The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1866-05-23
The Daily n ews.
WEDNESDAY MORNING. MAY 2s, 1855.
InIPOKTANT DECisION OFF JUDGE CLAY
TON, OTs M ssIssIPPI

oo"o 'ine sihoe we recei.td the subJoined able
and interesting decision OF Judge CLAYTON, the
Special Judge OF tho Sixth Judicial District OF
Mississippi, synopsis Of which we published at
that time. Many persons since thon have spoken
and written t" u.s. asking il VIC could not furnish
the Judgment in full, rs it was upon q matter OF
vast Importance to tho general public. At con-
sideraoio trouble We have secured from Columbus
tho document IN full, and have groat pleasure in
laying u peIore our readers It was delivcr red at
Columbus, Mississippi, last month.
Duke &C Cade r' John ". Psrkns-Biu for Specific Per-
In Special Court for 9th Judicial District of Mis-
=, , sissippi.
The bill, answer and proof, in tho abovo cause,
exhibits tho following facts:
On the 9th of January, 1864, defendant sold to
comPitinants twenty thousand pounds OF lint cot
ton, Tor the sum OF seven thousand dollars, which
was paid the defendant at the timo in Treasury
Notes OF tho Confederate States OF America that
at the time Of said contract, the Stao Of Missis-
slppi, having by act of Convention OF said State
secedoi from the United States, was in Confedera-
South CAROLINA, Georgia, Florida, Alabama. Loui-
siana, Texas, Arkansas and Tennessee, at war
with tho said United States; that said defendant
ferKlhs was to take ordinary care Of snid cotton,
and deliver the Same to complainants, when after
M maras e1ulred, ETC. Defendant having failed and
bill is instituted to enforce specific performance
OF the contract.
Defendant. by counsel, submits tho following
1st. That the act of secession by the State of
Hlisslss!ppi aud confederation with other States,
being in violation, of tho Constitution Of the
Unied States, no government was created by
SAID Contederacy which could perform any bind
ing act, and the Issuing of Treasury notes to be
used as money was nullity, aud consequently
was not such Il consideration as would make
contract legal between individuals.
"a; That the Constitution of tho United States
prohibited tho States from " emitting bills of
credit" and that the States could not do collec-
lively what they were prohibtedirom dong sepa-
ratsly. That said Treasury notes which formed
the consideration of the contract sued on, were
" bills OF credit" and having been issued in viola
ton OF the Constitution of the United States,
illegal aud void, and said contract founded on said
illegal consideration, cannot be enforced either in
law OF equity.
Sd. That said treasury notes we're issued to
oarry on O rebellion against the government of
tho United States, and tho same having issued in
violation OF the constitution, law and public policy
and binding contract could be created.
In considering above objections, it becomes
necessary in elucidation OF the subject, to state
concisey the nature and relation of tho State and
United States Governments with each other aud
10 show the peculiar character Of the recent war,
out Of which the Confederate States Government
living under two distinct governments, with clear
!y defined powers, expressed in written constitu-
tons I They owe allegiance to each, and obedience
case OF Craig us. the State of Missouri uses this
.sfhat distinct sovereignties could exist under
one government, emanating from the same people,
was phenomenon in the political world which
the wisest statesmen in Europe could not compre-
: hend, and OF it's practicabity many in our own
country entertained the most serious doubts.
Thus far the friends of liberty have had great
cause OF triumph in the success OF the principles
upon which our, Government rests. But all must
admit that the purity and perm anency OF this sye-
tenn depend on its faithful admin stration. The
States and the Federal Government had their re-
spoctive orbits, within which each must revolve.
II eithor GROSS the sphere OF the other, the har-
mony of the system is destroyed and its strength
Is impaired. 1t will be as gross usurpation the
part Of the ederal Government to interfere with
State rights by exercise Of power not delegated,
as it would be for State to nterPose it's authority
against a law Of the Union"-4 Peters Rep. 1853.
These two distinct Governments acting upon
the same people and exercising power over them,
must necessarily revolve in their respective
orbits ss above expressed, conflict would
sooner or later be tho result. Whenever suit
bctween individuals involves questions of gov
established tribunal ito wit, the Judiciary
which from necessity must settle the same.
But when it assumes a political character, and
the exercise of power is claimed by one govern
ment and denied by tho other, the organic law
is silent rs to the tribunal to decide the abstract
question OF national sovereignty. The judiciary
only political part Of the entire organization,
aud the mere creature OF zach, could not be en-
trusted ", With power so great and delicate as to
decide the extent OF the power OF either govern
ment. The trainers OF tho Federal Constitution
having clearly defined the power to be exercised
by that government and State, as clearly pro-
hibted the exercise of power by the government
which might conflict with the deleg gated suye-
reignty OF the Federal Government, they were
necessarily compelled. from the nature and fuEc-
tions OF the two governments, to leave all issues
In relation to abstract questions Of political DOW
or to- be determined by the good sense of the
people, IN the Same manner as questions Of like
character are settled by independent nations.
There could be, from the peculiar organization of
each government, no umpire appointed to decide
national controversies Of sovereignty. The only
hope Of harmony, and guar antee OF permanenoy
upon which the trainers Of the Constitution could
rely-was, that the common interest, which had
created both governments, for the happiness and
prosperity Of the people, would continue them in
the full use and exercise of their respective DOW
er. They did not suppose that local or sectional
preudices aud interests, combined with human
ambition, operating on mans natural depravity,
would produce parties who, in constituting consti.
tutional> power, would seek to enlarge or curtail
the powers OF each government merely to insure
for there arose, almost with the birth Of tho M.
tion, political parties, which became more en-
bittered towards each other, and more dangerous
to the safety OF the republic as the licentiousness
of tho prcss increased, with its age-one party
seeking tho Capitalization Of power in the Federal
Government, and the other contending for the
resumption Of power by tho States.
This state OF political affairs, we need only say,
eliminated IN tho attempted secession of part OF
tho United States, by regularly ganized conven-
tions of tho people, from the Federal Govern
ment-which State action produced q war, the
effects OF which will be felt by future generations
Fhese remarks have been made for TWO objects
first, to show the relation Of tho two Govern
ments with each other, to enable us hereafter to
define the character OF the recent war: and SECOND.
~, to combat All idea prominent in the able and