530 



INDIANA. 



which had been conferred upon him." This 

 militia bill, it appears, conferred the right upon 

 those enrolled under it to elect their own com- 

 pany and regimental officers, and reserved to 

 the General Assembly the right to say in what 

 manner brigadier and major generals should 

 be appointed. With regard to the latter ap- 

 pointments, it was claimed by the majority to 

 be the " constitutional " right of the Assembly 

 to say how they should be made ; but by those 

 who withdrew, it was claimed that the power 

 to make the appointment was conferred by the 

 Constitution of the State on the governor. The 

 consequence was that the Legislature adjourned 

 without passing any bills appropriating money 

 to meet expenditures. The State owes a for- 

 eign debt contracted previous to the present 

 war, the aggregate annual interest on which is 

 $320,000, payable semi-annually, on the 1st of 

 January and July, in the city of New York, to 

 such persons as may hold her bonds. As the 

 time approached for the payment of the inter- 

 est due in July, it was manifest that the Au- 

 ditor and Treasurer of the State would not 

 have the funds in New York for the purpose, 

 although the money was in the State Treasury. 

 The grounds urged for their position may be 

 briefly stated. 



In 1846 (the State having failed to pay the 

 interest upon the public debt for some years) a 

 compromise was made with her creditors, by 

 which they released one half of the indebted- 

 ness for new obligations, and for the other the 

 "Wabash and Erie Canal and the lands unsold 

 which had been appropriated by the General 

 Government for its construction, and the State 

 pledged its faith for the punctual payment of 

 the interest on the new bonds. In 1859 the 

 Legislature enacted a law prohibiting the Au- 

 ditor and Treasurer of State from withdrawing 

 any money from the treasury, unless in pur- 

 suance of appropriations made by law. The 

 General Assembly of that year provided for 

 the payment of the interest upon the State 

 debt for the succeeding two years, in the gen- 

 eral appropriation bill. In 1861 the Legis- 

 lature passed what is known as the embezzle- 

 ment law, providing heavy penalties for any 

 violation of the law establishing a treasury 

 system, which had been enacted two years 

 previous, and also provided for the payment 

 of the interest upon the public debt for the 

 two succeeding years in the general appropria- 

 tion bill. 



The Constitution requires that no law shall 

 be enacted unless a quorum of each House 

 shall be present, which is made to consist of 

 two thirds of the members of each branch of 

 the Legislature. The Constitution restricts 

 the sessions to sixty-one days, and all laws 

 must be enacted within fifty-nine days. Thir- 

 teen days previous to the expiration of the 

 constitutional term of the Legislature and be- 

 fore the appropriation bills necessary to sustain 

 the State Government and provide for the pay- 

 ment of the obligations of her creditors, a suf- 



ficient number of the members of the lower 

 House, to break a quorum, withdrew as above 

 stated, and thus suspended the legislation. 



As the time approached to place the funds 

 in New York to meet the interest, Gov. Morton 

 requested the Auditor and Treasurer of State 

 to assume the responsibility of withdrawing 

 money from the treasury for that purpose, and 

 argued that the laws compromising the State 

 debt were in effect a continuous appropriation 

 which authorized them to do so. They did 

 not place such a construction upon those acts. 

 To test this question, the President of the Sink- 

 ing Fund applied for a mandate directing the 

 Auditor to draw his warrant upon the treasury 

 to pay the interest. Judge Finch, of the In- 

 dianapolis circuit, first allowed the mandate. 

 From this decision an appeal was taken to the 

 Supreme Court. The judge then changed his 

 decision and refused to allow a mandate, and 

 from this decision an appeal was taken to thj 

 court of last resort. The object of these suits 

 was to decide the law in the case. The Su- 

 preme Court, after an investigation of the ques- 

 tions at issue, decided that the State officers 

 had no authority to pay the interest unless in 

 pursuance of specific legislative appropriations. 



The house of Winslow, Lanier & Co., New 

 York, offered to pay the interest on certain 

 conditions, which was declined by the State 

 agent, and it remained unpaid to the close of 

 the year. 



The sessions of the Legislature being held 

 once in two years, the reports of the State 

 officers relative to internal affairs are made up 

 and presented at the commencement of each 

 session. 



On the 25th of April, Gen. M. S. Hascall in 

 command of the district of Indiana, in the De- 

 partment of the Ohio, issued an order the bet- 

 ter to enforce General Order No. 38, issued by 

 Maj.-Gen. Burnside. (See HABEAS CORPUS.) It 

 led to the following correspondence : 



HEADQUARTERS, DISTRICT or INDIANA, ) 

 INDIANAPOLIS, May 5th, 1863. j 

 EDITORS JOURNAL : I have received the following 

 letter from Hon. Joseph K. Edgerton, member of 

 Congress from the Tenth Congressional District, and, 

 as it refers to matters which interest others as well as 

 himself, and as there are some who claim that they do 

 not understand fully the meaning of General Order 

 No. 9, recently issued from these headquarters, I pub- 

 lish his letter, together with my reply, for the infor- 

 mation of all concerned : 



FORT WATNE, (!ND)., May M, 1868. 



SIR: I have read with the interest due to it your Generil 

 Order No. 9, dated 25th ultimo. In this order you say th it 

 you have no partisan feelings or interests you intend to ad- 

 vance, but desire to confer freely and fully with the promi- 

 nent men of all political parties, and invoke their hearty co- 

 operation in all measures calculated to restore harmony ai d 

 good feeling in the State. This sentiment is patriotic. It 

 seems to recognize the fact that opposing political partl.a 

 may still be permitted to o\-i-t. and yet co-operate to resto'e 

 harmony and pood feelinirs in the State. In a com-spondii.lt 

 spirit, I, as a citizen, tliouirh not perhaps a "prominent" 

 one, in the sense of your order, desire to confer freely wllfc 

 you, by way of inquiry, as to the meaning of a part of your 

 order, which I do not fully understand. You will, of course, 

 admit that if the people are to obey your order, it is impor- 

 tant they should know the exact scope and design. 



Will you do me thejavor to inform me what you mean .n 



