The New York herald., 1850-05-18


point of view from which an obligation might ac-
crue on the part of the United States, to pay the
debt. The Attorney General does not present It,
He probably saw its weakness IL Is proposed by
some that as the lands in question were trust
fund in the possession of the State OF Georgia,
but which she, by appropratng them as bountes
TO the soldiers of the revolutionary war; transferred
in fact to the government OF the United States
and Galphin having a right TO pursue this fund,
the general government became bound to pay his
claim. o.
the fact should be first established that the govern
ment of the United States received the benefit of
the fund. Was this so AT the time of the war
of the revolution, Georgia, South Carolina, Eir-
ginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York, Con-
necticut, and Massachusetts,, each possessed and
owned vacant and unappropriated lands, and each
OF them, with the exception Of Connecticut do
mated them in bounties to our soldiers These
were State donations. The old Congress donated,
IA similar manner, bounty lands to all the soldiers
of that war, without regard to the States in which
they might have served. The donations of the
States were held to have been peculiarly for them
selves; the donations of Congress were for the in
terest of all. To have indemnifed the States for
the grants they made, would, in point of fact, have
made the general government itself the donor.
And thus il would have given twice or thrice, as
the case might be, the quantity OF bounty land to
the soldiers of State which owned none-a dis
elimination forbidden at once by every consdera-
ton of right and justice. The soldier of Georgia
received from the general government his bounty
land to an extent great as did the soldier Sf any
other Estate; and here the obligation ended.
Georeias donations were from her own bounty,
ard not from the common fund AS p0ssessor OF
the eminent domain within her limits, she could
appropriate her vacant lands as she willed, regard
less Of the bounty of the United States. She did
so; and any obligations which she incurred in the
disposal of her lands were peculiarly her own, and
she must discharge them These lands then,
were not used for the benefit of the United States
the. United States derived no benefit from the
fund, and, Of course, incurred no liabilities on
account of any membranes charged upon il.
Besides, if the fund had actually been appro-
pristed for the common benefit, il by no
means followed that the government of the
United States would be liable for the charges on it,
The States were quite unequal in wealth and gene
rosity, as well as in populations and il well might
be that wealthy or generous State might make
Ii this so, it would be subject Of consdera-
ton how far the federal government should dis
charge an obligation thus imposed. Equity and
night with regard 10 the other States would, under
such circumstances, deny indemnity TO its full
tent, and the precise amount 10 be allowed could
he properly determined only by an agreement; nor
would the case be altered il the property donated
had been trust fund in the possession of the State
In such case the extent of the liability of the
United States would flow only from its agreement
and 1t Is not pretended that any such was made in
regard TO the lands incumbered by the Galphin
claim. If Georgia appropriated the fund charged
with the payment OF the claim, Georgia must an
swer for il. No obligation devolved upon the
United States.
by the act of 5th August, 1890, Congress made
provision '.for the settlement Of the accounts be-
tween the United States and the individual States"
The act created board of commissioners to re-
ceiye and examine all the claims of the individual
States, and "to determine on all such shall have
accrued for the general and particular defence dur
ing the war;, and made most liberal PROVISIONS for
their allowance. Ii directed each State to be de-
hitcd with all advances made 10 it by the United
States, and TO be credited with its disbursements
and advances Under its provisions the commits
sioners discharged the duty imposed upon them
and made the settlement required; and on the 18th
June, 1923, reported that they had maturey consi-
dercd the various claims, and find that there is due
TO and from the different States therein named, the
sums as stated. Among these States is Georgia,
and there was found due 10 her the sum of nine
teen thousand, nine hundred and eighty dollars,
including interest TO the 3lst May, 1859, which.
'.by virtue of the authority TO them delegated"
they declare TO be 'the final and conclusive ba-
lances due TO and from the several States" This
closed the accounts Of Georgia for receipts and
pcndiiures during the war of the Revolution; and
IT Georgia appropriated any lands or bountes to her
soldiers, the presumption is that il gave her no
claim ON the federal government, or &c IL jil that
she presented il; and whether allowed or refused
the claim closed. II is too late now, either for
Georgia, or for others for her, to raise claim in
her behalf on account OF expenditures or liabilities
growing ont OF the war Of the Revolution the obli-
CATION for which fixed and ascertain prior to
the date Of settlement referred to.
From these considerations, our mature conclu-
sion IL, that there was neither legal or equt-
able obligation the United States 10 pay this
CLAIM. The terms Of the act OF ISlS. however,
may have properly been held directing it, and il
was paid The question next arises, was IL proper
10 pay interest on it!
TO determine this, we are naturally first led TO
examine the act itself Its terms authorize and re-
quire the Secretary of the Treasury "to examine
and adjust the CLAIM and to pay the amount which
may be found due TO Alillcdge Galphns executors,
&c. The claim is described as "the claim of the
late George Galphin, under the treaty made by the
Governor of Georgia, with the Greek and Cherokee
Indians, in the year seventeen hundred and seven
ty-ihree." The words Of the act contain nothing
in their arrangement, so tar AS they point out and
direct the duty Of the Secretary, which indicates
an intention on tie part of Congress 10 take the
examination and adjustment Of the claim from un-
der the established aud ordinary rules which govern
the accounting officers in similar cases. The Ian
luaqe employed seems 10 be that in common use
"to liquidaie and settle" TO "adjust and settle, TO
"audit and settle" to audit and pass" TO "sete,
TO .'liquidatc and adjust, to "audt and ADJUST
and in this case TO ''examine and adjust, Is the
phrascology of the acts Of Congress, in reltion TO
the settlement Of claims Sometimes additional
words are added, as 'accordng TO the principles Of
equity" OF, "according TO the principles Of equity
and justice" and these words bhvs been held di-
rective Of the rule by which the adjustment shall
be made, " lille their absence has been considered
leaving the settlement under the rules ordinari-
ly applied. But there such words in the act
OF August, 1873; and II IL admitted that the
language which describes the claim, could be held
directive OF its settlement a claim under the
treaty Of I773 sfill that settlement required TO
be made according To the ordinary rule IN such
case. II was TO be examined and adjusted under
the ordinary application OF the established rules.
In relation 10 interests or claims against IL, the
rule Of the government is well established. The
government does not allow IL. "The act OF Con-
gress does not direct the payment Of interest. nor
does i refer TO any principle OF settlement. from
which IL can be inferred that interest was intended
| to be allowed" ."-Opinicns Of Attorney General
| Vim. Writ. April 2. 1879.
"Thc claim for interest, IL appears, the account
ing officers do not think proper allowance, be-
cause the law does not expressly give interest. As
general rule, their view Il the correct one. e.-Op
| Of Att. Gen. Il. f. Butler.
al am given to understand that IT has not been
the practice OF the accounting officers OF the Trea-
sury Department TO allow interest upon an account
directed to be settled paid by act Of Congress,
unless there be in the act ITSELF special words to
! that effect. t."-Op Att. Gen. X. Rush.
| There may be cases in which might think
the head Of department authorized to allow inter-
| est; but they would be rare and singular excep-
tions."-Opin. Au'y. Genl. III. :. Legsre, 2d april,
| 1872.
| % ;a oonGJeotlv hcl,cved that all the