Daily evening star. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1852-1854, 1853-08-30
From the Norfolk (Va.) News.
THE VIRGINIA SCRIP ACT

THE VIRGINIA SCRIP ACT.
We have received and examined with
care, very able argument, addressed to
the Sccfctary of the Interior, by Nespa-
sian Ellis, ESQ.,, in vindication of the
claims of Our citizens, arising under the
Scrip Act Of August, 1852. This act
made an appropriation Of scrip to satisfy
all outstanding bounty land warrants,
issued by Virginia for military services
in the war of independence; but it con-
tains provision that all claims allowed
by the tribunals of Virginia, shall undergo
revision by the Departments at Washing
ton, before passing into scrip. This pro-
vision, it scents, has occasioned serious
embarrassment both to the government
and to claimants, causing vexatious de-
lays, and disturbing the calculations of
those having interests under the act,
which they supposed vestedand undoubted
on its passage.
But we think that Mr.. Ellis, in his mas
terly argumeiit, has stripped the subject
of all embarrassment. While he has vim
dicated most conclusively the action
of the Executive of Virginia in regard to
land bounty allowances, he has made it
palpable to otr mind, first, that no farther
revision of these allowances should be
made at Washington than is necessary to
detect fraud, and correct manifest mis-
take: secondly, that the construction of
the land bounty laws by the authorities
of Virginia is the law itself, and binding
on the United States authorities, charged
with the execution of the act.
At first blush, our strong State right
notions were rather outraged st the idea
of having the decisions of the tribunals
of a sovereign State, reviewed by De-
partment of the Federal Government; and
we marveffed at first that our Representa-
tiycs in Congress should have assisted in
the passage of a law containing the revis-
ion principle, or that the Legislature
should have accepted it with such pro-
vision. But we are now satisfied, after
perusing the argument of MIR. Ellis, that
the provision involves no disrespect to
our State authorities, but is right and
proper. The Legislature of Virginia had
passed statute of limitations for these
land bounty claims, and the new Consti-
tuition had abolished the only tribunal
left to apply the remedy in cases of mis-
take or fraud; and hence the power Of ap-
peal and revision was given to the Depart
ment of the Interior, which was charged
with the execution Of the law. But that
power was conferred clearly, we think,
not for adjudicating the claims as original
claims, but for the more limited purpose
of correcting palpable error and detecting
fraud
The position taken by Mr.. Ellis, that
the construction given by the Virginia
tribunals to her land bountt laws is the
lar itself, seems to us impregnable. The
Supreme Court Ct the United States have
decided, times without number, that the
construction of the local laws by the local
tribunals, is binding ON the United States
Courts. On this principle, the construc-
ton put ON the land bounty laws of Vir-
ginia by her Governor and Council, ought
not to be disturbed-should stand as
a guide to the Department of the Federal
Government entrusted with the execution
of the Scrip Act.
BY the laws of Virginia, her Governor
and Council were constituted the sole tri-
bunal to adjudicate these claims. There
lay no appeal froms their decision. They
judged both the law and the testimony:
construed the one and applied the other.
They were, therefore, so far as the allow
ance of land bounties was concerned,
clearly a Court of Justice, whose deci-
Sions, made within the limits of its iuris-
diction, are entitled to as much respect as
the decrees Of the highest Court ofjudica-
ture. 10 contest the principle for which
we are contending on the ground that the
Executive of Virginia is not Court
seems to us mere quibble, unworthy the
gravity of the subject, and the dignity OF
State Rights. .s FL .ra.
There are other considerations that
seem to us 20 require of the Federal Gov
ernment the utmost liberality in execut-
ing this Scrip Act. Virginia. at time
of very great trouble in our revolutionary
struggle, gave up for the common good a
magnificent domain, comprising now
some tive or SIX large and fourishing
States. A generosity so elevated and ex-
panded certainly should not be requited
| by dealing out half-handed justice to the
descendants of those who fought the bat
ties of continental liberty: and it does
seem to us that the United States, in as.