The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-03-07


This Is conclusive the subject but will go further.
and not leave an inch OF ground io those persons 70 stand
upon who assert that this money should be paid into the
/ national treasury.
There could have been but one Of these revenue laws
in force In Caornia-irst the tariff OF ls46 second, the
tarl laws passed by The Congress Of Mexico thrd me
military contribution tariff framed by the Secretary OF the
treasury under the direction OF the President OF inc
The .ari Of isio. ii mus, be admitted, was not in opsr-
alton under The uniform construction OF the treasury
Department as affirmed by the Supreme Court OF the
United States in the have just read TO the Senate
required an act Of Congress extend the laws
Of California, and after The peace until those laws
SO extended by Congress- the duties could not be collect
The Mexican tariff did moi apply during the war. be-
cause the country was in possession, and Il was
supsrseded BY our military contribution tariff and after
the ratification of the treaty OF peace the Mexican tariff
did not apply 70 California for BY that treaty ceased to
be part 81 the Mexican republic. The military conr-
button ar BY s very terms. ceased with the ratification
There Is another reason why neither the Mexican
nor the military contribution tariffs could be in force in
California after The peace, TO witt the sth section OF
expressly declares that all duties, mposls, and ex
cises ahsr be aaisoEn thsoughoat the United States
lnasmuch as neither OF these tariffs c0nforned to this
part OF the constitution, neither could be enforced in
California.
The government OF the United States being one OF
BY the Constitution. desire 10 know what clause Of that
instrument authorizes Congress receive and approp
ate any money which not collected under authority
and unauthorized
The only legal course that could have been pursued
California, as have shown in the case OF Florida and
Texas, TO have considered the ports OF that Ter
rtory foreign ports from which dutiable goods could
be introduced into any port OF the United States without
the payment OF duties This was necessary protect
hs revenue because cagoes Of duabe goods may have
been entered there without paying the duties, not for
consumption in California. bu, for shipment to other
ports OF the United States which would have been an
evasion OF the laws The principal argument
IN favor OF passing the law of Sd March, l549 was TO
gel clear OF this difficulty and to prevent the injury that
4 power to collect duties in California.
have thus shown, Mr. President, from the Presidents
message, Official documents treasury circulars laws OF
the land and the adjudication OF these circulars and laws
by the Supreme Court OF the United States that the col
lection OF duties in California, up TO the time when the
act OF 81 March, 1S4e went into operation, was without
authority OF law; that il was assumption Of power not
warranted by any law and cannot be legaized by the
passage OF a subsequent one. This money cannot be
paid INTO The treasury OF the United States without viola
ting the spirit if not the letter Of the constitution OF the
United States and creating precedent that may be dan
gstaus 70 the government these duties were collected
OF necessity 10 protect the interests OF the United States
These military commanders acted from the best and purest
and oppressive 10 the inhabitants Of the country they
governed. This assumption OF power was in time OF
peace and is the hrst instance (and hope it will be the
| iasD in the history OF the government where such
power has been assumed and exercised.
ask for condemnation of the acts Of these military
commanders because, as have said before. the parties
sancuonng them by the payment OF this money into the
treasury OF the United States II was paid by the peo-
re OF California and sxac,ed from them without author
the money back 10 the State authorities, to be applied
to the support Of the State government But may be
said thai the people of California did pay this money
that the merchants paid it, This true but who paid
the MERCHANTS The people who bought the goods
upon which The duties were paid therefore this money
back to them. The merchant added the duties To the
price OF his goods, and added his prohs on both items
he paid, do not appeal to the sympathy of this
ernmen but TO It's justice when urge the payment OF
this money 10 California. We have had none of the
benefits OF territorial organization; we have had no
roads made and public buildings built from the money
OF the general government AS yet we have had no do
nations from the public domain no laws authorizing the
settlement OF land clams-to separate from the public
domain private properly, upon which taxes could DC
levied to support the State government You withhold
from sale all the mineral lands in that State and give us
rno power to derive revenue IRON them The rowing ma
ture OF the population makes difcu and almost i'm
possible, collect pol-iax. From the state of affairs
in that country-we known 10 the Senate-the neces
sary expenses in carrying on the State government are
enormous The constitution OF the State prohibits the
legislature from contracting State debt for sum exceed
ing S3O0,O00 which she now owes Tor debts heretofore
contracted in supporting her State government How
you expect 10 maintain our present system OF gov
enment then without oppressive taxes, exacted iron
the people, unless derive some assistance IRON this
government! And have we not most Just and merlto-
rious claim upon this fund.- which, if paid to the State,
will relieve us from all our difficulties, and enable US TO
put our State government into successful operaonl Be-
fore the money thus received exhausted, we will have
laws TO separate private property from The pnbc do
main, 10 grant donations or eemptons on The public
lands and disposition OF the mineral lands by which
the State derive revenue from them, from other
portions OF real estate within its borders We will have
fixed and settled population, from whom we can col
ect sufficient revenue to support the State government
Z without oppessing them
With all these great advantages which will follow the
OF this fund to the citizens OF Call forna, is II
no he policy well the duty OF Congress TO give II
that direction Separated thousands OF miles, by almost
impossible mountains, from The rest OF the Union, with
grateful recollecons OF their former homes, this act OF
Justice ON the part of Congress will be looked upon
OF future avos such have been conferred upon
other States and will strengheR II that be possible,
their attachment 10 the government There il but one
opinion th subject California, and that is that this
fund OF right belongs the people of the State and il
do not authorize its payment TO the State during the
clare that injustice has been done which will cause
onerous taxes be exacted from them.
II should be borne in mind that there were no United
States courts IN California 10 protect Its people against
these illegal exactions that they had TO submit exrel
the military authorities, have their ships and cargoes
driven of the coast by the naval power OF the govern
ment which would have brought famine in the
country II there had been United States courts there
these collections would have been instantly suspended
an appeal To those tribunals. There are numerous de-
cisons made by the Supreme Court OF the United States
besides the one have cited and courts OF high authority
by which the district courts would have been governed
ali going to show that these duties could not be legally
collected. will name few of them
L. Taking duties illegally, by order OF The Secretary OF
the Treasury, s not justified. Tracy VS. Swartwoot, 10
Peters, In this the Secretary OF The Treasury
expressly decided that before the passage OF law creating
collection district in California the collection OF duties
was illegal.