The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1866-03-31
THE EXEMPTION OF FEDERAL
hONDS FROM TAXATION.

The Cincinnati Enquirer, in an able
article on the subject Of the exemption of
Goyernment Bonds from taxation ia the
States, says:
The acts Of Congress under which the
bonds were issued declare that they shall
not be taxable by the States. They are
the first laws ever enacted by Congress
which assumed to interfere in the internal
regulations of the local bodies politic--the
first TO supersede and obstruct State gov
ernment. Ifthey yare constitutional, State
government lies at the mercy of Congress,
to be extinguished whenever it shall suit
the convenience of that body to prosecute
the work of exinguishment. When Con-
gress has attained jurisdiction over sub
jeet, its jurisdiction is plenary; aud il, for
example, Il can prohibit State taxation in
one form, OF over one species Of property.
Iit can in other forms, and over other
species. It can destroy, at a single blow.
the revenues of a State, release its people
from taxation, prohibit its officers iron
levy aud collection, and annihilate the
body politic by paralysis OF its financial
machinery. Taking this view of the sub
ject, il would seem incredible that it was
intended by the trainers of the Republic
to place in such hands power SO dangerous.
Laws are binding which are made in
pursuance of the Constitution, and no
others. We DO not remember to have
seen it stated that the laws which release
the National securities from State taxa
tion were in pursuance Of the Constitution.
u. .aa We have affirmed above, there is no
basis for such laws in that instrument, il
follows that the laws themselves, so far as
they assume TO supersede or control State
netion, are Of no validity. They mny so
far repzeaest an obligation subsistihg be-
tween the Natioa and the bondholder as
to entitle the iatter to receive back from
~ National treasury the amounts he pays
= .n1 e taxes but that the National Gov
- CIV. ~ confer by law upon the citi-
cru - = S,.,a the right to demand from
.sa .s. g S....a 49, >,ission of taxes upon his
s.ss s.sa.S '.e ,rono. 'tion bordering upon
absurdity.
Thus far we have sem ~ a'gSules'
upon the legal question here { e'uefcu'
at least on tho side Of those who. re up
posed TO taxation. The arguments /, W.
ally have taken a personal direction, con-
sisting Of suggestions of disloyalty and of
reasonable indifference to the National
honor and good faith, which are consider
ably better calculated to irritate their op-
ponents than to convince. 1t may be an
unpleasant state of circumstances when
National honor and State rights are at
issue; but we must all admit that qucs.
tons in respect TO the latter are not, of
necessity, finally determinablc in the
forum of the former. In what the Ma
tional honor consists may be matter of
opinion; tho rights of the States as inde
pendent, selfreg1lating political corpora
tions are matters of fact. 1t no concern
Of ours that the issue upon the State tax
alton Of National promises has assumed a.
party complexion. Being so, it is all the
more incumbent upon both parties to
make appeal to reason as the umpire, and
tc enforce their opinions with fair argu-
ment; and, for party which sets its
claims to infallibility so high, the Repub-
hcan is certainly most extrasagantly reti-
cent IL the field of ratiocination.
We have no desire TO treat the honor
arxumeut-for, in one sense, it is an ar
eumcnt-unfairly 1t is predicated upon
the assumption that these bonds were
issued Al a time Of extreme National peril;
aad that the clause providing to relieve
them from the burden of State taxation
was essential to their efficacy as means
of relief from sch peril, and was, there
fore. done under the pressure Of that par
amount necessity " .hich, as primary law
of nature, overridcs and, for the time be-
ing, suspends all statl'tes and constitu-
tons This may have been; we will not
stop here to deny it; nor will We deny
that there may be occasions Nhen the law
of necessity rises to the como ition OF a
supreme rule of human conduct. 1t may
have been very expedient to hold cut the
idea that the National bonds Wonld net be
taxed by the State governments; and sill
very improper to attempt to compel thu
States, which were parties neither to the
peril nor to the arrangement, to establish
precedent of State subordination, for
the purpose of carrying it into effect.
The law of paramount necessity expires
With its occasion. Itcan not perpetuate
itself in endless financial or political con-
sequences. Il is not revolutionary In its
operation and as soon as it expires, laws
and constitutions revive, and, taking
things as they find them, go on as they
did before the temporary suspS6sion.
WHITE MANS DAY-In the House
of Representatives on the 9th Of Februa-
- n Ross .,f Ill;ns;e r,,nrad an ar,nalad.