Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1862-06-16
are the Legal Tender Treasury Notes
Authorized by the Constitution!

Union man, to address to you a few considera-
tons on your proposition for a further issue of
legal tender Treasury notes. 1 doubt both the
constitutionality ehd expediency of the measure;
and 1 think it is wiser to ascertain, before an act
is done, especially SO great a one as that propos-
ed, that it is authorized by the Constitution, than
to first do the act, and then look for the right to
do it afterwards.
The Treasury notes, thus far issued. whether
constitutional or not, may be converted into bonds
and Withdrawn from circulation before a decision
of the Supreme Court can impair their value;
and. therefore, it is eminently proper to pause
and consider before that issue is made.
Now that our brave armies are successfully
dispensing the rebel bands, with a prospect of
bringing the war to a close, let not Congress, in
the civil administration, by disregarding the Con-
stitution in its ACTION. destroy the hope of restoring
fraternity, and of the preservation, unimpaired
of all our liberties under the Constitution. Let
that body show a delicate regard to all c~onstitu-
tional limitations Of power, as an evidence to the
Southern States that, in the Union. their rights
under the Constitution will be sacredly respect
ed, and as a means of restoring their confidence.
1 know it may be urged that Congress has once
exercised the power, and that this is a c~onsiTuc-
ton of the Constitution to be respected.
But it should be remembered that never, till the
past year, has such an exercise been ventured
upon; and that legislative Interpretation does not
bind the judiciary, and is not, indeed, very highly
respected as authority.
GoUvERNEUR Morris, who was a member of the
United States Constitutional Convention, and who
moved to withhold from Congress the power to
emit bills of credit, wrote to Hon. TIMOTHY PICK
ERING: "What can a history of the Constitution
avail towards interpreting its provisions? This
must be done by comparing the plain import OF
the words with the general tenor and object of
the instrument. That instrument was written by
the fingers which write this letter. . = . But
after all, what does it signify, that men should
have a written Constitution, containing unequivo-
cal provisions and limitations? The legisla-
tive lion will not be entangled in the meshes of
a logical net. The Legislature will always make
the power which it wishes to exercise, unless it be
so organized as to contain within itself the sufi-
cient check. Attempts to restrain it from out
rage by other means, will only rend err it more
outrageous. The idea OF binding legislators by
oaths is p%uerile. Having sworn to exercise the
powers granted. according to their true intent
and meaning, they viii, when they feel a desire
to go farther, avoid the shame, if not the guilt Of
perjury, by swearing the true intent and meaning
to be, according to their comprehension, that
which suits their purpose" Life of Morris, vol.
3, p. 800.
We proceed, then, to examine the question
has Congress power to issue legal tender Treas
ury notes?
Let us turn a moment to history. On the Sd
of July, l776, there were thirteen British colo
MES, within what is now territory of the United
States. On the 4th of July those colonies de
clared themselves to be, and they became "free
and independent States"
On the 18th of November, 1777, a Congress of
delegates agreed upon articles of Union between
"the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Vir-
ginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Georgia" Those articles were submitted to the
Legislatures of the several States named, were
unanimously ratified by them. returned to the
Congress of Delegates by whom they were also
ratified, and put in force on the 9th of July,
IT'S. Those articles formed the first Constitu-
ton of "the United States of America" That
Constitution expressly gave to Congress power
to "emit bills of credit. - as well as to coin money,
and did not take the power away from the States
- =. =. e IL. Tv-..zl
States till the 4th of March, 1889, a period oil
nearly eleven years. Experience demonstrated
that those Articles of Confederation and Union
of 1776, did not embody a perfect constitution Of
government. They contained some grants oil
power that the people wished to recall, and they
failed to grant some powers which the people
found it necessary to confer. Some organic
changes were also demanded. A convention was
called to revise those articles, and a new Consti
tuition or form of government was formed and
put into operation, March 4, 1889; but the Arti
Giles of Confederation constituted the GROUND
work of the new Constitution, as a con- D. rison Of
the two instruments will plainly show. Tn,
Government under the Constitution was but a
continuation of that under the Articles of Con
federation.
As has been said, the Articles Of Confedera.
ton granted to the Federal Government power
to emit bills of credit; and in the Convention thai
prepared our present Constitution as a substitute
it was proposed to continue that as one of the
powers of Congress, and in the draft of a Consti
tuition reported by a committee of five, on the 6tt
ofAugust. 1871. it was provided in Art. Z, Sec. /
that Congress should have the powers, among
others, "tO coin money; to regulate the value o.
foreign eoin;'' and "to borrow money, and emf
bills on the credit Of the United States" Eni
otis Deb. Vol. l, p. 258. 2 Mad. pap. p. 1882
But, on the 10th Of the same mouth, sit wa,
moved and seconded 10 strike out the words 'anC
emit bills out of the eighth clause Of the frs
section of the seventh article. which passed il
the Affirmative. Yeas, New Hampshire. Massa
chusetts. Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware
Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Geor
gia-9. Nays. New Jersey. Maryland-2." II
p 276. , Mad. Pap. p. l343.
Mr.. GoUvEKxEUR MoRRIs made the motiJn t
strike out. He said the moneyed interest woult
oppose the Constitution If paper emissions wer'
not prohibited.
Mr.. GoRHAH was for having nothing in tn
Constitution that would suggest the idea Of sucl
an issue.
Mr. Mason thought Congress would not hav'
the power TO issue such paper unless it was ex
messed in the Constitution and hence. as he wa