The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-11-05

legations Of bclligcrent wge conceded 10 ii In
lis military characicE very coon after the war
pe'liency, by the United States. The whole
territory controlled by it VIC. thereafter held 10
Of Of s s errory WeTs s in os resses
supremacy, however ere unsSsaly Gained, in ali
The power OF the insurgcnt g,ilcrnmcnt cannot be
questioned. That supremacy would not Justify
1t should exercise them m,istbc left to the lawful
government upon the rc-estetltshmcnt OF It's all
thorily. !iut it male ciyilt sfe-lience to It's au
such obc,cncc civil ordersfas impossible. 1t
was hy this government exercising Its power
crate notes were issued early In the war, and
these n0iCs in short time, became almost en-
sSs e t%TSsy Rs
successful revolution, these I3tcS were nullitics,
for except in that eyent(f (fherS could be no payer.
for they were made payable only "after ratillca
iion Of treaty of peace betwscii the Confederate
tho war lasted, however. they had certain
contingent value, and wee used as money
in nearly A. the onsitsss 1I;un ,Tansactions n;
he regarded therefore; .as currency
imnoscd on the communsy by Irresistible
'Iucncc from the ac;ua, SUPREMACY Of the inslr-
gent government as II bclligc,cnt, within tho ter
riitGry where 1t Sirrnate saa IN inc & necessity o
In 1t. that this currency Eiust3c regarded In the
courts OF law in the same liS.;t rs II 1t had been
issued 10y foreign government temporarily oc-
cupy.ng part OF the territSry. of the United
Staics. Contracts s,ipuatinl, for payments In
that currency cannot be rcgaysed as made In aid
OF the foreign invasion In the one case, or Of the
domestic insurrectlOn in the oIler. They have no
necessary relation to the hostile government
whether invading or insnrgerf. They are trans
actions In the ordinary cousc OF civil society,
and, though they may indSeciiy aud remotely
been entered into with aetuai iieht to further ihe
On C@n nai
the United States after the fSttoraton OF peace,
to the extent OF their fIss obligation. The
ative answer. Tic: second question, whether
evidence snn bc rcGelve' to prove that promise
pressed II 10 he be for @ the I pay mest OF dollars Without
qualifying words, was, In facttmcdc for the pay
ncnt Of any other thnu law1ula!o ollars OF tue Uni
clear that contract to pay Cellars made between
citizens OF any State ofthe Union maintaining its
ment is contract 10 pay lawful u money Of the
United States, and cannot be modified or en-
planned by parole evidence. Bnt It Is equally
nominated dollars should be eaathorlzcd OF diner
cnt value from the coins or notes which are cur
rent here under that name, that in u suit upon u
contract to pay dollars made II, that country evil
dcncc would he admitted to prove what Kind or
dollars dollar was intended; and, If It should turn out
equivalent value In lawful money OF the United
States. Ia
oUCu CNiueuCc UOcS ttOt HOtily OE NlcT COn
tract. II simply explains an ambiguity which,
under the general rules OF evidence, may be re-
moved by pareie oI evidence M e. We have already afeaG
under this Confederate Government, were, III
legal contemplation, substantially in the same
condition us Inhabitants OF Districts OF country
occupied and controlled by nm Invading bcl!igc
rent. The rules which would apply to the former
mcr case, the people must be regarded as sub
them pc interpreted anu elsorcfd with reference ]
IN In 1,v In,
latter cnse the inhabitants must be regarded MS
under the eS.sorIty OF The inaurSent beigerents,
is ,ns must OF the %e
condition Of things erea.ess ihe acts Of tic
: II is said, indeed dsss !ss tho insurgcnt
government the word dollars had ihe same mcslii-
sts.cs; tiias tho Confederate notes ysrc never never
$ass lsSsl fsaaSs; a that
Du, 1t must DC ref;er; y: :.eu that tie =. = SS.ss
matter OF fact, Father than matter OF INV: and as
matter Of fact these notes, payable at II future
and contingent day, which hns not arrived, ana
dollars II not directly by the legislation, yet nd
rcctly and quite as eifectuaiy by the acts Of the
selves, ana in the light OF subsequent events,
these notes had no real value. hut they were
current as value by Irresistible force; they were
tile only measure Of value which this people Ind,
and their use was u matter OF almost absolute
necessity, and this Pave them sort OF value,
Insignificant ana prccarious enough IL Is true,
but always having { sufficient definite relation 10
gold and silver, the universal measures OF value,
so that IL was easy TO ascertain how much gold
and silver was the real equivalent OF u sum eX-
pressed In the currency. In the light OF these
facts IL seems hardly less than absurd TO say that
these dollars must be regarded rs identical In
Kind ana value With tlie dollars which constitute
the money OF the United States. We cannot shut
our eyes 10 the fact TINT they were essentially diff
fcrcnt In both respects, and II seems to us that
no rule OF evidence, properly understood, re-
quires us TO refuse, under the circumstances, TO
admit proof OF the sense in which the word dollar
was actually used In the contract before us.
Our answer 10 the second question is therefore,
plsO In the affirmative. We are clearly or the
opinion that such evidence must he received In
respect 10 such contracts III order that justice
may bc done between the parties, ami that the
party entitled TO he paid in these Confederate
dollars Can only receive their actual value nj the
time AMI place OF the contract In lawful money OF
the United States. We do not thlnl: IL necessary
10 go Into q detailed examination or the evidence
in the record In order to vindicate our answer 10
the third question. II Is enough TO say that II has
lclt no doubt in our minds that The note for $!0,
000, to enforce payment OF which suit was
brought In the Circuit Court was 10 he paid by
agreement in Confederate notes. II follows that
the Judgment OF The Circuit Court must be- rcvers-
ell and the cause remanued for new trial, In
conformity With this opinion.