Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1864-12-17

.NfB1 .NNIV-' hhh VsA'
,H.nss -.- h--,s e.~z yiNsn :. sss Fsss-'-
hs1rs ezss zzs afArr IAsA 4zs zaEsz< ans f'4-i
a, trr4-aun Soc ~ ~s&r q F~H
Ia - = zn~-~~sa@zsssAl s~rs.~s ths nzssrr - tAs
,~e- -ruxh sxgzr.s~x ss TN >a<sr es<<ris rr-
-srrs t&-s stssd ~ er~rrs-~s - rae eesrz-z ss'-
srnu.<us II sstrz@zs - s-x-a<zr SFsas Us
~ sAz e1r~@y. ssA - -a~zs - az a. = ~ 'A~i
- sa -~.n.<-.s@ 49,. ~f rvr-azn ~zV ~ e4r-
r~nrS sAzL 61-ehzrx tn a-a<- Po~yE ssrssEnx the
rzrr~~~s be- ~ ssss< iss~ns-e tsr
NAais rnssz N<r< nas IN <xsslxrseH sf~~~ ~
s,.S~. ruas ~ - saxs& fAe nzuEAs and es~xT zpes
ca eszdsssn. zzG es&asrr1~2s II tes ssses@ >tst->
n G~-s-m ~ las 8~rlzr~ tk<f gJS-G caafrzcf
usr-S Trez~rs sA>E "a sr l~<. ,.sdr.
Csfsr1Iz ss4s 1zr- thai z1efArr essatrar- aste
>,as~< w shAH nns s~ II es.A~r nsv do thf-.
ihrH NAssAss1set, nav Fross4r that na<AaH< e~i
ansefscaA czses hal - legal tenaef payns-n; II
sny drbs So t-s Ne. Yark. b hA- prser~s o< rea-
sunlnz. ss ~ shs-H-,o have in- eSassi aiicns poser
exelva> ts~ Naanal arrsney fre- her surd~rs sfe
xstaer and Substitute pax Irsn og ssenesee wheat IN
the placr thereyd.
Nor Is the pom, of ths reasoning turned ASIDE BY
saving that the State, by thIs than
that niis States Treasury n"tes nut legal tena
will cancel all debts. - in fact. money AZ all.
Aud the Law OF Congress- by declarIng that dst'
be paid IN Of the lawful currency II the United
States a, the option Of the debtor proeesds upon the
great nsl idea which underes all Iust notions
Of political economists respecting currency.
The leading doctrines Of the United States Supreme
Court settled in the great Of Sturcis Crown
inshied t4th Wheaton, 1887 and Of Pryg the COM
monwcath Of Pennsy lvania l6th Peters) conclu-
svc the unconstitutionalitv OF the Specific Con-
tract Law. The powcr the State pass any law
in relation to it, Nor State egislatc in aid OF the
law of Congress But the friends Of this bill
duccd such poverty Of excuses that they not
permitted by its terms to pretend that is in mid
of any Congressional legislation. In these cases. the
Supreme Court decided that the legislation by Congress
upon any subject which il has jurisdiction is
prcme and that it excludes all State legislation upon
the subect-and that State can pass any law
regulation, intcrpOsc such may haye been law
regulation when the Constitution of the United States
ratified, to superadd to, control, qualify, impede
the full force and effect Of an act of Congress Any
claim Of power for State to lcgslate upon the subject
ALL claim for each State to its discretion in
determining the and the extent to which it will
go in that direction, and each may be governed
that best suits its own policy, local convenience and
local feelings without any regard TO either the wishes
or the necessities of the National Government. Even
among the States themselves there would be unfor
nifty in either the purpose or the operation OF their lcgs
laton.
