The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-02-01

agreement 10 paw interest there is no moral obligation
pay IT, All the rest is conventional II Is not question
OF justice, but purely question oil conventional law
You may authorize that upon claims. as between Rdi
yduas IN different States, interest may be recovered ac-
eoIdng TO their statute ensetmenis But there Is no ques-
ton OF justice about that is question OF expedency
merely conventional matter You accordingly find in
State that interest fixed al certain rate ana IN
another State al much higher rate al lower rate
You will ind upon examining the laws upon interest IN
the derea States OF this Union and in Great Britain that
IN one place interest is allowed upon certain class OF
claims while in another place interest is not allowed be-
cause II Is considered contrary 10 the arbitrary laws oil
the place where that interest is not allowed And there
is principle OF morals which requires The payment OF
interest," unless il Is founded upon express agreement.
or the laws OF the country demand IT, Il then becomes
question OF mere statutory enactment II that be SO.
then this is not question OF justice as 10 whether the gov
eminent will allow interest TO individual who has
claims against IT, II is simply, then, question OF policy
expe dency regards the action OF this government
The senator from Florida Mr. MALLORY says, and il
may be So that he produce fifty cases where interest
has been allowed Now, l rather apprehend that there
may be more than five hundred found where interest
has been denied As understand IT, the settled policy OF
this government--no matter how il orignated-and The
settled policy OF the British government snotto allow IN
erest upon claims against the government There no IN
justice in tit the policy OF the government undetermined TO
be that the nation is not to be responsible for interest And
the reason that IS given Tor this policy is that the govern
ment is supposed to be always ready 10 pay its debts
And so she IS willing TO pay. when she acknowledges
policy that she shall not be responsible for interest
consider this necessary policy for all governments and
especially for one like our own, where we allow no suit
against the government al all but where we require the
party 10 before here, when he has claim which
is not recoverable under ordinary laws; but when
there is no question about its justice, allow him
means oil suing the government but tell him that he must
come before the Congress OF the United States and
will decide in each particular to whether there is
any claim sustainable against the government. | am
sorry 10 say, however, that far my observation
tends, seems 10 me that instead Of deciding judcaly
upon some general principles which ought TO cover that
class OF cases the rule OF decision seems TO be the prn
MI nf mar iIa fhQ w mat
be entertained OF the individual merits OF the case, with
out any reference 10 any general principle to govern our
action upon these private claims.
For my own part under these circumstances, should
say that the government would never be sae unless she
adopted the principle OF non-payment Of interest when
there Is no agreement to pay it. In The case Of loans
there an agreement TO pay interest But IN other cases
the government should not pay interest Individuals, it
is lrue are obliged to pay interest But the distinction
giyen-which, though technical in its character, per
haps sound in itsefis that this difference is founded
upon this distinction between individuals and the gov
ernment As regards the individual The debtor is always
bound 10 seek his creditor wherever he may be and
him, while, regards the government, the creditor is
bound 10 come forward and demand his debt Of the gov
eminent That places them in entirely different posi-
ton that there is analogy between the two cases
Even between individuals it is not rule Of morals and
justice That requires interest but mere conventional
law OF the land under which interest can be claimed II
you TO England you will find that you cannot recover
interest upon Judgment while there is Stale in the
Union, believe where you cannot recover interest upon
u
ment Of interest has been more extended than in
mir. BADGER. Do understand the honorable sena-
tor to say that in England you cannot interest
up Mr. : b ls3sl1sI' Tina, is my opinion.
Mr. BADGER. Not upon an action Of debt
Mr. BAYARD understand such TO be the fact, un.
less the law has been changed OF late years The
for that understand TO be this That the party having
Judgments bound to act upon at once; and it is his
own negligence and fault If he does not recover imme
daiey, and therefore the law allows him interest
upon judgment. do not doubt that am right in that
position. But whether am or not il matters very little
My object is to show that this matter OF interest is
purely conventional In one State six per cent per
cent, 10 per cent interest is allowed, while in
another State only per cent or per cent is allowed TO
be legal interest Now, If the principle OF justice is APP
pcabe TO these different rates OF interest, and it is not
matter of polcyand expediency, then il seems TO me the
rule should be that where claim arises in State where
the usual rates of interest is 10 per cent, then the
government ought TO pay 10 per cent. interest; II
then the government should pay per cent? il per cent,
then the government should pay per cent and SO on
the government paying the rates OF interest allowed
by law the States where the claims may arise. But the
truth is, il is purelya conventional question: and you
have at last to back 10 the question whether il is
the policy Of the government to pay interest upon claims
where she has not agreed TO pay IT, There is one excep
lion TO this policy; and that is where appropriation is
made for claim which, under the ordinary laws OF the
government, would be payable out OF the public treas
ury, and would be paid the moment the appropriation is
made. And as the principle upon which the policy OF the
payment Of interest by the government stands is that
il is always ready 10 pay acknowledged claim, them
II no appropriation is made 10 pay IT, il is the fault Of the
government, and II would be right in such a to al
low interest. ! know Of no other exception which
would be willing 10 make 10 the rule.
The great objection 10 that rule is this that il is per-
lecy true that as regards good claims, they may very
often be presented here and there may be difficulty in
having them passed here, arising from tie want OF
proper representation OF the claims, and proper evidence
10 support them or al other times there may possibly be
we should not presume such is the
ease-on account OF negligence and want Of attendance
10 their duty upon the part OF the committee TO which
they referred, from the hurry and pressure OF bust
ness N the body who called upon TO act on them
But, independent OF proper and Just claims there is al
waysa vast class OF claims, many OF which are posi-
lively bad aud others very doubtful in their charac.
ter Now, II you adopt the principle OF paying the in
teIes upon every claim against the government do in
all cases
II you admit the justice OF the claim, you admit tina, il
was due at the time when the transactions upon which
Il is based took place But the established rule is that
The right TO the claim against the government exists only
from The time when the government acknowledges it,
from the passage OF the act under which The party IS en-
titled TO relief Rut il you allow interest from the time
when the transactions took place upon which the claim
Is founded, then you will encourage parties who have
claims Of doubtful character TO hold them back unit,
The memory OF individuals in regard 10 these transac
lions is weakened ,eor the individuals themselves have
passed away and You cannot have such means OF inves
legation you would have in reierencsto recent claims
and recent transactions. The allowDgo interest there
ore tends TO encourage the holding back OF all that class
II claims that either doubtful positively bad in
against the government knows that il is ever acknowl
edged he will be entitled TO recover nteres, upon i from
The time II first began, il is not clear one, and is one
which, AT the time IL first orig mated would not have been