New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1863-04-11
LEGAL TENDER NOTES.

I -
tender in payment of debts, has been affirmed
| by the General Term of the Supreme Court foi
the Northern District of this State, in the case
Of Hague v. Powers, and tho elaborate
opinions of Judges Smith and johnson are pub.
lished The three points, whether Congress
has power to issue such notes, whether if 80 il
can make them a legal tender, and whether
they must be received in payment of debts con-
tracted previously to the passage of the act,
ara all comprised aud disposed Of in this case.
Mr.. Justice Smith considers Mt some length
the first of these points, but it Is ono concern
ing which in view of the uniform practice OF
the Government here can hardly be serious
question. Even Dir. Calhoun said in 1893:
The tight had been exercised from the commencement Of
the Government iotOvs teng gseiiOnsd and according 20
hi. conceptions within the power expressly granted TO
Congress to borrow money, which means neither more or less
than to raise uppues on the public cTetiN'
The act then under discussion amended an
act for the issue OF 100000 Of Treasury
notes, passed in 1887, which was supported
and voted for by Mr.. Webster, and the subse.
que,t enactment was favored by such men as
sila, Wright. Mr.. Benton, and Robert j..
Walker, and was approved by President Van
Buren,. The unqusstioned exercise of this
power by the. Government ever since its
origin must DO regarded by the Judiciary as an
authoritative Affirmation Of the right not now
to DO disturbed.
The right to mako such notes legal tender
is q question which admits of argument, be-
cause it is a Dew one, but which t is impOs-
sbio 10 believe any Court, loyal and intelli-
gent, would decide adversely to the legislative
power. 1t may be readily admitted that no
express power is granted in the Constitution,
for although We do not wholly dissent from the
ingenious argument Of Judge Johason that it
is included in. the right to coin money, we
consider that il may more safely and wisely be
reekoned ansng the implied powers resulting
from or included in others expressly granted
Judge Smiths argument from the sovereign
rover of the Government to do whatever is,
necessary aad proper for the safety and de-.
tense of the aAtiou, is both timely and sound.
it is not necessary to seek in the letter of the
which the preservation of the Constitution II
self, and what is of infinitely greater conse-
auence, the existence of the Nation require.
The salvation of the People is the Suprsme
Law, and to secure it ought 70 be the object
Of ali branches OF this, as of every other Gov
eminent founded on Justice, and deriving its
authority from the consent of the governed.
But it - none the less certain that the exist
ence of the power 10 question may be estab
lished on the most rigid principles Of Judicial
construction and Interpretation OF the COnstitu-
ton itself, and the whole argument may
be condensed in a paragraph, aud based on
either one of several express grants Of powers
to the Federal Government. Congress has
debts, aud provide for the defense and general
welfare of the United States. IL has power to
raise and support armies, to provide and main
tain navy, to suppress insurrectlon and repel
invasion. These and other powers are granted
in general words, and all subordinate and
auxiliary powers incidental to them, and neces.
sary for their complete aud efectual execution
are implied in the general grant. And in ad
dtion to this, it is expressly declared that
" Congress has power to make all laws which
shall be necessary aud proper to carry into
execution the foregoing powers. and all other
powers vested in the Government of the United
States, or in any Department or officer thereof.
There remains, therefore, but one question:
In order to levy taxes, or pay debts, or raise
and support armies. or suppress Instruction,
was it necessary and proper to issue Treasury
Notes and make them legal tender But
that 10 question not for judicial but for
legislative determination, and Congress by its
own action has declared its affirmative opinion. |
So devoted a defender Of judicial right as
Chief Justice Marshall has decided that this is
a matter with which the courts have nothing
to do. Expressly affirming in the great case
of McCullOch agt. Maryland, that
when tho law Is prohibited and Is really calculated to
ssc. any OF the objects intrusted the Government to
undertake here inquire into the desroe Of s necessity
would DO to pa the line which circumscbes the judicial
department and tread on legislative ground"
The promptness as well as the soundnsss
Of the decision Of this Court deserves to be
commended. 1t is not q moment for delay any
more than for nice cavilings on narrow points,
Tho question is momentous, and it, final de-
,ision adversely to the act would be inconceiv-
ably disastrous to the country both in its bust
aess interests and ito hopes Of crushing tho