II any State can egslatc as Oregon and California
have legslatcd upon the subject. then al! the States
the credit Of the General Government, and deprived it
Of its only for carrying on the In that
should to-day have been at the feet Of rebels
who make drinking cups Of the skulls Of brave and pa
triotic who poured out their precious blood in de-
fensc of their country. That such legislation would
have had the effect have indicated will be apparent to
any one who reflects that the for issuing those
Treasury notes because they designed to sup
ply the place Of the gold and silver Of which the Treasury
had become exhausted during the progress Of the war
But how could they be made to supply the place OF the
precious metals, il each of the States instead Of fight
ing the battles Of the country, had remained at to
dcpreciae the National Currency and to drive out Of
Another view Of this subject WILL believe prove the
stitutionality Of this law. II Sheriff. having
execution in his hand by some means comes in possess
sion Of quantity o gold coin owned by the judgment
debtor he would be permitted to sell that coin but
would be required to apply credit, for the
that te gold thus stamped BY authority OF Congress is
declared to be money. Nor would the bc in any
degree changed by supposng that Treasury notes sill
dollars had come into his hands, and for the same
reason-that Congress had declared them he money
liable to execution 1t nothing more than the repre-.
sentative Of values and tho medium Of commercial
changes.
During the debate on the bill, the California de-
cision was read, citing Judge Story on the law of
specific performance. But neither the California
judges yet the friends of he law have been able
to find single decision in which any court had ever
held that contract to pay given number of dol
lars in silver coin, might not be discharged by
dcring u like number Of dollars in gold COIN. The
whole doctrine of specific performance refers to
property contracts, and not to money contracts.
There is not in any Of the books, ancient or mod
ern, 4 single example conflicting with the doc
trinc thus affirm. In this California decision,
il is said with very becoming gravity that II
contracts to pay one thousand half dollars, he may
make II legal tender of them. 1t is then triumph
antly demanded, If he may not be compelled to do
what he has u legal right there to do. answer,
certainly not any more than you could compel
the specific performance OF contract to deliver
one thousand bushels Of wheat. Any money roc
Ognizcd by national authority as national curren.
cy would be the end Of either contract. In short,
this much.vaunted California decision does not
rise in authority to the dignity Of a respectable
obier dictuM.
Nor is it true as pretended by som of the friends
Of this measures, that q man may waive his legal
rights, and thus oblige himself to pay gold and
silver instead Of United Statcs Treasury notes.
This is simply absurd, and scarcely merits y seri-
Ous refutati0n. Fit were so, then all laws made
to prevent nsurious contracts would be an absolute
nuity, since it might always be said THAT the de-
fendant had waived his legal rights. usuriOus
contracts cannot be enforced, because the public
policy requires that they shall not be- however the
defendant may seem 10 have waived his right to
insist upon paying only certain amount Of in
terest.
Still more unworthy Of serious notice 10 the A.
gument Of some Of the friends of the bill, when
they grasely inform that itproposcs TO give the
debtor the privilege of saying in what sort sf
rency he wall pay mere petlifcgger might be
excused for using this sort Of argument before q
justice of the peace. Ne ksi sAss er~is,s sssAsss
fAs tsu, which now takes it from him, instead VI
giving IL to him
ihs sset thss sse Suer~aoe V~art OF sshfsTntn
has teessed thai the lAw from y hish A.
Eaainis copied Is constitutional. proves nothing.
beeaase n u uish"ss susk srisy and vsshsss pre-
essea,- Ha4 10 proves - mere ,hss ts< ta-s ssss
~hea . eosrt rssss 10 ssssasn State ixs. Il . sll
se--r - ~ ssss fn~ ss i~ass ssse psxsxltsr
~sss Sc sss aagasss9- nst shss~ 10 s~s ss~agk
sAsss sAx csisssrnlA 1~~a-ss@ zr2k< z u~rrA5 @:
s-z~r co=sa@~rx.ssn IT, .es - Is Le<ffzsnrx
As refi. pPDasA1s. - sk~ aHnss.a ~ ~ esssss
tAcrs, err sAs rss-la II fAx ~~s~s-x g~vs<@sx 81
>aa FrzsTi~~~ ezsst.ffzss rsanmr~~ssr A~manzf-<
- sp<~ss~ y-ss~.a~~~ - ~~ss-srs.-
a rs~ p~3s< u a~ss. ~Asus Asunms & azs-
l. @s4Tss e~aghs, - szsa~ s@< al kss. g.
- crave she asr