The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-09-04

IN gold or silver conn.,. Inc lntentlOn cOuIu
not have been to receive the bills not only OF
the Bank of the State. but Of private banks. %,
without reference to their convertlbihty. Thess
words were inserted to guard against the re-
ceipt OF worthless paper, and it is not denied
that those rendered by the relator are OF no
appreciable value and constituted no part OF
the currency OF the country. An authority to
receive bank bills in payment OF the taxes, re-
gardless of their value as currency, might, in
times OF great pecuniary embarrassment, de-
prive the State Of the means necessary to car
~. on the government. We apprehend that q
fair construction Of the 18th section Of the act,
which constitutes the contract between the
State and the billholders, requires that the lat
ter must tender in payment Of his taxes only
such bills as are payable, or shall become pay
able in gold or silver coin, on demand, and not
such as possess neither specie basis nor pub
lc confidence to impart value or give them
currency, and before the Ielator complains OF
the breach of the contract by the State, he
must show performance by himself.
The decision in the case Of Woodruff VS..
Trapnall, referred to by the counsel for appel
liant, depended on the construction Of the
twenty-eighth section of an act Of the Legisla-
the State OF Arkansas, which provided that the
bills and notes Of said institution shall be re-
celvable In all payments OF debts due to the
State of Arkansas. This language differs wide
ly from that used in the sixteenth section Of
the act to establish bank on behalf and for
the benefit Of the~State. No restriction or
limitation is imposed on the authority con-
made guarding against the depreciation Of
them or the insolvency Of the bank. A tender
by the public debtor Of bills OF the Bank Of
Arkansas, without regard to their converti-
blllty or currency, WAS compliance with the
express terms OF the contract, and refusal by
the State to receive them impaired the obliga-
tion binding her to the performance of it.
Admitting the authority of the case of Wood
ruff vs. Trapnall, and Of other cases affirming
the samo doctrine, it cannot control the de-
cision of the principal case, which presents for
adjudication the construction Of different
contract. But if there be error in our construc-
ton OF the contract, and that the true intent
was to authorize tux collectors to receive the
bills of the bank whether they possessed any
titled to a mandamus according to his own
construction. The act Of 184S, directing that
call taxes for the use and service Of the State
Shall be paid in specie, paper medium, or the
notes OF the specie paying banks OF the State"
was virtual repeal OF the sixteenth section
OF the act Of 1912. And although the act Of
1843 may be within the constitutional inhi-
bitlon, prohibiting State from impairing the
obligation Of q contract, the prohibition can
apply only to bills IN circulation before the
passage of the act, to which time the guarantee
Of the State extended. If, therefore, tender
is made Of bills issued and in circulation after
1S43, it would not be compliance with the
conditions prescribed Ito pay in "speoie, paper
medium, or the notes Of the specie paying
banks Of the State" This point was made in
Woodruff vs. Trapnall, and the court held that
''the notes issued by the bank after the repeal
were not within the contract, and might be re-
fused by the State"
After due consideration Of the points made,
we are of op nion that the order discharging
the rule for q, mandamus was correct, and the
motion is discharged.
We concur: BENJAMIN F. DUNKIN.
D. L. WARDLAW.
R. MUNROE.
j. P. CARROLL.
JOHN A. INGLIS.
F. j. MOSES.
T. NJ. DAWKINS.
81. d. LESESNE.