WE HAVE NEVER been convinced that spending tax money to turn the Hunley submarine into a tourist trap was a good use of precious state resources. But we could say that about countless programs the Legislature has initiated or continued in recent years, even as it has inadequately funded vital services.

What sets the Hunley project apart is the way the Legislature has abdicated its duty to oversee the matter and instead turned it over to a small group of people who are allowed to act as independent agents and thus are not held accountable for their decisions.

This problem has been apparent from the time his colleagues allowed Confederate memorabilia shop owner Sen. Glenn McConnell to write the rules for the Hunley and chair the Hunley Commission that was to oversee work on the vessel. The problem deepened when the Legislature looked the other way as its subcontractor, the Hunley Commission, subcontracted its work to the Friends of the Hunley, whose members the commission hand-picked. And now we learn that the Friends has been allowed to keep $1.3 million in sales of Hunley tickets and memorabilia — money that by all rights should go to the state.

Mr. McConnell notes that the Friends assumed much of the financial risk of the project and insists that a contract with the federal government saying that “The State of South Carolina will receive all receipts, royalties, and all other revenue generated by the exhibition, display, curation, and all other activities related to the Hunley” was meant to let the Hunley Commission decide how the money is spent.

If you accept Mr. McConnell’s interpretation and believe the Friends of the Hunley really does have a right to the money, then the Legislature has been even more derelict in its duties, for allowing that to happen.

We’re not suggesting lawmakers should micromanage the Hunley marketing efforts. What we’re suggesting is treating this project as the state generally treats other investments, by putting it under the control of a state agency (the Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department comes to mind, although perhaps one of the agencies that should be combined into an arts/history department would be more appropriate), which would be responsible to the Legislature and the governor for the way it does its job.

This isn’t the first time the Friends group has gotten away with ignoring state law. It has refused to answer Freedom of Information requests from some individuals, insisting that it is a private entity to which state laws do not apply. Officials defend its actions by pointing out that it answers requests from the news media; Mr. McConnell, while agreeing that the group is bound by the law, nonetheless apologizes for that fact, saying critics are using the law for harassment. That may be true, but the law treats all requests the same, and they must be complied with; that’s part of the price of receiving public funds and public support.

And that’s the central issue here. Either the Hunley enterprise should be a public venture, or it should be a private venture. If it’s to be a public venture, then it should be governed like one, its revenues should go to the state, and it should be included in the debate when lawmakers decide which programs deserve to be continued and which should be cut off. If it’s a private venture, then it should never have received the $8 million in state and federal tax dollars it received, it shouldn’t be set up in law, and it shouldn’t have the governmental protections and rights that that entails.