Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-12-06
Aancaster .9ntelligenrer.
EVENING DEC. 8. 1852,
Tue Government in Court.

L
was the home of General Robert f.
Lee. when the rebellion broke up, and
which since has been in the possession
Of the government, and in use as ma
tional cemetery, under its purchase of it
at sale held for unpaid taxes of a few
dollars. The court decided that, as the
payment Of the tax was required to be |
made by the owner in person, and as he |
could not personally pay them during
the rebellion, the sale was void. The
point upon which the government
relied was that, whatever the
merit of the plaintiffs case, his suit could
not be maintained because the United
States cannot be sued save by its con-
sent. The suit was, however, not
brought directly against the United
States, but against its officers, who were
in charge of the estate and the court
made the important decision that it could
be maintained against them, and that
under it the inquiry could be made as
to whether the United States had
such title to the property As to enable
the government officers to maintain pos
session of it. Practically, therefore, it
is determined that the United States
may be sued for tire recovery of property
uclawfully held by it. and it may he
wrested from it. The immunity
which it enjoys from direct suit will not
enable it to maintain itself il wrongful
possession Of aDother's property when it
has to do so through agents and as IN
mcst, if not all, cases, its possession
must he thus maintained, it would seem
that its inability to he sued directly vii!
not Ike OF much consequence to those
whom i: seeks to wrong. This decision
is eminently just, but it is a notifying
thing that it was ever found to be neces-
sary. That the United States govern
ment, which is so lavish in its eXpendi-
ture, and in possession of a revenue
which 1t does not know what to
do with, should have been will
ing for twenty years to wrongfrlly
appropriate the property Of another, as
the supreme court says it has done, is
not an honorable exhibition to make to
the world. 1t is a disgraceful fact that a
great government should have been thus
dishonest. 1t has set a bad example to
the states, and one which they have
been ready to follow. 1t is notable
and most discreditable that many
of the states of the Union have dis.
honored their obligations and kept the
property of their creditors just because
they had the power to do so. 1t is q con-
ceded thing in civilized governments
that the debtor must pay his debt if he
has wherewithal to pay it. The states
SO provide by stringent laws. The
courts are open for the adjudication Of
disputes between the debtor and cred
itor, but when these are decided against
the debtor he must pay, if the sheriff CAR
find any property belonging to him. But
the states which thus provide for enforc
ing an honest discharge of their Obliga
tiOns upon their citizens are by no means
solicitous to impose the same burtheI
upon themselves. Their laws provide
that they may not be sued. They legis
late upon the assumption that they can
do no such wrong rs to repudiate theil
debts, and then straightway proceed tc
do it of course, ali the time pretend
ing to believe that they are 10!
doing it, and claiming that they ought
not to pay what they refuse to pay
But in this generally the judgment of al
the world beside is against them. TX
such outside judgment they will no
submit themselves nor will they ever
ask the Judgment Of their courts which
they have raised to decide between thei
citizens. The people of the state, Who
are the debtors, are sometimes asked b.
their Legislatures whether they are viii!
In, to pay their creditors, and general.
and naturally they say no. If the state
should leave to the debtor class of thei
citizens to say whether they should pa.
their individual creditors, they would b.
apt to decide, with equal unanimity tt
that with which they repel the public
creditors, that they have just defens
to the claim. There would be little us'
for civil courts if the homer and judg
ment of the debtor was to determine tn,
payment of his debt and the states have
proved in abundant instances that they
are no more honest than their in
debted citizens. And neither, it seems
is the United States entitled tC
claim that it is always honest and
just in deciding upon the justice OF
claims against it nor properly scrupu
lOus of its power of immunity from
suit.
1t is a good thing that the United
States government can be brought into
court agai nst its will to answer for its
appropriations Of property. 1t follows
that the states government are equally
ameEable to the processes of the courts
in the persons of their agents and that
their creditors may seize upon any of
their property that is unlawfully de.
tained from them by such agents under
the authority of the state. Probably
this decision will result in the appear.
ance in the courts of many state and III,
tional creditors, who conceive themselves
wrongcd by the government. How far
the remedy pointed out to them will
help them seems to depend only upon
their ability to find property, to which
they are entitled in the hands of govern
ment agents. Creditors who have