New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1870-03-16
ne goHlng IS tne resat Of Ind basness AZ the un:ed


There are very few stocks with history Ike that OF
the Pacific Mail. The business Of tho Company has been
immense and its in the control of gentlemen Of
high character and large aud yet the stock has
sold at the Stock Exchange follows January. 1864 at
2H; July 2si January lsGs. $40 July. 29j; January,
1866 2lO July. 2lG; January 1901 1885, July iss Janu-
ary 1865 ll5l; July lolI January 1902 1905 July 900
January, 1870, 43.; and today 1t u selling az 5l d!
Hero decline since January, 1861 Of the stock OF y
rich corporation of $287! per hareand this too, without
any change in its management
In 1868 the Assessors valuation OF real and personal
property Massachusetts 81 300 1o5939 in 1869,
3nlGoO3 Savings Banks deposits in 1865, s9Is3e G6
In 1902 sll2l9Ol6 Corporate over real estate
and machinery 1903. s92,3o67c8; 1869, f95677i5.
Total 1863. s,iO747lO3; total in 1850, $l,jisjdlG
Increase in 1869 in taxable values sllOos5IJ. The
poration tax last year collected was SlijS,9S9 10.
In Pennsylvania corporations pay very heavy tax. 80
much that there tax real estate for state pur
poses Where special privileges are granted special taxes
should be paid.
The aggregate amount OF exports exclusive OF specie
from the port NewYork To foreign ports for the week
ending March IS, 1870. was S25sG,5h
The Ihilddciphid Ledger publishes the following i'm
rortan letter from the official reporter Of the United
states Supreme Court concerning the character and
sanction Of the Legal Tender decision:
WASHINGTON, ID. C.. March ., 1870.
Tn a recent Issue of your paper read this:
CoNxoSfEs og SiyENe frNp RHi,nTRe Feb a. $50
Rrr That nasmueh as the recent decision OF the supreme Court
Un States tue question Of legal tenders coucrr 10 by
the legislation authorizes the payment Of Der indebted
What, lsorn the teus cene Of The Tinted state.
the present mode Of paying The Obligations Of he comwoaTsah
CLERK to Commissioners Of Sinking Fa6I
When the decision in what called the legal tender
was made the Supreme Court OF the United states con
sisted of eight Judges, tho number then fixed lort ny
law Aud the decision that notes OF the United states
to the passage Of Legal Tender act of February 1885,
was no lawful tender Mas eoncurred in by IRE JUDGES
| I'VE judges %ere- the cmen Justice, andl Justices
the Bench before the opinions derered but he
1t when the case was argued IN conference and when
Kentucky, which had decided the tender bad,
| rreyocabiy and perfectly agreed upon. And this, in
officially printed. though not in others that have
While ON the subject, and since have seen II stated
that the decision does not apply to interest which has
accrued since the Legal Tender acts, obligations
on such obligations may be- paid in paper. may take
leave TO add that the decision did apply 20 interest just
much IA to principal Part OF the tender made in
case exactly for interest interest. mean which
had accrued after the passage Of the Legal Tender act
cpal aud interest but held the tender bad IA toto And
80 the Supreme Court held 10.
may add that no great constitutional question
where professional aud public opinion has been largely
divided. do recall ease for many years where the
Judges unanimous, or nearer To unanimty than in
the present That the hastily idjudged
may be believed, not moro FROM its Importance than
case In another. and with less fulness,
gued athe bar not less than ak different times and
held very long under Amusement. am your obedient
servant, wv. WALLACE.
The Lsiger adds the following opposite comments:
Whatever private opinion any new Judges who may
hereafter 20 on the bench may have about the
ness Of tile late adjudication they would hardly venture.
we presume, 10 suggest the oyerrunng OF decision
solcnny made the late The whole history OF the
Supreme Conrt OF the United states Ncods successful
enort at such thing. Even II they did seek To do
THIS, unless trcrB OF the thrco late dis
scntcrs joined with them In the effort "a thing
10 be believed by any who knows what cSpcct IA
Court pays To ts own prccedents the thing would
10 nothing Tie Court would still be but equally d..
yhed. anl The present Judgment would have 10 stand.
which, y 10 is raSe
nov on The docket which Involves the legal tender qurs
non. All have been disposed OF. hear 10 would
take two or three before
could be get up, IN the present crowded state
Of the supreme Court docket; aud raised
M ana 10 the face Of the late emphatic decision.
would look hnch Ike raised for delay 81 pay.
nent that the party taking appeal would probably
be considered ~ coming within The rule ~ the Court
which allows tho Bhnc 10 add ten per ccnf interest above
Tie legal rate any which tcy believe II brought
Tor delay The rulec the reported decisions OF tho
toui snow, las Gccrw vice enforced lately aud II Is
dangerous one 20 trhe,wth