The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1867-08-30

tam process CtllSu coming. IL was
urged at the BARI do not know wheth-
er seriously or nOt-that printing is
stamping, and these notes might,
therefore, literally be said to be coined.
No such use of the word in any author
has been shown. We may say, tigu-
ratively, to coin story, meaning to
invent one, but never to coin the book
in which it is printed. The story is
q fictiOn-the coinage of the braln-the
book a reality. Surely, however, no
one will contend in earnest that if a
sufficient number of clerks had been
employed, and these notes had all been
written with the hand, they would
have been unconstitutional, but that
printing makes them valid. To state
the case thus is to reduce the argument
to an absurdity.
1t may seem like laboring unnecessa-
rily very plain proposition, but i
will hazard some further illustrations.
The notes is question draw a plain
distinction on their face between them
selves and coins. They promise to pay
dollars. What is d0llaro TO sim
liar questiOn-What is a pound? Sir
Robert Peel answered: "a pound is a
definite quantity of gold with a mark
upon it to determine its weight and
tineness." Many pages have been
written to cOntroVert this definition
and to prove that pound is a mere
notwithstanding like Il math-
ematical point without length, breadth
or thickness. But common sense, |
think, vindicates Sir Robert Peel. A
standard measure must be some actual
length or capacity-a standard weight
some actual weight. How else can
other weights and measures be compar
ed with it? This is the object of a
standard. So a standard of value must
be some actual value. | would say,
drawing the definition from the statute
book know not where else to look
for it-a dollar is silver coin, weigh
ing four hundred and twelve and one
half grains, Of gold coin, weighing
twenty-five and four-ffth grains, of
nine tenths pure to one tenth alloy Of
each metal. These notes then promise
to pay coins. TO say that they are
themselves coins is to make the prom
Use and performance identical.
AS they do not state on their face
when they are to be paid in law, ,ifissued
by an individual or corporation, they
would be payable on demand. Whit
lock VS.. Underwood (3 B. 4 c., 49,
Story on notes par, %. Payable in
what? In themselves, ifthey are coins
or dollars. They are promises to pay
on demand. \ promise to pay may
represent coin and circulate as such.-
1t is properly designated as currency,
and is one Of many modes by which
the use of an expensive standard may
be spared by the substitution, as me-
dunn Of exchange, of public or private
credit. 1t is safe and convenient as
we'll as economical. as long as it truly
represents the standard, by being i'm
mediately convertible into coin. But
in its very nature it is not coin. Its
value or power Of purchasing othercOm-
modities depends as well upon the con-
fidence of the issuerS to redeem it as
upon the amount Issued. Coin, on the
other hand, possesses present, actual
and intrinsic value. If you obliterated
from thepound weight the public mark,
which attests its conformity to the
standard, it still weighs the same as be-
fore. So you may erase the image from
the coin, yet its value remains. Blot
out, however, the superscription from
these pieces of paper and nothing re-
nains-they are w rthless. TheStamp
on the coin is really nothing but GER
tificate Of the weight and fineness Of
that piece of metal. Government
guarantees nothing but this makes
no contract to deliver corn, wool, or
leather in exchange for it. The power
of regulating its value can only extend
to declaring that in law certain num-
Der Of one coin shall be deemed the
equivalent of another of a different de-
nomination in contracts and her
transaction. In the market unequal
values cannot be made equal by law.
Congress has no power to enact how
many bushels of wheat an eagle shall
exchange for, and if they had and
should make the experiment, the act,
like all attempts by government to
change the laws, would be futile.
The legislation of Congress upon this
subject recognizes the difference be-
tween these United States notes and
coin, and that they are not Of equal
value.
That act before US February %, 1862
requires duties on imports, and the in
terest Of the public debt to be paid in
coin and provides that the notes ''shall
be received the same as coin at their par
value, in payment for any loans that
NAV hereafter be sold or negotiated by
the Secretary of the Treasury" SO by
the act of March II, 1862, the Secretary
of the Treasury is authorized to pur-
chase coin with them atsuch rates and
upOn such terms as he may deem most
advantageous to the public interest,"
And the act Of March 3, 1868, prohibits
the loan Of currency or money on the
security of gold or silver coins, exceed
ing in amount the par value OF the com
pledged or deposited as security. by
the first of these acts, coin is treated as
the standards; by the last, paper. The
one speaks of the par value of the notes,
the other of the par value OF the coins.
If the word coin has any more gen
eral or figurative sense in the phrase, TO
coin money, than that ! have assigned
to it, it must be held to have the same
in other pa Is Of the article. In for
eign coin will be included foreign paper
money, and Congress may regulate its
value and make it legal tender. They
may thus treat notes of the Bank of
England and France, Austrian and
Russian government money; but not
State bank notes. Congress has no power
Regulating the value OfmOney except
foreign coins and money coined by its
own authority. If to coin money mean
to stamp%paper, then the clause which
fOrbidS the States ''tO emit bills Of cred
it" was unnecessary; the prohibition
''to coin money" included it. The
terms of that very prohibition show
that in the minds of the makers of the
Constitution, $50 coin money! and to
Innit hills of credit ,, unrn two entirely