The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-02-16

should suffer this loss? The discount was
a part of the direct and necessary expense
incurred and assumed by the State in its
p~raiseworthy and loyal effort to sustain the
national government. 1t is a claim which
falls strictly within the principle of the
New York case. 1t was there distinctly
held that the interest paid by the State on
its bonds issued to raise money for the pur-
poses expressed by Congress constituted a
part of the costs, charges and expenses
properly incurred by il for those objects.
Under this principle, which is in no wise
or anywhere disputed. the discount upon
the bonds so issued constituted a part of
the costs and expenses for which the
State was to be reimbursed. To employ
the ~languag of the Supreme Court fur
Their, lit is as If the United States had thus
borrowed the money through the agency of
the State
THE discount by the State was simply a
discount for and on behalf of the govern
ment. 1t was in no sense for the special
benefit OF the State, but was for the direct
benefit of the United States. 1t was clearly
an obligation incurred in the latter's behalf
within the purview oflthe act of 1861. and is
obviously as much a claim against the ma
tional government as the interest paid
upon the face of the bonds.
1T would indeed be a strange and unnat-
ural construction of the broad and general
language employed in the act of 1861 to
for the interest paid by 1t upon money Dor
rowed to aid in sustaining the integrity of
the government, but that 1T could not be
repald the amount of the discount il was
1t negotiated and sold to raise money to as
sist the government. The manifest inten-
ton of Congress was to hold the States
harmless in their effort to support the gov
ment, and any provision for their reim-
bursement which does not restore to them
the entire amount of money paid by them
for the purpose falls short of compliance
with the equities existing or with the strict
letter of the law.
1.-THE State of Indiana filed in the Treas
ury Department on Oct. 4, 1889. additional
items of interest paid on the war loan
bonds hereinbefore mentioned from May l.,
1861. TO May l. 1881, amounting to $107. 497. Il.
These items, it will be observed, accrued
subsequently TO the date of filing the claim
hereinbefore mentioned, and for the reasons
above set forth, in the opinion of the COM
mittee, are a valid claim against the
United States.
THE committee, after a careful consid-
Grafton of the law and the facts, are clear
~ of the opinion that the State of Indiana
should be paid by the United States the
full amount of its claim for discount, in
terest paid upon bonds sold and the ex-
pense incident to their sale, under the au-
thority of its Legislature. for the purposes
contemplated by the act of Congress APP
proved July q, 1861. and the joint resolu-
ton of Congress approved March s, 1862.
The items constituting the entire claim
of Indiana now on file in the Treasury De-
partment are as follows:
Discount on S2,0O0.OO0 bonds sold. .S243, 1915
commissions, etc ................... 1,6S5. 80
Interest to May 1, 1868 ......-...-... 362, 1876. 81
Interest from May 1. 1868, to May
j, 1881 107, 497. p
Total STA, 1852
"A copy of the opinion of the controller
of the treasury overruling the application
of the State of Indiana to set aside prior
adjudications and reopen its claim is at
tached to this report. The committee rec
ommends that the joint resolution do
pass"