Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-05-13


may be honest upon a contingency. The De-
mocracy generally will appreciate at a high rate
His Excellency's great maenanimity. His Ex-
cellency devotes a considerable portion of his
letter 10 convincing Mr.. Winston, that ] have
not maintained a consistent position upon the
subject of appropriations-tbst ] have given the
Auditor of State opinions favorable to the issuing
Of warrants when, had | adhered TO the principles
stated in my interest opinion, the decision would
have been otherwise.
As have not the distinguished honor of Mr..
WinsIOtc's acquaintance. / am unable TO saw
whether the labor of His Excellency will be n
source of pleasure or distress TO him, and | am
unable to see hos His Excellency's charge, if il
was even true. would weaken nv argument on
the interest question. III was right then. a want
Of consistency would not make it wrong; IL ] was
wrong, consistency would not have made it right.
The concluding paragraph of His Excellency's
letter has a strange look in a communication ad-
dressed to a citizen OF the State Of New York
upon u purely legal question.
His Excellency saws: THE law is plain: the
money is in the Treasury, and If the interest is
not paid. the responsibility will rest with those
officers upon whom the law has deyolved the duty
of making the payment"
Responsibility TO .whomf the creditors of the
State, or TO some other party?
The question with Mr.. Winslow. is, will the
interest be paid?
With dis Excellencv, IL is a question of official
resp0RsibiIity-a question of whose shoulders
shall bear the burden he and his party friends
voluntarily assumed.
Had His Excelleucy been as sensitive upon the
subject of official responsibility at the time the
appropriation bill should have been passed, the
legal question discussed by him would never have
beer presented. He and his friends assumed
the responsibility of defeating the appropriation
bill, and have no right to ask the Auditor and
Treasurer OF State to violate the law and subject
themselves to the penalties prescribed in the en-
bezzlement bill, to relieve them of it's conse-
quenceS.
II Is manifest that this part of His Excellency's
letter was designed for political rather than fnan-
cial circles; for Indiana rather than New York
consumption.
His Excellency saws 1 gave the opinion
that the interest could not be paid because there
was no specific annual appropriation for that pur-
pose, and then practically dissented from the doc
trine by drawing NV OWE salary. His Excellency
is mistaken. | gave no such opinion. ] ex-
pressly stated that an appropriation might be spe-
cihc, for a single wear, or that it might be contin-
uing, and showed that no appropriation bill of
either class existed authorizing the payment of
the interest.
His Excellencv was also aware. and forgot to
mention. that section . of Acts of 1861, page Ia,
contains the following provision:
"Such Attorney General shall receive for his
compensation the sum of one thousand dollars
per annum. to he audited and paid quarterly out
OF the State Treasury
His Excellency also forgot to inform M.
WinslOU that the Salary Act of 1853, a G.. &H.,
$780, under which the salaries of the various
State officers are being paid, contains tie follow
Ing provision:
"SEcTION /. That there shall be allowed to the
several officers of Government, and persons here.
matter mentioned. the following annual salaries,
to be paid quarterly out of any moneys in the
Treasury belonging to the general fund, and nos
specially otherwise appropriated by law" &c.
Do not these acts set aside money for particu-
lar purposes. and authorize it to be taken from
the Treasury for application to those pnrp0sesI
Perhaps His Excellency can see no difference
between these sections. and the acts of 1876 and
lS47, and this may explain his omission to set
them out.
His Excelleney dwells with particular emphasis
upon the opinion given as TO the 32d section of
the act Of March ., 1855 a 6. & H., 339).
The section authorizes the State offices to fur
nish, at the expense OF the State. the necessary
record books and office rent and s%tationars for
certain offices. ! think that Il legislative direc-
ton TO certain officers who have the money of
the State in their hands TO furnish, at the ex-
pense of the State certain articles for the public
service, amounts to an appropriation bill, and
presents a very different case from that made by
His Excellency.
There are other points in His ExcelleDcy's
letter to which | would like to call attention, but
this communication is already of greater length
than ! designed it sheuld be aud ] bringit to a
close.
The State officers are deter mined to perform
their duties according to their understanding of
the law. They regret that differences as to
official duties should exist between His Ex-
cellency and themselves, but will not in conse
quence Of this want of agreement vary from the
line of conduct thew have marked out. which is to
adhere strictly to the legal rules regulating their
duties. Respectfully,
Oscar B. HoRD.