The Daily clarion., 1867-02-05
Balance due plaintiff.

s,1ff.aeut, and with the IaItef pea, AAe0; -
Z ,yav Cf set-of note made by plaintiff ana II.
= zer, 10 the defendants, Tor 50, TS9 %, due
lst January, 1888, having sundry creolts e.
dorsed; and an account OF goods receiEeu y
plaintiff to be sold on commission for defenu
ants amounting to $1,000. And to the plea O.
navmeut. the plaintiff filed the general rePh-
The verdict was for the defendants for s2ls,-
81 and they moved TO set IT aside ana loi a
new trial on several grounds; when motloh
wa, oyerruled: and hence the defendants BRING
the case here -
tions of great interest and desSs, S,rtt8ca an ri
yol'ng II. PEaeiRieese q. Re seSlAng 4 state Of the country
sensible a. we are of the great magnitude OF /
these questions. we have mat'lreiy cohsluefe1
them. and now proceed 10 give the result Of
our deliberations upon them.
The evidence touching the several points +
presented, Is vOluminou>, but the substance ot
il will be stated a. we come t. examine each
of them.
The first question for consideration is, whe-
ther the action, IN the form in whichit was M /
stituted, can be maintained, on the facts ot the
case.
1t appears. by the record, that the action
was founded mainly on certain funds known /
as Confederate Treasury Notes, MISSISSIPPI
Cotton Notes, and Mississippi Military
Treasury Notes, which the plaintiff had, from
time to tIse, deposited with the defendants, a
bankers, during the years 1861 and 1867. From
April, 1882 10 October in that ear, these Con-
been worth in the market, from two to two
and half for one in gold or silver, and Mis-
Sissppi Treasury Notes, due IN 1868 ana 1904,
were worth from five to twenty-five per cent,
more than Confederate money, and IN Decem-
ber, 1862, they were worth about nilcty per
cent. premium over Confederate money. But
during the time tated in PLAINTIFFS account,
these several funds constituted the OILY elrcu-
latng medium of this State, and the defend
! ants. bankers, kept the accounts of CUSTOM
ers by crediting the deposits as 50 much OF
whatever kind of funds were deposited, and
paid out the same kind of funds. \ general
check was paid by them in Confederate notes,
and if other funds were drawn toI, it was de-
signated. 1t further appears that, IN May,
/ 1862, the defendants had on deposit to the
credit of the plaintiff, in Cotton money $685.
/ 81, in Confederate money Sl,4J6 y, and had
received of him 81 800 in Mississippi Treasury
/ notes, which last sum was handed 10 them by
/ the plaintiff, i'm consequence OF an understand
| ing between the parties that the defendants
would accept that kind of funds in payment of
/ the note of the plaintiff held by them and here
] set up as a set-off. After receiving this last
sum, it appears that the defendants refused to
credit il on the nole, and also refused to deliY-
/ er il back to the plaintiff Their reason for
/ this course viii be hereafter considered.
As to the other funds, Confederate and Cot
/ ton money, on deposit, the testimony Is in dl-
rect conflict, as to whether the defendants
about May, 1862, or afterwards, refused TO pay
1 the same 10 plaintiff upon his demand,-the
plaintiff stating the affirmative, and the de-
/ PENDANTS the negative. 1t would appear that
| the jury found that they did refuse to pay or
/ credit the same ON the note: and with respect
! to the point now under consideration, 1t Is
/ proper to take that view of the matter. There
! is also evidence tending to show, that the de-
PENDANTS kent on hand these Mississippi Treas
ury notes received of the plaintiff. and made
| no use Of them for their own benefit; and it
/ apears that, by reason Of the defendants refu-
sal to deliver these notes to the plaintiff, he
lost the full value of the notes aS at par.
On this state of facts. the court nj the DialU-
tff's instance, instructed the jury as follows:
! ''That. if they believe, from the evidence,
that plaintiff applied to the defendants to ap-
/ ply his deposits to the payment of the note
| they held against him, and they refused to do
SO, and, on such refusal. that the plaintiff de-
manded that his deposits be delivered to him,
and the defendants refused to deliver them,
they are liable for their value at the time of
| such refusal"
And the court refused to give the following
| instruction asked for the defendants:
. 9TH Even if the jury believe that Szer de-
manded the return of his deposit of Mississippi
/ Military Treasury notes, and that defendants
refused 10 re-deliyer the notes, vet if they also
believe from the evidence that defendants have
not, III any way, used said notes or received
any value therefor, then III this action, Sizer
! cannot recover on this item. His remedy. if
| any, Is not in such an action this, and in
this action the jury must reject that item from
| their verdict"
These instructions prevent the question wbe-
| ther the funds received by the defendants. I'M
der the circumstances of the case. can be re-
garded in law as money, to any amount, SO as
/ TO support the count in the declaration, for
I money deposited or the other counts for mo-
ney.
