The weekly Arizona miner., 1870-03-05

circulation was originally placed; for the re- ceivability clause appears to have been intro duced at later stage of it's progress. These facts certainly are not without weight as ey- idence that oil useful purposes of the notes would have been fully answered without making them legal tender for pre-existing debts. It is denied, indeed, by eminent wri- ters that the quality of legal tender adds any thing at all to the credit or usefulness of the Government notes. They insist on the con trary, that it impairs both. However this may be, it must be remembered that it is as the means to an end to be obtained, by action of the Government, that implied power of making notes legal tender in all payments, is claimed under the Constitution.
 Now. how far is the Government helped by this ineapsl Certsi2ly |. cannot obtain new supplies or services at cheaper rate; for no one will take notes for more than they are worth at the time of the new contract. The price will rise in ratio of depreciation, and this is all that could happen if notes were not made legal tender.
 But it may be said that the depreciation will be less to him who takes from Govern ment if Government will pledge to him it's power to compel his creditors to receive them T " | by no means certain. If the quantity issued be'cxcessive and redemption uncertain and remote, great depreciation will take place. If on the other hand, the quantity is only ade quate to the demands of business, and conf dence in early redemption is strong, notes will circulate freely, whether made a legal tender or not But, if it be admitted some increase of availability is derived from mak 1 ing notes a legal tender under new contracts, it by no means follows that any appreciable advantage is gained by compelling creditors to receive them in satisfaction of pre-existing | debts and there in abundant evidence that, whatever benefit is possible from that com pulsion to some individuals, weighed by loss es of property, Arrangement of business, ! huctuaton in currency and values, and in crease of prices 10 the people and Govern ment and the long train of evils that flow from the use of an irredeemable paper cur rency. It is true these evils are not to be at tributed altogether 10 making it legal ten der. but this increases these evils. It cer- tainly wdens their extent and protraets their continuance. We are unable to per suade ourselves that an expedent of this sort is an appropriate and plainly adapted means for the execution of the power to declare and carry on war. If 1t adds nothing to the uti- ity of notes, it cannot be upheld as means to the end in furtherancc of which notes are issued; nor can 1t, in our judgment, be up- held as such, if while facilitating in some de- gree the circulation of notes, il dcbases and injures currency in it's proper use to a much greater degree; and these considerations seem to Is equally applicable to the power to regulate commerce and to borrow money. Both powers necessarily involve the use of money by the people and the Government but neither, as we think, carry with it, as an appropriate and plainly adapted means to it's exercise, the power of making circulating notes legal tender in payment of pre- existing debts.
 But there is anohter view, which seems to us decisive. To whatever express power the implied power m question may be referred, in the rule stated by Chief Justice Marsball. the words appropriate" plainly adapted, n really circulated " are qualified by limita- tion, that the means must not bs prohibited, but consistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution. Nothing SO prohibited or inconsistent can be regarded as ''appropriate. '' or plainly adapted" or really calculated, 3 means 10 any end.
 Let us inquitr, then, first, whether making bills of credit legal tender to the extent indicated IS inconsistent with the spirit of the Constitution. Among the great cardinal pur- poses of that instrument one Is more con splcnous or more venerable than the estab- lishment of justice in the minds of the peo- pie who ordained 1t, is happily not matter Of disputatiOn. It IS not left 10 inference or conjecture, especially iH it's relations to con tracts. When the Constitution was under going discussion in convention, Congress of the Confederation was engaged in considera- ton Of an ordinance for the government of the Territory northwest of the Ohio the only territory subject, at that time, to its regula- ton and control. By this ordinance certain fundamental articles of compact were 'estab- lished between the original States and the people of States of the Territory for the pur. pose, to use its own language, "of extending the fundamental principles of civil and relig- lous liberty, whereon these republics, as the States, united under the Confederation, as their laws and constitutions are erected n Among these fundamental principles was this, and in just preservation of rights and prop erty, it is understood and declared "thaf no law ought ever to be made or have force in said Territory, that shall, in any manner whatever, interfere with or affect private contracts or engagements, bona sRs and with out fraud, previously formed"
 The same principles found more condensed expression in that most valuable provision of the Constitution of the United States ever recognized as an efficient safeguard against intrigue: That no State shall pass any laws lmpairing the obligation of contracts." It is true that this prohibition is not applied in terms 10 the Government of the United states. Congress has express powers to en- act bankrupt laws. and any other express power which incidentally impairs obligation