The Washington union., 1857-09-19
DEPARTMENT. NEWS.
ATTORNEY GENERALS orrIcn


the Attorney General ON the claim of the State Of Mary
land for interest published several weeks since by the
press generally. Subjoined is the opinion entire
ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE
August III, 1857.
SIN have very carefully considered the question you
submitted TO me on the construction of that section OF
the civil and diplomatic appropriation bill Of March Sd,
1857 which provides for the re-examination of old
account between the State of Maryland and the United
States.
will state the facts only far they necessary
TO show how the question of law arises and without
gard 10 exactness either in dates sums.
During the Of 1872, the United States became in
debted to Maryland about half million of dollars The
principal of that debt paid of in various at
different times between 1918 and 1922 but interest
was paid In 1926 Congress passed act authorizing
interest to be computed and paid at the treasury This
done but in making the calculation all the payments
applied TO the principal, reducing the upon
which interest allowed by the full amount of each
payment and allowing interest at all after the debt
had thus been extinguished Maryland salts
fed with this She continued to memorabilia Congress
for more liberal adjustment of her elain, but
succeeded until the last day Of the last session. when the
act under consideration passed.
This act requires the accounting officers to make the
calculation by the following rule Interest shall be cal
cuated up to the time Of any payment made to this
interest the payment shall be first applied and it exceed
the interest due the balance shall be applied diminish
the principal II the payment fell short Of the interest,
the balance of interest shall not be added TO the prnc
The Third Auditor of your department, in his report
upon the expresses strong doubt whether the act
of 1857 authorizes any interest be paid after the set
tement Of 1926 though calculation made agreeably TO
that law shows that portion of the principal then
due, and has remained unpaid ever since while the
counsel for the claim very clear that interest should
be counted down to the present term least to the
date of the act This difference of opinion raises the
question which am to solve
Since the dispute arose. several distinguished and lead
ing members OF Congress have stated dn letters which
have been laid before that they voted for in the belief
that IT would and with the intent that 1t should give to
Maryland all that she claims under It, The report
which accompanied the bill when ii came into the House
OF Representatives shows that understood by the
committee that framed it, There also adverse
port from another committee, by whom it opposed
the ground that interest ought be given to the
present time. The evidence in Short makes it oleably
clear that while the bill its passage through Con-
gess its friends and it's opponents in both houses regarded
it as provision for the payment of interest the whole
of the principal debt long that principal should
main unpaid But cannot allow this fact to have the
smallest weight on my judgment The act must be con-
stred pisces Congress addresses the executive
and judicial departments of the government only through
the statutebook When speak of the intent of the
Legislature, refer to the meaning of the words used in
their act and not to the unexpressed thought which
may have been in the minds of the members. When
all OF the members Of legislative body declare it to
have been their intention that particular act should
have certain construction such declaration useless if
their construction be correct and unwaranted if it be
wrong In either case it is proper element of legal
judgment You must ascertain in this in other cases
what Congress has commanded you to do by taking the
words OF the law, and understanding them in the
assigned to them by the established rules of nteprea
ton.
First Of all it must be kept in mind that as general
rule the government does not pay interest The excep
tions TO this rule found only in where the de-
mands made under special contracts special laws
pressly providing for the payment interest An obi
CATION to pay it is not to be implied against the govern
men as II Is against private party from the mere fact
that the principal detained from the creditor after
his right to receive it had accrued.
There is another Of construction which must not
be overlooked and that is that all laws which give away
the public money to be interpreted strictly against
the party to whom it is given He who claims pay
ment out Of the treasury and bases that claim upon act
OF Congress- must show the payment to be authorized
either expressly or by very clear implication Analogous
phrases will not serve his turn When two meanings
be assigned to act like this and the arguments in
favor Of both nearly balanced the public is entitled
to the benefit of the doubt OF do not
that claim ought to be defeated by straning the
sense Of the law against it, But if Congress has all the
money of the United States under its CONTROL it also has
the whole English language to give away with and it
is easy to definite terms in law like this, that
when they not used will presume them not TO be
meant All Legislative grants, whether of money or OF
privileges are and ought to be construed strictly against
the grantees.
These principles create only difficulty that lies in
the way Of the claim If could put liberal construc
ton on the law my duty would be done Butbefore
down to this time, must find something in the act of
Congress which expressly says or clearly implies that she
is entitled to it.
The act Of 1857 after declaring that the account set
tied agreeaby to the act of 1926 should be reexained
and directing the amount of the debt and the several pay
mens on it, to be taken truly stated in the old
count, adds these words " But in the calculation OF
the interest due under tie aforesaid the following rules
shall be Observed &c. and then goes to lay down
the new rule for computing interest. L at first
strongly inclined to the opinion that the phrase have
quoted would oonne the allowance of interest to the pc
Rod previous to 1926. But the logical consequence of
that view would be to nuly the act of 1857 altogether
interest could be allowed except what due under
the act OF 1926 all the rules introduced for the first
time must go for nothing. The whole amount of both
principal and interest ue under the act aforesaid
paid thirty years ago. and there nothing due under
that act But such is manestly not the meaning of
the act of 1857 which is very plainly intended to give
much larger than paid before think there
FORE that those words could not have been introduced to
limit the amount of interest the time it should rum
but used merely because the act of 1896 and the
accounts stated under it, adopted standard for
asccrtanng the Of the debt and the dates of the
several payments
On the other hand Congress- in prescribing the rules
by which this calculation shall be made have used al
most the words in which the Supreme Court declared how
interest 10 be counted between private parties
When there Is well known judicial decision establishing
rule which is applicable to class of cases. and the
legislature afterwards extends that rule to another case
not covered by the decsion il cannot reasonably be
posed that the statute and the decision meant to be
understood differently. What, then, did the Supreme
Court mean by the sentences transcribed into this law
Nobody understood them otherwise than requir
ing interest 10 be computed to the time of final payment
When Congress authorizes the payment OF debt with