The Bolivar bulletin. [volume] (Bolivar, Hardeman County, Tenn.) 1865-1888, 1866-09-22

An Important Case Affecting the Notes
OF the Bank Of Tennessee. ----.-.


OF the Bank Of Tennessee. ---
CAN the STATE BE FORCED TO AcOEPT THESE !
NOTES FOR Taxes
,H Abd easel Of 571rman g Co, on. an appli- /
cation for a mandamus against p i. Nichol. !
County Court Clerk, was argued in the Cir
cult Court on yesterday It appears that
the relators, Furman q Co., are citizens do
ing business here, and for the payment Of
their taxes due the State, tender Mr.. Nichol
notes of the Bank Of Tennessee, issued
by that Corporation prior to the 9th day Of
May, 1861, when the bank was taken away
by It's officers into the rebel army. The clerk
refused to receive these notes, and on this
SUIT 1t Is sought by a mandate from the court
to compel him to do so.
The plaintiffs rely upon provision in the
charter Of the bank. passed by the Legisa-
tGfe IN the year 1888 which enacts that the
notes of the bank shall be taken in payment
OF taxes and all debts due the State Of Ten
nessee. They claim that this action of our
State government is IN the nature Of d con
tract by the State with its citizens, and all
others, and that upon this faith thus pledged,
the notes acquired their circulation, and
That IN cOnseQueHce their value became fixed
at or near the standard of gold at the time
From TING the contend that the faith Of the
State is pledged to the holders Of these bills,
and that it Is bound to receive them in pay
ment of taxes
The defense cite portion of the schedule
IN the pew Constitution submitted to and
adopted by the people in 1865, which rem
ders all transactions Of, or notes issued by
the Bank since May 9th 1861 null and void
They also showed that the Legislature, by
an act passed in the year 1865, repealed the
law OF 1888, making these bank notes re-
ceivable for taxes, or a legal tender for debts
4
that the obligations of the State in this par
ticular are in the nature of a contract, aud
claim that the Legislature at all times has
right to say what kind Of money shall be
received By tile Statenpon debts due her or
taxes levied, and that the defendant cannot
receive these notes for the reason that they
are deprecated In value to an extent of more
than one-haH Of the amount called for upon
their face
The plaintiffs admit that the Legislature
has the power to repeal the law of 1888, but
scontend that this repeating act cannot be-
come retroactive, or ca post .facto IN its ma
ture, and that it cannot reach back Of the
date of its passage. They cite a number of
cases in support of their position, one of
which arose in Arkansas The legislature
of that State in 1886 passed a charter for
the Bank of Arkansas, containing a similar
clause to the one in our State Afterwards
the same was fepealeQ. ne 1fGdsuEeE OA
State becoming a defaulter, was sued, and a
Judgment recovered against him for $4,000,
in payment Of which he rendered notes Of
the Bank Of Arkansas, which IN 1893 were
declared a legal tender for debts due the
State The case finally went up to the Su-
preme Court of the United States, which
court decided in 1850 that the State was
bound to Feeeive the notes. This doctrine
has since been reafirmed by that court on
no less than. three different occasions, the
last one in 1861.
This case has been ably argued by Judges
Cant and Caruthers for the plaintiffs, and
Messrs East and H. II. Harrison for the de-
tense. Judge Brien has taken the matter
under consideration on the reassemblng OF
the Court one week from next Monday. Its
importance can readily be seen, fer the
plaintiff view is sustained, this money will
at once reach value very nearly approxim-
atiug to that Of the National currency, and
the State will have to make provision for the
deficiency which will thus be created in her
receipts for taxes.