Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1869-12-02
Contracts in Confederate
CurrencY..

Especial point at issue namely
whether a contract for the pay
ment of Confederate notes by par
ties residing within the Confeder
ate States can be enforced In Uni
tied States Courts, (and if so, OF
what terms,) but also In conse
quence of the political status of th'
Confederate Government.
Chief Justice Chase holds tina
"there are several degrees of wha
is called de tacto Government" " o
which the highest is that "whos,
adherents in war against tie Gov
ernment de 5ure do not incur th,
penalties of treason; and, under
certain limitations, obligations as
sured by it in behalf of the coun
try, or otherwise, will in genera
be respected by the Government
de jatre when restored" The
Court declares that the Confeder
ate Government was necer &C
knowledged by the United
States as a de facto Government
in this sense, nor was itso acknowl.
edged by other Powers. No trea-
ties made by it, nor were any OBJ
legations of a national character
ever created by it, binding after
its dissolution on the States which
is represented, or on the National
Government. What then was
the Confederate Government p
The Court makes a distinction
worth nothing on this point. "lt
might perhaps, be aptly denomi-
dated q government of paramount
force" The distinctions of such
a Government, land there have
been several in our own expert
ence-as, for instance, that ofCas-
tine, in Maine, reduced to British
possession in the war of 1872, and
OF Tampico, occupied by our troops
during the Mexican war, are, as
the Court holds, as follows:
"Q) That its existence is main
tanned by active military power
within the territories and against
the rightful authority of an estab-
Iished and lawful Government and
(2) that while it exists it must
necessarily be obeyed in civil mat
ters by private citizens, who by
acts of obedience rendered in sub
mission to such force do not be-
come responsible as wrongdoers
for these acts, though not warran-
ted by the laws of the rightful
Government"
The result of this view is. in
brief, that we cannot now ques-
tion the power of the insurgent
Government to the extent of actu-
al supremacy, however unlawful
ly gained, in all matters of gov
within it's military lines.
And, though chat supremacy would
not justify acts of hostility to
the United States, how far it
should excuse them, ''must," we
are told, "be left to the lawful
Government upon the re-establish-
ment of its authority"
These general points of this
highly important case we lay be-
fore our readers because they ap-
ply to a very large class of con-
tracts, and very large class of
considerations regarding political
obligations. Though general in
form, they can hardly be regarded
as obiter dicta, since they are OBJ
viously the fundamental grounds
on which the special, case
rests. They do not, perhaps, go
quite as far as the remarkable case
regarding the Texas bonds, but
they lean in the same direction
They may be regarded as having
not only judicial but political sig
uifcance, and as affecting COM
as well as juridical sub
jects. Touching the special mat
ter involved--namely, contracts
made in those famous Confederate
notes, payable after a ratification
of treaty of peace between the
Confederate States and the United
States of America; the Court
regards these notes as having "a
certain contingent value" and as
ga currency imposed on the CON-
munity by irrespectable force. >
And accordingly it declares that
this currency must be regarded In
the courts of laws as if it chad
been issued by a foreign Govern
ment temporarily occupying a part
of the territory Of the United
States. Contracts STIMULATING for
payments in that currency cannot
be regarded as made in aid 6f the
foreign invasion in the one case
or of the domestic insurrection in
the other. "They have no neces-