The Idaho world. [volume] (Idaho City, Idaho Territory) 1864-1918, 1864-12-10
ARE GREENBACKS A LEGAL TEN
DER For TAXES
DECISION OF JUsTIcE WALKER.

city, in less quantities than one quart, with
out first obtaining a license therefor, as re-
quired by law. The Defendant admits the
facts set forth.in the complaint, but says that
he rendered the amount Of the license in
tUnited States, notes" which, the Collector
refused to receive.
/ The Prosecution admits the TENDER but
claims that g United States notes +" are not a
legal tender-for 'Elicense tax"
In passing.upon this question, it is.not my
province to inquire whether the Act,o Con-
gress, passed. February 2sth, 1862 creating
. United States notes. and making them
legal tender in payment of debt, is Constitu-
tial OF not But the question to be deter
is, did Congress intend to include.tax-
es due the. county and Territory in saying
that such notes should "be lawful money and
"a legal tender in payment of all debts, pgB-
" Lie and PRIVATE, within the United States :"
We do not think the act has reference to taxes
levied for local purposes. 1t only speaks. of
taxes ,due the United States, and distinguishes
between them and debts. It's language is
!" for all taxes, internal duties, excuses, debts
and demands Of. every, kind due. to the United
States
We are to consider first, whether tax.is a
debt, and1second, whether license s.a tax.
The Supreme Court of California, in pass
ing upon this question, used the following
language, to wit.
"a debt is a sum of money due by conf
tract, expressed or implied. A tax. is a |
charge upon persons or property, to raise
money for public purposes. Its not found
ed upon contract; it does not establish the |
relation of debtor and creditor between the
tax payer and State it does not draw inter-
est; it's not the subject of attachment, and
it is not liable TO set-off !. it owes its exist
ence to the action of the legislative power,
and does not depend for its validity or en-
forcement Upon the individual assent of the
tax payer
For this distinction between debts. and
axes. the following cases are referred to by
he Court The City of Camden VS.. Allen,
I'd butchers, New Jersey B., 398) Pierce
IS: the City of Boston, I'd Met, SOY; and
Shaw vs.. Pickett, (22th VT, 49," And the
court further remarks on this subject, that
rThe term debt, it is true, is popularly-
lsed in far more comprehensive sense, as
not merely money due by contract,
,ut whatever one is bound to render to an {
'ther, whether from contract or, the require
nents of the law. Bat the legal technical
neaning of the term as used in Statutes, and
n the Constitutions both of this State and of
be United States, is as we, have defined it.
10 one would pretend that an act providing {
Or the COLLECTION of debt would include by II
9rce merely of the term. debts, the collection
f taxes aIso.'
The Court, in concluding. he.subject, says
ne question is: a. u
What did Congress intend by the act
nder consideration? g. Upon this question we j
re clear thatit only intended, By the terms 4
EBTs, PUBLIC and. PelyATE, such obligations
n the payment of money as are founded on |
CAL, p. .358.
These are some. Of the. reasons which have !
npelled US to believe that Congress did not n
ltend that United States notes" should be J
legal tender in payment of. taxes for county.
1d Territorial purposes. Another reason is
lat, the County, State, or. Territory, depend Ia
pom local rules or laws to raise money to
efray their current expenses, audit certain !
would be unwise and impolitiein Congres8l il
pass an act which might prexent the u
( =
ounty, and Territory from obtaining theli
cans to continue their organization, by en-
'ling. the tax. payer to discharge his obliga- II
on to the County and Territory in a depreci- ff
ed currency, which he would not receive at I
If for his labor or his wares, and the. result "
ould be that. he who furnished raw. material If
labor for the public, would do so at his !
Vn expense; or, in other words, it would be d.
eenbacks from the public and gold3 dust Sc
om the individuals We can hardly believe hi
at such was the intention Of the act creating SC
United States notes. and we therefore 5f
include that the act does not refer to taxes BIZ
We'd for county and Territorial purposes. al
We have now reached the, second subject, pr
wit: CO
Can License. be considered a tax? The pr
atptes of this Territory use the term Lii th
nse tax" therefore, whether the common til
", or the writers on the subject, treat IL
Nc IN,