The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1868-02-20

. tors, as well as citizen creditors within
the States" In the State of North Caro-.
lima, st1afting Under this extreme policy
Of relief, this prohibition of the Constitu.
tion was specially advocated by member
Of the Convention on the ground that q
| sister State could not again do what they
had heretofore done. Make Pine Barren
acts to discharge their debts declare that
Our citizens shall be paid in sterile, mara
BILE lands at an extravagant price; pass
instalment laws, procrastinsting the pay
ment OF debts due from their citizens for
years." This conternporaneous history Of
the legislation out of which this re-
striction grew, and these declarations of
trainers of the Constitution, conclusively
prove that this clause was designed
to interdict to the States all legisla-
tive Interference with. contracts, such
as had so disastrously relaxed the
morals, interrupted the commerce, and
disturbed the harmony Of the States. For
obvious reasons no attempt was made to
enumerate cases within this prohibition ;
but its terms were so comprehensive as
clearly to embrace the antecedent mis-
chiefs, to which it was specially directed,
| DO WOll 40 w plOfluO dkdtRoU luUolO OEiic
of the same kind. The Supreme Court of
the United States has, in long series of
decisions, announced their conclusion
"that any law which enlarges, abridges,
or in any manner changes the intentions of
the parties, resulting from the stipulations
in the contract, necessarily inapaa-s It,.
The manner or degree in which this change
is effected can in no respect influence the
conclusion for whether the law affect the
validity, the construction, the duration,
the discharge, or the evidence Of the con-
tract, it impairs the obligation, though it
may not do so to the same extent in all the
supposed cases. Any deviation from its
terms by postponing or accelerating the
period of performance which it prescribes,
imposing conditions not expressed in the
contract, or dispensing with the perform
ance of those which are part of
the contract, however minute or ap-.
parently immaterial in their effect,
impairs its obligation" Ogden Us. Saun-
ders, IL Wheat, 327; Green Us. Biddle, 8
Wheat, s4.) In some of the Judicial expo
sitions of this clause it is to be regretted
that an incautious qualification of this
term :" inpairing" has crept into the Ian
guage of the courts, for which I can find
no warrant. In that branch of the doc
trine, which I shall have no occasion to
examine, touching the distinction between
obligation and remedy, it is frequently said
that the latter may be changed so that it
does not materially impair the former.
This epithet is vague, uncertain, and cal
cuated to confuse and mislead. A better
guide is afforded US by Justice Woodbury.
in Planters Bank Us. Sharp d al., 6 How,
327, where he says: "One of the tests
that contract has been impaired is that
its value has by legislation been dimin-
ished. It Is mott the Constitution to be i'm
paired at all. This is not question of de-
gree, or manner, or cause, but of encroach-
ing, in any respect, on its obligation, dis
pensing with any part of its force"
The final term Of this prohibitory clause
requires neither explanation nor comment.
The meaning of " contract is well under
stood, and is not open to disputa-
ton. It is only necessary to add
that it applies to all contracts, whe-
ther verbal or written, express or
implied, executing or executed; whether
between individuals, corporations, States
and individuals, or between separate
States. 1t may as we'll exist in the form
of grant, public or private, as of mutual
undertakings. Whatsoever its character
may be, it is secure from all legislative
control or modification; and the public
faith is solemnly pledged, under all circum-
stances, and in spite of all temptations, to
uphold its integrity. ..-.
In these comments on this clause of the
Constitution I have ventured on no prin-
ciple which is not conceded in all the cases
in which this restriction has been judicial
" considered. I am not aware of any au-
thority against the positions have taken
any respect to the common conces-
sions of the opposing counsel in this case.
And yet shall apply no other doctrine to
the solution of our present inquiries. The
variance and the difficulty will doubtless
occur in determining the state of facts to
which this conceded law shall be applied.
Nor does it seem to me there can be any
serious discrepancy of views in the ascer-
tainment ofthe real nature and effect Of the
contract in this case. Had it pleased
the parties to confne their dealings
to the conveyance of the tenement on the
one hand, and the taking of the negotiable
notes on the other, q very different ques-
ton would exist as to the means Of en-
forcing payment and as to legislative con-
troll over such remedies. In such an event
it would have been in the contemplation
of the parties that satisfaction, if not vo-
luntary, could only be coerced by resort
to the courts. But the parties did not
stop at this point. The vendor had not
the security he wished. A supplementary,
though distinct, contract was entered into.
1t consists of the deed of trust of the 18th
of September, 1860. 1t has the dignity
and solemnity of sealed instrument.
The appellant thereby conveys to James
NJ. Taylor and John Enders (trusteesl his
house and lot in trust to secure to John
NJ. Gregory the payment of the sum OF
Sl3,29955, due by ten negotiable notes.
drawn by the grantor and payable to said
Gregory, with the following stipulation
viz, SIN the event that default shall be
made in the payment of either of the
| above mentioned notes as they become
due and payable, then the trustees, or
either of them, on being required so to DO
by the said John NJ. Gregory, his execu-
tors, administrators, or assigns, shall sell
the property hereby conveyed. And it Is
covenanted and agreed between the par
ties aforesaid that in case Of sale tho
same shall be made after first adver-
tisipg the time, place, and terms thereon,
for fifteen days in some newspaper pub
lished in the city of Richmond, and upon
the following terms-to wit For cash as
to SO much of the proceeds as may be
necessary to defray the expenses of exc;
cutting this trust, the fees for drawing and
recording this deed, if then unpaid, and to
discharge the amount of money, principal
interest, and charges, then payable. upon up OF