The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1866-09-13

easements Of the State, and Unjust tlSip
the privilege Of an occasional correspon.H
enS In suggesting some measures Of re-
lief, which have occurred to me as plainly
practicable and expedient. - 3A'.
The ordinary rules and arguments en-
ployed by political economists, by moral
philosophers and lawyers, in the discussion
of the Indebtedness Of people, are not all
applicable to our case. 1t appears to mo
that many Of the debts or contracts Of the
South may be declared null and void by
tho Legislatures, and nearly the whole of
them scaled or reduced, without positive
violation OF the Constitution, and without
any lmputation against us Of spirit Of re-
pudiation. The instincts, for instance, or
the conscience, if he has any, Of tho vcricst
monster Of avarice, must tell him, that
Justice and equity forbid his collection Of
the full amount of any notes or contracts
he may hold for the recent sale of negroes.
And this accords with the sentiment of
the whole people. Where all agree there
fore, that remedy is needed, is it possible
that the Legislature cannot afford one?
When particular view is thus adoptedby
the universal sense of mankind, it is not
apt to be founded upon orror, or to be con-
trary to law.
We will examine the question with the
eye OF reason and philosophy, by the prac-
teal tests which are at the command of
every lover OF truth. The only obstacle in
our way, ls that paragraph in the tenth
section of the first article of the Consttu-
tion OF tho United States, inserted likewise
declares that no State shall pass any Claw
lmpalrlng the obligation of contracts"
Let us fix the meaning of these words: for
contracts and the obligation Of contracts
are different things. In Sturges vs. Crown
inshield, 4th Wheaton, and in Ogden rs
Saunders, 18th Wheaton, it is decided that
tho ''obligation of contract is the law
| which binds party to perform his under
taking" And in tho former case, Chief
Justice Marshall, the greatest of all the
| Jurlsts, who walked with the men Of the
Revolution" decides, in effect, that not
only the present property of the debtor,
| but 'all his future acquisitions" +" enter into
and constitute part of the obligation of
his contracts; and this opinion is sub
! stantially confirmed by numbcrcss subsc-
qucnt decisions. Adopting this view then
we proceed to remark, that negroes being
| recognized as property by the Constitution
and the laws of the United States, consti-
| tuted about threc-fourths of the wealth os
the people OF the South, and tho basis of
| three-fourths of their contracts; and when
they were cmancipatcd by the General
Government, and by amendment of the
Constitution, convention Of the people OF
the State cooperating therein, the obsa-
| ton of thrce-fourths of our contracts be-
came 'tpso fdcto'-impaircd- human
| ingenuity cannot avoid that conclusion
The inference is legitimate, therefore,
| that as the obligation o: our contracts has
been impaired by operation of the Const-
| tuition OF the United Statcs, it could not
| possibly be unconstitutional for the Legi.-
| laturc so to declare, and to declare also.
| to what extent it has been impaired Its
action would only be conformity to truth,
| and decent compliance with the brhcsts
| OF superior power.
This argument applies, with peculiar
force, to contracts for the purchase Of ne
| Srocs. The slaves for whom YOU gave YOUR
bond or note for $4,000, payable in twelve
months, have been set free by an amend
! mcnt of the Constitution in one month
| aftcryour purchase, and before they have
! been able to compensate you for the first
| ONtlt with which You equipped them; and
| can that Constitution now require You to
pay the full amount of your bond or note?
| The proposition IS absurd, and the idea
! suggested by it repugnant to all our con-
| ceptlons of honesty and fair-dcaling. The
| Obligations OF the governor Or government
| and the governed are reciprocal. For your
submission to the laws, the former owes
YOU protection, and when that fails you,
| the law OF your obedience ceases To bind.
| Eat 1T were mOnstrOus for the Govcrnims nj
To require you to pay your negro debts,
| and, at the same time, to take from YOU,
not only tho means OF paving with, but he
very articles of property for which the debt
| was contracted.
| Hence, We reasonably conclude that the
| Legislature has tie power, in conformity
with the amendment of the Constitution,
| and the ordinance of the Convention of
| South Carolina sanctioninS that amend
ment, to diminish the debts of the people IL
| especially their negro dcbts-in proport on
| to their losses by the forcblc emancipation
of their slaves. If they had freely given
| their consent to this proceeding, and vo-
| unfairly surrendered their property, then
| the question for our consideration might
| have been Of moro difficult solution But
| the negroes were set free by Presidential
| prociamatlons, by resolutions Of Congress.
| by physical force and military power, and
| by an amendment of the Constitution cX-
| tortca from the South by the bayouct., of Il
victorious army.
But We contend that, i'll a strictly hJ0l
! point OF view, these contracts for negroes
must be annullcd and curtalcd, for reasons
| quite as potential as any that have vet be cn
offered. Whilst our citizens dealt in slaves,
the same warranty applied to them that
| sonalty. A sound price not only demanded
warranty from the vcndcr to the hlvcr
| that his titles were good, and that the
negro would remain his chattcl for life As
soon, therefore, a-s tho negro became ma
| numitted, there was failure Of the con-
sldcratlon of the note given for his p.lr-
chase money, and the buyer had the ri, Int
to plead IT in discount ar by .yoy nf s.t,,U