The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-02-24
THE STATE DEBT.

THE STATE DEBT.
Can the Convention Aepudiate nt7--An Ar
suinent Against Its rover To Do 50.
To the Editor of the Democrat;
The people OF Louisiana stand In presence
Of the most momentous question that can be
submitted for their determination. II y no
less than forming new organic law to take
the place for former one, the proper solution
of which demands the highest exhibition Of
the true qualities for sef-government In the
proper selection of those delegates to fulfill
Che public will. The best men morally, the
Oldest heads, the ripest intellects In tho com
munity alone are fit for delegates, and II is pre-
sumable the people will select such to accom-
plish the desired work within the limits of their
own settled Jurisprudence and those Of the con-
stitution Of the United States. which 10 y con-
siderable extent abrldges the natural rights
Of a pre-exlating State Of the Federal Union.
Jt must not be forgotten that there are some
things n people In convention can do, and
there are others which II would not only be
impolitic to attempt to do but positively null
and void, by the supreme law Of the land.
For Instance Il Il recommended and argued
in your valuable paper that the convention
can deal with the ''public debt" and has the
power Of Reputation, or may establish some
mode of inquiry into the validity of its Gre
alton In order TO affect tho present holders
Of state securities. Can tho convention take
cognizance Of any question other than the
proper mode OF authorizing the Legislature
Be provide for paying Il Ia Il legitimate for
n convention TO devise means TO avoid paying
the public debt 2 II IL attempt to do so will
ft he In accord with the Federal constitution,
90 be recognized AZ having a republican
form or government These seem TO me
pertinent questions. The Federal constitu-
tion says: mo State shall pass any law i'm
pairing the obligation of a contract" Thepres-
ent constitution contains the same provision.
Article Of the Civil Code says, "A law can
only prescribe for the FUTURE IL can have no
retrospective operation, nor can II impair the
obligation OF contracts" The Federal courts
hold that a constitution can no more impair
the obligation of atontract than can Legis-
lature or an individual with tmpuntty. 1t is
no part of sovereignty to act In this way. and
Estates and cities ought to remember that
when they borrow money, retufnabe with
interest, that they step down from their soy
ersignty and are TO be treated precisely
as ordinary individuals In their private
contracts" Murray vs. Charleston, Otto.
any provision that will be retrospective and
no behind a contract or obligation solemuly
acknowledged In order to affect or impair or
destroy that contract, or even 10 affect the
remedies then In existence to enforce IL. these
principles are elementary and have been en-
bodied In forty decisions OF the Supreme
Court of the United States. Now the State
has passed an amendment To It's constitution,
by which IL issued bonds to recognized credit
ors. and solemnly contracted to levy certain
taxes to meet the interest and extinguish the
bonds nj maturity. How Ia IL possible for
any sane people to suppose they can escape,
by the formation of q new government or q
new organic law, the inhibttions OF Federal
constitution, whose provisions they are bound
to obey, and Is prohbitory of what they are
attempting to do2 Republication is openly
urged by gentlemen and journals OF great
responsibility, but they would cease 70 be
such n they practiced In their private Pc
cuniary affairs the doctrines they so madiy
advocate. It Is He answer to press upon the
people that the origin of part of that debt
was corrupt and illegal. That time has
passed: the State and the people are est0pped
by their deliberate, solemn acts In relation to
that subject. IL IL thing adjudged, by its
highest tribunal the organic law OF the land.
It will be the enthronement Of puerility to at
tempt to attack such a tinality.
In speech of Mr.. Bayard, In 1902, as a Sena-
tor In Congress, he said: Among the obnox-
folis measures of the late administration was
the loan of five millions, which was funded at
& per cent. The law was created by law,
and funded by q law j. the gentleman pre-
pared TO say that this debt, which was funded
by law OF the former Legislature may be
extinguished by a law OF the present? Gan
you by calling the interest of this debt exor-
bitant and usurious, justify the reduction OF
it2 Sir, the true principle is, that one Legis-
lature may repeal the act. OF former, IN
cases not prohibited by the constitution"
The same logic and reasoning applies TO
new constitution. 1t may change and alter,
but 1t cannot destroy a vested right or I'M
pair the obligation OF contracts 1t authorized
and sanctioned. These questions are beyond
It's reach and under the Rgis OF Federal con-
servation.
Again, one government replaces another.
Inc new one, which takes the benefits, neces-
Sarny incufS the burdens OF the old one
IL suppiants This is the law of nations
States 1leither lose any of their rights, nor
are dlschdfged from any Of their obligations
" gnutye sc ute Jorm Of ciuil government
Vide Rutherford Inst, 2 vol, book g. chapter
10, and Grotlus, book 2, chapter 9, sections
and 3. Z seoo
.vattel says: Loans contracted far tia ser-
slse 2. l.e oIate, ueuIs incurred in the adj
In all the strictness of law, and ohliuatorv
on the State, and the whole nation, which =
mdispensably bound to discharge those debts
When once they have been contracted hv lau
ful authority, the right Of the creditor Is y.
ueJedsi6te. Whether the money harrny,ad
mas been turned to the advantage If III
state, OF squanuered In foolish expenses IL
no concern OF the person who has lent If. he
has Entrusted the State with his pronertv
and the nation is bound to restore it to hin,
again. 1t is so much the worse for her il sSa
mas committed the management of her az
kIalrs to Improper hands," Grotius tells of
Philip III, In 1896, that he declared himself 4
bankrupt, under pretelse that an unfair adj
vantage had been taken OF his necessities
His creditors loudly exclaimed against his
conduct, and asserted that no confidence could