Message from Mississippi Governor James L. Alcorn to the Mississippi Legislature; June 8, 1870

Documents
Message from Mississippi Governor James L. Alcorn to the Mississippi Legislature; June 8, 1870

Document Network
Document Metadata

Each transcribed document contains links that connect it to other documents on the same topic in the collection.

People

Alcorn, J. L. (James Lusk), 1816-1894

Events

Collecting of accounts Conventions Conventions--Mississippi. Constitutional Convention (1865)Mississippi. Legislation Mississippi. Legislation. An act to incorporate a Board of Levee Commissioners for Bolivar, Washington, and Issaquena Counties and for other purposes (1865)Taxation Taxation--Mississippi United States. Constitution

Organizations and Businesses

Levees Mississippi. Executive Department Mississippi. Legislature Mississippi. Legislature. House of Representatives Mississippi. Legislature. Senate Mississippi. Military Department Stockholders

Occupations

Commissioners Contractors Cotton gins and ginning Laborers Treasury agents

Places

Bolivar County (Miss.)Issaquena County (Miss.)Washington County (Miss.)

Page 1

[note] June 8, 1870 [/note]

[note] 1870 [/note]

To the Senate and House of Representatives

Gentlemen,

I return to you without my approval H R No 244, being "An act to further amend an act entitled 'An act to incorporate a Board of Levee Commissioners for Bolivar Washington and Issaquena Counties and for other purposes' Approved Nov^r 2'' 1865." My objection is to the 2^d Section of the Bill, On the following ~~on the~~ grounds;

The act of 1865, recited in the title of the Bill before me, sets apart a certain tax for twelve years for a specific purpose. On that basis it authorizes a loan in these words (Sec 7) 'That said Board of Levee—Com-missioners shall have power to borrow money for the purpose of building and repairing the levee aforesaid and of "carrying into" effect the objects of this act, and to that end the said Board, may issue the Bonds of said Board to the amount of one million of dollars &c &c'—

The Levee Commissioners were restrained then for in their operations within certain limits of expenditure, whether of cash or credit, and if the present Board had exceeded those limits their acts outside those limits are null and void.

Page 2

No obligation resting on us to make good the excess of powers employed by the Commis=sioner, the question arises: are we called on to do so by expediency? The commissioners who have overstepped their authority, hold no authority from this government. They have expended large sums of money un=der an authority which it is not ours to question, and while we do not know whether or not, they have expended those monies properly we have not even a right to go behind their Settlements with the Mil-itary power, if any they have made; under this view of the case, I submit that we are in no position to give our approval to the acts performed by the Board in excess of the terms of the law which they have been charged to carry out, by placing at their disposal any Credits beyond those which they have been authorized under the existing law to employ.

The act of 1865 makes the provision for the payment and the limitation of the amount of the bonds, with a view to their appreciation. And having done this it Stipu=lates in the proviso of sec 7, 'that the Bonds shall not be sold, 'at a rate if discount exceeding five per cent? The Bonds have, I suppose, been disposed of, nominally, by the

Page 3

commisioners at par to the contractors; the prices given for the work have involved such a virtual discount as that represen-ted in the fact, that Contractors have Sold the bonds, bearing on their face 10 per cent per annum interest with Coupons attached at even fifty cents on the dollar! Inas-much as no people can afford ti pay any such price for the use of money, I submit, that if we would not drive the counties ~~named~~ concerned to the necessity of repudiation, we must put a stop at once to the system that involves a financining so utterly ruinous.

If the ~~expenditious~~ expediency of Such an additional issue of Bonds be Supposable let me ask you to consider, Gentlemen, whether it is legal? The tenth section of the act of 1865 provides: (That the taxes levied and assessed and that may be collected under this act be and they are hereby con-stituted a Special fund and trust to be used by said Board; first in payment of any of the bonds that may be sold or used as before provided under this act, or of any money that may be borrowed under its provisions, and secondly, for the payment of any other debts or liabilities of said Board; and when collected the same Shall

Page 4

be paid into the Treasury of said Board for the purposes aforesaid,—said Taxes, so levied and assessed as afroresaid,—shall not be subject to repeal, alteration, or Suspension during the term for which they are levied and assessed as aforesaid, until all the bonds, obligations and liabilities of said Board shall be first paid and dischar=ged?—The law of 1865 in Setting apart the taxes as shown here, ~~are~~ in limiting the bonded debt to be thus provided for, to the sum of one million dollars, is neither more nor less than a solemn con-tract. The Bondholders have acquired, under that contract, certain vested rights: Any such legislation as that proposed in the Bill before me is a clear violation of that contract, and to the extent of its increase of the bonded debt second by the Taxes provi-ded, is a violation of the rights they ac quired.

The bill before me authorizes the issue of two hundred thousand dollars in the bonds of the Board but makes no provision for the redemption of that issue. If it con=templates an appropriation of any surplus left after liquadating the obligations of the commissions as limited by law from the taxes levied in the act of 1865, I

Page 5

Submit, first, that, no such surplus will be found to exist, and second, if Such surplus should exist, its appropriation as contemplated by the act befoe me, is unconstitutional;

Since the ^passage of the^ act of 1865, the Con-stitution has been changed. The Specific tax that Could have been levied lawfully in 1865 Cannot be Collected lawfully now but by virtue of the considiration, that its operation has been made legal until March 1879, to the extent of and as a condi=tion of a certain public contract. But the attempt to predicate the Collection of ^any part of^ that tax on a new Contract at a time when the form of taxation has been changed from the specific to the ad valorum, is plainly outside the powers of the Legislature. It amounts in effect to an exercise of the right of taxation in a Shape forbidden by the text of the Constitution.

The Constitutional objection ^to the taxation^ involved in my approval of the Bill before me, is not the only objection to it, I Cannot Consent to it because it Conflicts with my views of Sound policy. The tax on Cotton which it in-volves, is a tax on production, a tax in fact on labor, and as such violates what I hold to be the best interests of the State

Page 6

and people.

On all the foregoing grounds I am unable to give my approval to the exercise made ~~of unlawful~~ ^in granting unlawful^ authority to the Board of Levee Commissions and to the Means by which liability to be incurred in that exercise, are proposed by the Bill before me to be ~~carried out~~, discharged.

J. L. Alcorn

Executive office
June 8 1870,

Page 7

Message on H R. No. 244
delivered June. 9. 1870
with accompanying Bill