The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-12-17
CnnstitnfionaIity of the LegaI.tendcr Act,

CnnstitnfiOnaIity or the Legal-tcndcr Act,
B1om the NJ y Herald
There is some anxiety in the public mind to
know what the decision of the Supreme Court
of the United States mag be- on the consttu-
tiOnality of the Legal l-tender act in the cases
now pending before the court on that ques-
tion. 1t is, undoubtedly, an important ques-
tion involving not only the powers of the
Government, but the obligations and transao-
tions of trade and the value of property, both
past and present. STILL we think there is no
need for apprehension or disturbance of bust
ness: for whatever the technical Interpretation
of the Constitution or law may be, there is an
imperative and higher law that must govern
in the matter, and that is the law of necessity
the law of public welfare. IL was this law
that led to the issue of the legal-tender cur
rency to preserve the Government and the life
of the republic in a great crisis, and it will
now save the country from the shock of an
nulling the act of Congress and declaring the
greenbacks worthless. OF course we do not
know what the decision of the Supreme Court
may be; bat if even adverse to the constitu-
tiOnality of the act it would be comparatively
imperative, for the great and general interests
of the country would prove superior to the
diotum of the court. But we suppose the
court will be governed by higher considera-
tiOns than those of doubtful constitutional or
legal technicalities, aud that under the ab-
normal and extraordinary circumstances sur
rounding the issue and operation of the legal
tenders it will look to the public welfare.
On several occasions in the history of the
country, under the pressure OF great financial
difficulties, specie payments have been sus-
pended, and it is well known that the laws
were pOwerless to compel the banks to pay
coin. The same has occurred in almost all
other countries. The law of necessity is
stronger than all other laws. 1t will prove so
in this case. Mr.. Evarts, in his able argu-
ment before the court, maintains that while
the several States are prohibited by the Consti-
tuition from emitting bills of credit, this is not
forbidden to the Federal Government and that
by implication it has the power to emit bills
Of credit and to declare the value thereof.
"Let the end be legtimate,' he says, ''let it
be within the scope OF the Constitution, and
all the means which are appropriate, which
are plainly adapted to the end, which are not
prohibited, but consistent with the letter and
spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional
Under that the Bank of the United States was
sustained in time of peace. Under that the
embargo was sustained in time of war"
Then he lays down as proposition that "to
determine what shall be the money of q coun-
try, and how it shall serve its purposes as
measure Of value and medium of exchange,
including its efficacy as legal tender in salts
faction of debts, belongs to government. So,
IOoJ W uoIeImlue Wu6LuSr uyJuluB D6SluSS
money shall be legal tender in satisfaction
of debts among its subjects or citizens be-
longs to government" Then Mr.. Evarts
argues that the law can no longer be ques-
toned under the fourteenth amendment of the
Constitution; for that has ratified every act
of Congress relative to the public debt and
the legal-tenders are part OF the debt. That
amendment declares, in effect, that the laws
passed during the stress of war in aid and sup
port of the public credit shall not be uro'-
toned.
The Supreme Court ,~-y reserve its decision
if II fnds q additional difficulty, or it may
rena~4 Une not directly bearing upon the broad
issue, to save the country from financial trou-
ble but it will be better if the question can be
settled at once and forever that the Legal
tender act is valid and cannot be disturbed.
Public opinion is strongly in favor of such
settlement of the question. Even the onto
specie payment theorists are alarmed at the
consequences should the Legal-tender act be
declared unconstitutional. But, as we said,
we think there is no reason for apprehension,
and that under any circumstances the law of
necessity will uphold the value of our green
back currency.