States, created by executive order, and cannot be legally sued without its consent, pursuant to an Act of Congress, and that plaintiff’s action is without permission or authority; and for that the suit was not instituted nor service had in accordance with the laws of the United States.
After finding pertinent facts, Judge Hoyle Sink, at term time, entered a judgment denying defendant’s motion, and, thereupon, caused a jury to be impaneled and the amount of damages ascertained. The jury gave *582a verdict for $75.00, tbe value of tbe cotton, and judgment was entered accordingly, from wbicb defendant appealed, assigning as error tbe refusal to allow tbe motion to dismiss, as above summarized.
Tbe Act of Congress under wbicb tbe Emergency Crop & Seed Loan Office, a branch of tbe Farm Credit Administration, was created by presidential edict, makes no provision by wbicb it may be sued in tbe courts of tbis State. It is, however, an agency of tbe United States Government and enjoys tbe immunity against suit in tbe State courts that attends tbe Sovereign. North Dakota-Montana Wheat Growers Assn., 66 Fed. (2d), p. 573; Buckley v. United States, 196 Fed., p. 430; Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat., 266, 54 L. Ed., 257. If tbe suit may be brought at all, it must be brought in accordance with tbe Acts of Congress regulating such suits. U. S. C. A., Title 28, sections 761, 762, 763.
Tbe want of reciprocity in securing relief for wrongs committed by an agency given such wide power of dealing with tbe citizens of tbe State — and almost certain to complicate tbe rights of others — is a subject that might appeal to the lawmaking bodies, but one over wbicb tbis Court has no jurisdiction. United States v. Wickensham, 10 Fed., p. 505. Tbe propriety of adjustment of matters of tbis kind through administrative process or other methods wbicb tbe Government may have seen fit to provide is not subject to criticism here.
Tbis Court is without power to aid tbe plaintiff, and tbe judgment of tbe court below is
Reversed.