1t is insisted, in behalf Of the plaintiff in
I error, that all or any of these funds. are not
money IN law, but mere specific chattels; and
/ that-not having been converted into value IN
| money by them, and not having been appro-
/ prlated TO their usc-they are net responsible
/ IN this form Of action, as for money.
Money is defined TO be &" cash, that is, 0oId
or silueT, or the lalrJul circulating medium OF
the country, iRcluaiRg bank notes lcheR theg
/ are 6H0toR and dppr0Ued OF. and used in tHe
market as cash" BurrelFs Law Die Its i'm
! port Is derived from the laws Of commerce.
and, IN commercial acccptation. it means that
/ which passes, in country, as the medium Of
exchange and the representative Of Value. and
/ whether. for the time being. il be the precious
metals, or any chatte Of intrinsic value as to-
/ hacco or cotton. or that which j. issued uuder
/ the authority of Government and, by common
/ consent, l. agreed on to represent value and to
( pass from hand to hand as such and in its
! character TO be convertible into value such as
government or bank. bills and certificates of
/ value, payable to bearer, i is money. McCuI-
/ loeh's Comm. Die, Titles Money and BGaks
rms principle, as applicable to bank notes
7 i settled ia the leading case Of Miller vs. Race
1 Burr. 55a, IN which Lord Mansfield Savs
" hey are not goods, not securities. nor dot.,I-
/ mehts Tor debts, nor are so esteemed: but are
treated ds money, y,as cash, in the ordinary course
/ ana transaction Of business. by the general
/ consent Of mankind: which gives Them fba
credit and currency of money to AN iutentS and
+ purposes. They are much money As o71i
/ meas themselves are, or any other current eesi1,
1 or cash. That rule was afterwards affirmed
[ and established in the cases Of Grant "
/ Vaughan, Burr. 1916, and Gorgier vs.. Mie-
/ vile. 3 b. 4 c. -, in the last of which il was
! applied 70 government bllls-and it has ever
/ since been followed in England and in this
( country.
Motto cite the almost tnumberiess cases. in this
country in which ii has been sanctioned we Will
refer only To the language of Ch. Kent, in Mann
Fs. Mann eXors, lst John, ch. r. 2si " ho SAYS
/ that the term : na0Regs extends TO bank notes
4 when they are known and approved Of. and
I used in the market as cash.
But it may be said, that the rule cannot an
ply TO deprecated government or bank bilfS
+ which are not equivalent 70 gold or silver I'M
/ the market though they may pass as the eir,II-
I laiing medium, because they are not the time
I representatives,, in value OF gold and silver at
I the time, and are not redeemable al par. This
/ objection. though plausible, Is not sound.
The main reason why such notes are eonsid
/ cred money. i that by common consent. fhex
/ pass from hand 10 hand as the representa- fixes
of value. They are promises to nav vsIna
1 winch Tor public convenience, are received nv
/ the community on the faith that the nToSniscsr
VIII ne ahle 70 pay the sum promised. and that
/ ItWin Ultimately be paid. They are not the
less the circulating medium and substituted for
value, because they are deprecated when co,1,
pared with gold or silver; for they NAV PAS
ana answer all the purposes of a medium
/ of exchange, notwithstanding they are
1 known 70 be Of less value at the time tha,,
gold and silver coin. In such circumstance
their real yalueis still governed. in this coma
iFy, by the standard Of gold and Il yer, because
she Constitution OF the United States. which
recognizes nothing a A legal fender for th
payments Of debts but gold and silver. ALWAYS
SUBJECTS their real value to that test Still fbex
.ollsuTute I the circulating medium Of the eoun-
Try. For the most part, however. though thew
pas az their nominal value, yet property pur
chased with them or exchanged for them. in
the course OF Tade, Is obtained at 4 price en-
1aneed 20 the extent Of the depreciation. so that
ene Price AZ winch the article is purchased. and
Al winch the money passes, is really tha sans
u value as II gold or silver were the med,ur
q exchange. Thus. if horse could be mr. mr.
CHASED for one hundred dollars in eold or silya,
oat that ceases 20 be the general circulafi,g,
meaiun. and bank paper takes its place. vrhis55
= deprecated my Der cent. below gold or 81
aer- the same horse cannot be BOUGHT for Lee 81
tnan two hundred dollars in the rirelIIats,,,~
neoium. Ins horse isreally worth no more a