The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1871-02-25
THE DEBT OF THE STATE.
From the Now Orleans Bec.l

State Constitution, by q late amend
ment, limits tho debt of the State to
twenty five millions Of dollars, yet that
the Legislature may lawfully endorse
bonds or other obligations to an unlinl-
tied amount, provided these bonds and
obligations are not those of the State Or
for which the State is primarily bound.
The absurdity Of this proposition is
apparent to every reasonable mind.
What was the object of the people Of
Louisiana when they voted upon the
amendment to their fundamental law
limiting the debt to twenty-five millions
Of dollars? ? Was it not to secure them
selves against incurring obligations of
any kind in excess of that amount p
Was it not to prevent their lawmakers
from creating debt or obligation in any
shape beyond the amount named p
What matters it whether it be bonds of
the State or bonds of corporations for
which the people arc responsible? The
only difference between the two classes
| of obligation is, that for the bonds of the
State, the State only is responsible,
while for bonds not issued by the State
but only endorsed by the State, she is
only responsible if the principal maker
of the bonds should fail to pay.
1t is a law maxim familiar to every
body that an act which cannot be done
in a direct manner cannot be done in an
indirect manner. The Legislature is
the mere agent or attorney Of the peo-
pie. 1t cannot lawfully go beyond the
special power granted to it by tho Con-
stitutiOn, any more than an Individual
holding special power Of attorney can
lawfully exceed his authority. The
mistake which our lawmakers make is
that they construe their power to be
general and not special.
But what else can be expected from
the men who assemble at tho Mechan-
ics' Institute than continual stretches
of authority. They go not there to pass
wise laws for the benefit of the people
but to sell their votes for any scheme,
however mOnstrous. Tho word REPU-
DIATION is no favOrite word of ours,
neither would we advise that the threat
should be uttered, but assuredly unless
a stop shall be put at once to the reck-
less extravaganza now daily practiced
by those whom we are forced to rccog-
nize as our lawmakers, reputation
will not be for us Il question of choice
but OF necessity. There is such Il pro-
ceeding rs revolution by statute. There
is also such Il proceeding as robbery by
statute.
Purchasers of State bonds arc bound
to enquire into the laWfulness Of their
issue, precisely as the capitalist or bank
er who discounts Il promissory note
signed by one who acts as attorney for
another, is bound to enquire into the
power Of the attorney to bind his prin-
cipal. Those who deal with agents
cannot plead Ignorance of the extent of
the powers of such agent.
The debt of the State at the present
time, according to the figures in the re-
port of Auditor Graham to the I4egis-
latllre now in session, amounts to twen-
ty-eight millions ofdollars, which is an
increase of eighteen millions in four
years. In a comparison of expendi-
lures in previous years, we find they
have increased from two millions and
a half in 1866, to seven millions in
1870. This is an indirect method ofvio-
lating the Constitutional prohibition
touching the debt and excessive taxa
ton is another. The situation of the
State finances is truly alarming, and it
is our duty to warn capitalists in States
against unlawful issues of bonds by
this State and unlawful endorsements
by the State of bonds issued by cOrpO-
rations lcg:,lized by our Legislature for
merely speculative purposes.