The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1863-01-30

g 10 coin money, regulate the value thereof
DC. Blu. the banks now regulate its value
by controlling prices. by substituting ,hei,
money for coin, and By expelling it from
J the country at their pleasure. Recollect
these powers over commerce and money are
: erclEsire. not concurrent, so adjudicated,
} and the Constitution. in delegs,ing them
exclusively TO the Government, withheld
them altogether from the States. The
conceded fact that these powers are erclS-
sire. proves that the States can not. BY any
instrumentality. directly or indirectly. con-
troll their exercise. An exclusive authority
necessarily forbids any control or interfer-
ence. But there are express prohibitions 10
the Constitution as we'll grants. That
instrument declares that mo State shall
emit biNs Of credit The State itself can
not emit circulating paper; how. then. can
1t authorize this to be done BY State COR
poration, which is the mere creature Of
State law ? The State can not authorize its
Gorernor TO issue such paper how, then,
can it direc, cashier, deriving all his pow
er only from State law. to DO the same
thing Qai Jacit per alum. facit per Sc.
and this fundamental maxim of Law and
reason is violated when State does through
any instrume ntalty created by it. what the
State can not do itself.
! 1t is true that msj ,rity Of the Supreme
Court of the United States in ] Peters 257.
| did decide that the Bank of the Common
wealth of kentucky did not violate that
clause of the Constitution forbidding States
to :" emit bills of credit" but Justice Sto-
ry. in his dissenting opinion. said When
this cause was formerly argued before this
court. a majority of the judges who then
heard it were decidedly Of the opinion that
the act of Kentucky, establishing this baok,
was unconstitutional and void as amounting
to an authority to emit bills Of credit. for
and on behaN of the State. within the pro.
hibition of the Constitution of the United
States. In principle, it was thought to be
decided by the case Of Craig as the State
of Missouri ca Peters 4l0). Among that
paj5fity was the late Chief Justice Mar
shall" This decision. then, in the case Of
the Bank Of Kentucky. is overthrown. as
authority. by the fact that it was against
the decision of the Supreme Court in for.
mer case, and against the opinion of ma
Jorlty OF the court in that very case before
the death of Chief Justice Marshall. In
delivering the opinion of the court in the
Missouri case A Peters 4l0) Chief Justice
Marshall defined what is that bill of credit
which State cannot emit He says: "If
the prohibition means any thing. ifthe words
are not empty sounds. il must comprehend
the emission Of any paper medium by State
government. for the purpose Of common
circulation. And he also says +" Bills of
credit signify paper medium. intended to
circulate between individuals. and between
Government and Individual for the ordina-
ry purposes Of society,"" That the notes of
the Bank of Kentucky came within this
definition and decision. is clearly stated by
Justice Story. In that case also it was ex-
pressly decided, that if the issues be uncon-
stitutional. the notes given for the loan Of
them are void. 1t is said, however, that
the bills issued by bank. not by the
State; but the bank is created by the State.
and authorized by the State to issue these
notes. to circulate as money. In the Ian
guage Of Chief Justice Marshall, in this
case. Z" And can this make any real differ.
ence Is the proposition to be main tanned
that the Constitution meant to prohibit
names and not things % On this subject,
Justice Story says That a State may
rightfully evade the prohibitions of the
Constitution by acting through the instru-
mentality Of agents in the evasion, instead
of acting in its own direct name, is a doc.
trine to which ] can never subscribe" &c.
am conscious that Justice Story also
said in the same case, argaendo: - The
States may create banks as we'll as other
corporations, upon pirate capital and. SO
FAR AS THIS PROHIBITION Is CONCERNED, NAV
authorize them 10 issue bank bills
or notes as currency, subject always TO tie
control Of Congress. whose powers extend
to the entire regulation Of the currency of tie
countSy' 1t will be observed hat Justice
Story gives no opinion as to whether the
issues Of such banks are constitutional,
whether they conflict or not with the power
of Congress to regulate coin or commerce.
He only says (and the Limitation is most
they do not violate the prohi
bition as to bills of credit. (from which
dssen, } but he does declare that to Con-
gress belongs "Me entire regulation of the
currency" Now, this power must rest on
the authority of Congress to regulate coin
and commerce. But these powers. we have
seen, were not concurrent. but coaclusioe
aud. il the language Of Chief Justice Mac
shall. in delivering the unanimous opinion
OF the Supreme Court in the case before
quoted from Wheaton 90, as to any such
power that g should be exercised exclusive-
Iy by Congress. the subject is as completely
taken from the State Legislature as if they
had been forbidden to act on IT.
All, then. who agree that Congress has
the entlro regulation OF the currency, must
admit that all banks of issue Incorporated
by States are unconstitutional, not because
such issues are bills Of credit, but because
they violate the exclusive authority of Con-
gress TO regulate commerce, coin, and its
value. 1 repeat, that while this question
has never been adjudicated by the Supreme
Court. yet, il their decision in fourth and
ninth Wheaton is maintained, such bank
issues are clearly unconstitutional. 1t is
clear, also, whatever may be the bank is
sues, based only upon private capital" or.
in the language of Judge Story. /" if tho /
corporate stock. and that only by the char
ter, is made liable for the debts Of the |
bank" yet. if the bank issues are based on |
The :. funds" or " credit" Of the State, such |
issues do violate the prohibition against biIis |
Of credit. Such bank issues. then. IS are
furnished and cJuntersigned by State off. |