The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1859-03-15

and Ineligible, il leaves no room Tor doubt OF consruc-
ton, and il is mandatory in requiring that the revenues
and debts shall be paid into the treasury the mode OF
making the payments and the general superintendence oil
them is left to the Postmaster General, but it does not
allow him any authority or discretion to suspend or an
null the positive requirement that the revenues and debts
sball he 80 paid. The second section of the same act re-
o,re, the Postmaster General TO submit to Congress an
nually Specific estimates Of the sums OF money expected
IN he reauired for the service of the department in the
subsequent year, commencing on the first day OF July,
under the following heads," viz
Compensation of postmasters,
TRANSPORTATION OF the mails .. ".
.'Ship, steamboat, and way letters,
Z" Wrapping paper, ....
'tOfice furniture,
Advertising '.mail bags, " ''blanks, vi
EMAIL locks, keys, and stamps t
stMail depredations and special agents" nsa. ~
CLERKS for offices, {" and miscellaneous
And nthc Postmaster General shall render an account to
Congress at each succeeding annual session OF the amounts
actually expended for each of the purposes above
specified. aa.
The third section declares that the aggregate sum re-
ouired .for the service of the Post Office Department
in each year shall be appropriated by law out OF the reve-
nue. of the department; and all payments of the receipts
of the Post Office Department into the treasury shall be
to the credit of the said appropriation"
Thus the law directs that call the receipts (repenmes and
debts include all receipts) of the Post Office Department shall
go into the treasury.
There shall be submitted to Congress specific estimates
for each item and there shall be appropriations made by
Congress for tho sums to be expended Elpressio tnius EST
erclusio auerius, and as the law ~prescribes the mode of dis
posing of the receipts and of making the expenditures,
there can be no change without q violation of law and
gross dereliction of duty. #Au.N u.s.. Er.u .
The decision of Justice Woodbury., referred to by r. IL,
G.. in the case of Body Us. United States, seems to es-
tablish the reverse of the position assumed it recog
misses in express terms that the receipts of the Post Office
DEPARTMENT must go into the treasury, and be paid out
in obedience to appropriations, but it j%ustifes a general
covering order at the end of each quarter as being tanta-
mount to a specific order for each item arising during the
quarter yet this justification is limited to payments
made in consequence of appropriations which Congress
alone has the authority to make. The language of the
Judge is rs follows
'The act of 1886, chap. 81, sec. /, which ssgsdiIeRt rs
DC pala INTO the treasury of the United States, and the
money disbursed to be drawn therefrom, does not refer
to each individual collection or payment, but the aggre-
gate quarterly and yearly collections and expenditures.
This is in order to make them appear on the exhibit of
the annual receipts and expenditures of the country, and
also in he annual appropriations, which was not the case
formerly. This is effected by large Covering warrants,
quarterly or otherwise, and not by a deposite and war
rant in each individual case over the Union else the la
Dor and details would be insuperable without a great adj
ditional force in the department. *
There are other laws and decisions connected with tho
subject all going to show that the postal receipts must
be paid into the treasury and the money be drawn there
from as in other cases. If this were not 80, why require
estimates for each item of expenditure, appropriations for
them, and a statement of the amounts expended for each
~purpose2 Why not allow postmasters to deduct their
salary and expenses, and account only for the balance a?
This they cannot do, unless the Postmaster General gives
...u--f fr III ,o,o,,t ,yI;oI ;r rano;,roI ;,fo tLa 3,n..
ury as cash, while the provisions of the 9th section of the
act of 1886, requiring that ''the appropriations for the SER
vice of the Post Office Department shall be disbursed by
the treasurer out of the moneys paid into the treasury
for the service of the Post Office Department upon the
warrants of the Postmaster General, y would be efectu-
ally nullifed and repealed.
OF this opinion, too, was the Hon. Benjamin f. But
Ter, Attorney General of the United States, g Attorney
Gen. OPP, p. 49, who said ua- 1852 tsa@
1.-THE constitution declares that no money shall be
drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropri-
ations made by law Whether the public moneys at the
disposal of the Postmaster General are technically in the
treasury or not, the spirit of the provision applies to
them, and ought to be faithfully observed in their ex-
penditure."
Payments by appropriations must not be oonfounded as
meaning the same thing there are abundant means of
making the payments, without the money ever actually
being in the treasury its constructive presence is deemed
sufficient, but there is no right to pay for any service for
which Congress has not made the appropriation. The
act requires that the whole sum for the Post Office ser
vice shall be appropriated by law, and, until so appropria-
ted, there is no authority to make any payment for any
such service. 1t would be an act of usurpation, an in
vasion of the prerogative Of Congress, the only law
making power, and IL tolerated in this case, it might
fairly be claimed in Others, such as the collections of
customs, proceeds of sales of public lands, sc.
Congress is TO Judge of the necessity and extent of the
appropriations and expenditures, and when they fail TO
make appropriation for any given object,, the response
bility is upon them, for they have the power TO withhold
it. Hthe Executive can thus spend money for one object
without appropriation, merely because it has been re-
ceived from the same branch of service, every other re-
ceipt from any source must be in like manner at his dis
posal. /" The beaten track is the safest road and
whether this leads to an extra session or TO a diminution
of postal facilities should not be considered as outweigh
ing the serious objection of an invasion upon the consti-
tution's declaration, and a strong interference with legis-
lative privilege. The argument of r. II. G. shows the ques-
ton TO be at best doubtful, and he has certainly erected
q structure without q sufficient foundation to support it
the constitution seems to be against him, the laws are in
conformity, while precedent and practice unite in the OPP
posite doctrine If the right is doubtful, its exercise
should not be attempted, for such doubts should always
be resolved against Powv, and If the right, as asserted,
does exist, henceforward let there be no application
TO Congress for appropriations for which there would APP
pear TO be no necessity, r. u