Arkansas democratic banner., 1851-04-22


 naturally lDok lo the setsa Of sovereign sa,e. ;o De ehafacsefizei by mase scfapaloas reznsd ta justice and aigher mwaiity, than belong to the ordinary Tansacti0ns ofsn ivIlnsls Tke obligation 0f he State oi Akansas, ta receive inc notes of the benk, Ia paYueEt cf it's dets. $ much s,g0nxeF than n the above case ef individual guaranty.
 The bank beisase1 b tte ss=te -.sl T rs-i....s the profits af is opssxt~ss II was conducted by inc agents of tee State, uRlgr the gsTerysssoh of the legislature. By the gasTaa,y ihe notes of inc bank, for the payments Gf debts to the State. were equal b gold and silver. ThiS, to some extent sustained thslr credit. sud gave them euneney- Loans were made by ihe 5ask on satisfactory sc euTity The debts ef tile bank. or q large propof- ti2a of thcsn. may lary De pres sDed to have been eo.iect ted. Ba, She oG lac bank, ihas, an der tie coaIoi of inc State became exhzustei.- Whether thss was the resa't of wiihdEaaiag tlse capital from the baak. by the State d3es not aJ ! pear upon the record. We oaly know the fscs that is funds having disappeared leaxing # said large amount Of is paper issued betsts tiss Fs- r ai of guaranty, worthless, the hands of eli zeHS Of The State.
 The obligation of the State to receive these notes IS denied, oD tic ground that the 2sth section was general p-5yIsoni liable to be repealed, a, any tune by the legislature And II is compared io . general provision t0 receive, for pablis dues the paper oi tanks generally, unc0nnecied with the Stag. There is DO analogy in the two cases-- One $ a questtoa Of pG5ile policy ini scncea by considerations of general convenience, which every one knows may be changed at the discretion Of the Legislature. Bat the ether sTises out Of a contact Incorporated into the charter tEposi,,e ar ohiIcation on the Staie to receive, in payment c. all de5is due to II, the paper of bank owned by tAe State and whcSe notes are circulated flr is benefit The power of the legislature to repeal Inc section. inc stock of the bank being owned by inc State is coatIoreTied bat that act cannot affect the note n ere Hiaian al the tune os the repeal. [ IL IS objected that thls trenches upon the Sov,- reigRiy of The State, the exercise Of it's taxinz power and Tn the regulation oi Iis currency. We are moi aware that State hss power over the cur rency farther than the right b establish banks to regulate CT prohibit the circulation. within the State, of i1Tsfgn notes, and 10 determine h what the public dues shall be paid.
 It $ principle controyeEsed by no one, that on general questions of policy one ieglsl8tGrs cannot bind those which shall succeed Il; but II Is equal ly true and GndoRbted. that a legislature may make contract which shall bInd these that shall come afseE it.
 The ne:es of the bank in circulation a. the re- peal of tie 2Sth section, f made receivable hy the State ln discharge of pablic dues, may so far te. suScItate them, that the course of tune they wtl find ;heir way into the treasury oI the State where in justice and b. contract, they belong It IS presumed there will be no complaint as there will De no ground fer any, by ike citizens of the State If these notes now dead and ogthIeSs should be So far received as ;o reach their appropriate destination And If, aS consequence, some iu- crease Of taxation should be required by the State II wili be nothing m1re than IS common to all other States tha. perform their contracts. l. would be q mast unwise policy for State, 10 improve its currency through violation Of its con .fsc cts- In such course the toss Of the State would bc in- eomparabiy greater than it's gam. Any argument In cGmmeBdation of such an action by 8 State. eanno; otherwise b. considered than as exceeding ly infehcit0us and unjust.
 Ii these notes be receivable in payment of pub Inc dues by the State, having been Tn circulation al the time of the repeal of Inc above sec;ion as VIC iaink they clearly are, doGb; can e1isr, as to he sulbeleacy of the tender. The law of ten der winch avoids future interests and costs has no application ln this case The right to make payment to the State in this paper arises ont of continuing contract, whlch IS limited Tn time by the circulation Of the notes to be Ieceived. They may be offered Tn payment of debts due the State n is own right, before or after judgment, and without regard 10 the cause of indictment.
 Whatever may be the demerits of the plaintiff error. they co not affect the nature and extent of the obligation of the State. And that obliga- ton cannot be withdrawn from this paper. In whosesoeyer hands T. shall come 1t carries with 1t the pledge of the State 10 receive It III pa yment of iis debts. In this case the payment Is made by the securities of Woodruff, and exacted by the State 10 whose oTganlzatlon and management; of the bank, may be attflsuted it's insolvency. In proc anae the notes of the bank these securities had right to rely and no doubt tld r.y upon the guaranty of the State 10 reeeive them in pay ! neni Of deb,s.
 In sustaining the application for a manlamas, the supreme court oi the State ezeresed urisdic- ton Tn the case. To that coun exclusively be- lnRgs tke question of its own iunSdictinn FOr the reasons stated, the Judgment or the supreme court IS reversed, and the cause IS remandeI for further proceeding to that court as h may have jurisdiction, m conformity 10 the op,nion of thls court. True copy.
 Teste: VIM. THOS. CARROLL.
 C. $. c. |. s.