Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-05-09

ATTORNEY CESEEAL's OFFICE.
indianapolis, Ind. Nay {. 1865
JosErH J BISeHAx, Eco
SIN. On the Sd ult., tho aditor Of State re
questei my Official opinion 20 whether there
existed, the necessary legislation 70 authorize
him 70 draw his warrant upon the
stase Treasury, for the amount required to pay
thsJsiy interest upon the funded debt OF the
STATE On the 6th al. answered the inquiry
expressing The opinion that such authority eI-
isted, and. gave my reasons tor the conclusion
arrived at The note of the Auditor and my an
swcr we're published in the Sentinel of the 9Th
cit
In the Journal Of the 4th inst. was published
a letter from his Excelency, Oliver p. Morton.
dated the 23d ult.. addressed 70 James Winsow,
Esq of the City of New York upon the
subject. which has been published, with some
PREDATORY remarks. in pamphlet form. and is being
distributed political document.
His Exeellescy has seen tt to indulge in some
reflections Of character that caDnotbe regarded
as complimentary 20 the Democratic party, gen
orally. aud myself particularly. which furnish my
excuse for troubling you with this communities
ton.
The foundation OF His Excelency's argument
is that the Acts OF 1916 and lo47 constitute
appropriation. for all coming time. of the money
necessary TO pay the interest upon the funded
debt; not because they appropriate money for that
purpose. because they profess to appropriate
money, or because they appropriation bills,
according the definition OF His Excelency;
but because the acceptance OF the propositions
made by the State 20 her creditors. and the form
of the bonds issued. constitute contract on the
part of the State to pay the interest certain
time and place: that the honor and good faith of
81. Cs. a. no
complied with therefore. these acts constitute an
appropri alton. and no further legislation is ne
ccsStry.
He sums up the argument thus:
lis IL possible that further legislation is roquir-
ell to authorize the State 20 paw the interest
this obligationf The State makes her written
promise to pay. at particular times. and delivers
It To her creditors which, upon presentation to the
proper officer. is direct AMI sufficient authority
for payment IL il il not. then the promise of
the State carries with il no obligation. and the
authority 10 paw must be derived solely from sub
sequent legislation
The question presented il this: Does a contract
on the part Of the State To paw money, amount
To an appropriation and furnish authority Justify
ing the State officers 10 take money from tn
State Treasury TO pay the indebtedneSsy An
agreement on the part Of the State to paw money
is one thing. and legislative direction tn the
State officers TO take money from the Treasury
To pay the Indebtedness il another. few illus
trations will show the difference.
The United States by contractwth the officers and
soldiers composing the army agrees to paw them
STIMULATED price per month for their services This
contract is the contract OF the Government and
Is made by virtue of authority conferred by Acts
OF Congress
The honor Of the Government is pledged to a
faithful compliance with the contract, and ITS
breach would be lasting stain upon the nation
al character; but | have always understood. not
outstanding this. that not "A cent could be paid
the army without an appropriation bill
1t His Excellency is correct in his assumption
that contract TO paw money is an appropriation
OF the money necessary 10 pay 1t, then the Fed
ersl authorities have power To enlist a soldier
for longer period than two years; for it is ex-
pressly provided in the Constitution. as a limita
ton upon the right To raise and support armies.
"that no appropriation u that use. shall be
for longer term than two years
The Government has. however. always acted
upon different pruciple-has understood that
contract to pay, was not appropriation-an0
therefore enists soldiers for longer period than
two wears
The Federal Government has the power to
make treaties. and may contract IN them to pay
money fixing the time and place OF payment: and
may solemnly pledge the faith Of the nation for "a
compliance with the obligation: vet il has always
been regarded necessary that Congress should
Appropriate the money necessary satisfy the
obligation thus assumed
Some light is shed upon this subject by "A
discussion IN Congress on the 18th day ct January
1876. with reference 10 appropriations to sustain
the mint. and the debate took quite II wide
range
Mr. Theodore Selgwick, OF Massachusetts, rs
sumed the position that when the Government
had assumed obligations. or made legal establish
msnts. il was the duty Of Congress to make the
necessary appropriations To provide for them and
that Congress had not the right To refuse the AID
preparations. or discu their propriety
Mr. Selgwick did not however take the hisl,
ground occupied by His Excellency, that an obi
gat on on the psrt of the Government was IL
self an appropriation that rendered further action
by Congress unnecessary.
Mr Albert Gallstin differed from Mr. Sesigwick
and expressed his alarm at the position assumed
He thought that notwithstanding the obligation
to paw existed still the appropriation to meet il
was for Congress and that the subject of aptro-
priation "A solemn aud important one placed
in the hands of the Legislature "A check upon
the other branches of the Government: that Con
gress IN each case h 81 the right and il was their
duty, TO determine the necessity and propriety OF
making an appropriation.
He reterre'i. nv way Of illustrations 10 the fact
that the military establishment was made up by
enlistmenfs for three more wears while il was
usual u mike annual appropriations for its sup
prt; and Congress was expressly prohibited. by
the Constitution. from voting appropriations TOR
more than two years Tor the support of an armed
force.
At tie time OF this debate the Government was
largely in debt. had out>tandin. bonds and prom
ises to paw the interest thereon According 10
His Exceliency theory. these obligations consti
ted appropriation of the money necessary to
meet the interest. without further legislation
Mr.. Gsllstin ia speaking of the right Of the
legislative branch of the Government to control
appropriations SAID: There was one instance in
which this House hid thought il proper TO aban-
don the right In order To s'renethen the public
credit they had consented that the payment Of
interest the Debt should depend on their
sole will; and they had rendered the appropriation
for thst object. not yearly. but permane nt one -
Mr. Gallarin did not think mere promise to
pay interest, rendered subsequent legislative
appropriation unnecessary. but saws that Congress
has madea permanent appropriation for that pur
pose
make the following extract from the act of
Congress referred To by him. passed August
4. l19O-found in | L. 5. Statutes AT Large. 1879:
section L. be it enacted. That reservng out
of the moneys which have arisen since the last
dav at December last past. and which shall here.f
ter arise from the duties goods wares and mer
chandise imported into the United States and an
the tunrage OF ships cor vessels the -. rIy sum Of
SIX hundred th0aSani dollars ur an much the,eof
"a may be appropriated from time time ,ow,rds
,h. de,eu-e of the Government of the Irr,,.,