The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1870-10-06

ton itself, and the mischief To be prevented
. which We know from the history OF oui
country, equally limit the Interpretation OF
the terms. The word emit" Is never en-
ployed in describing those contracts by
which State binds itself to pay money at !
future day, for services actually received, OF
, for money borrowed for present use; nor
are instruments executed for such purposes
in common language. denominated bills OF
, credit" To ''emit bills Of credit" conveys
TO the mind the idea OF issuing paper in
tended TO circulate through the community
for its ordinary purposes, as money, which
is redeemable at a future day. This is the
sense in which the terms have always been
understood.
What is the character Of the certificates
Issued by authority of the act under cOnsid-
Grafton! What office are they TO perform z
Certificates signed by the Auditor and
Treasurer of the State. are 10 be issued by
those officers to the amount of two hundred
thousand dollars. OF denominations not eX-
ceeding ten dollars. nor less than fifty cents.
The paper purports on its face To be receiva-
| Die al the Treasury, or at any loan-otiice of
the State of Missouri. In discharge OF taxes
or debts due 10 the State.
| The law makes them receivable in dis
charge of all taxes or debts due to the State.
| or any county or town therein; and OF all
salaries and fees Of office, 10 all officers civil
and military, within the State; and for salt
sold by the lesses of the public salt works.
State for their redemption.
! IL seems impossible to doubt the intention
/ OF the Legislature In passing this act. or u
mistake the Character of these certificates.
the Once they were 10 perform. The de-
| nomination of these bills, from ten dollars
/ 10 tfty cents, fitted them for the purpose of
ordinary circulation; and their reception in
| payment OF taxes. and debts To the govern
ment anu to corporations, aud of salaries
| ana lees, would give them currency. Tney
were TO DE into Qircnlafinn. fbuf n
emitted by the government. In addition 20
all these evidences of an intention To make
THESE certificates the ordinary circulating
medium of the country, the law speaks of
them in this character, and directs the Aud
ltor and Treasurer to withdraw annually
one-tenth of them from circulation Had
they been termed "bills of credit" instead
certificates" nothing would have been
wanting TO bring them within the prohibit-
DRY words of the Constitution.
Can this make any real difference? Is the
proposition TO be maintained that the Con-
stitution meant to prohibit names and not
things? That very important act. big
with great and ruinOus mischief, which Is
expressly forbidden by words most appro-
pirate for its description, may be performed
by the substitution of namey That the
Constitution, in one OF its most important
provisions, may be openly eyaded by giving
II new name to an old thing? We cannot
think so. We think the certificates emitted I'M
der The authority Of This dct. are as entirely
bills Of credit, as i they had been so deRomiRd-
ted in he dct uself.
The certificates for which this note was
given, being in truth "bills Of credit" in
the sense Oft Constitution, we are brought
to the INQUIRY
Is the note ralid of ,clicl they form the con-
sideTdtiOn?
1t has been long settled. that a promise
made in consideration of an act which Is
forbidden by law is cold. 1t will not be
rtrn ua1 fItnf 49, IL.
Constitution of the United States, which is
the supreme law. is against lac. NOto the
Constitution fOrbids State 10 "enu bills Of
credit" The loan Of these certificates is the
Uery act qohich is forbidden. It is not the
making of them while they lie in the loan
offices, but the issuing of them, the putting
them into circulation, which Is the act of
emission; The dctthdt Is forbidden by The Con-
StuutiOR. The consideration of this note is
the emission of bills of credit~by the State. |
The very act which constitutes the consid-
Grafton, is the act of emitting bills of credit,
in the mode prescribed by the law of Mis-
souri,; which act is prohibited by the Con-
stitution of the United States.
A majority of the Court feels constrained
to say that the consideration on which the
note in this case was given, is against The
highest lao Of The land, and that de note useb
is utterly cold. In rendering judgment for
the plaintiff, the Court for the State of Mis-
souri, decided in favor of the validity of a
law which is repugnant to the Constitution
of the United States.
In the argument we have been reminded |
by one side of the dignity of a sovereign /
State. of the humiliation of her submitting |
herself to this tribunal, ofthe dangers which !
may result from inflicting wound on that 1
dignity by the other of the still superior /
dignity of the United States. who have |
spoken of their will in terms which we can /
not misunderstood.
To these admonitions we can only answer |
that if the exercise of that jurisdiction /
which has been imposed upon US by the /
Constitution and laws of the United States |
shall be calculated to bring on those dan /
gers which have been indicated; or if il 4
shall be indispensable to the preservation of /
the Union, and consequently of the indie |
pendence and liberty of these States; these |
are considerations which address Them |
selves to those departments which may with |
perfect propriety be Influenced by them
This department can listen only to the man |
dates of law. and can tread only that path !
which is marked out by duty.
The judgment of the Supreme Court of |
the State OF Missouri for the first judicial
district is reversed, and the cause remanded,
with directions to enter Judgment for the
defendants.
Nothing could be added to the weight
and conclusiveness of this decision. 1t
is directly in point, and Enthusiastically APP
plicable to the case of the proposed issue
of the certificates under the act of the
Mississippi Legislature above quoted
The whole scheme is a high-handed
swindle and another device of the public
robbers to impose special tax for their
own benefit. The tax will not be levied |
to carry out the legitimate purposes of
the government, and will be in violation
of the supreme law of the land. Its au-
thors in order not to be baffled in their
intention have provided that the tax shall
be Immediately levied for cancelling the
pretended obligation and one-ffth of the
amount is to be wrung from the people |
next years. But is there no way to pre- |
vent the outrage? An appeal to the peo-
pie will secure a Legislature next fall
which will arrest the robbery; but can
no means be devised to prevent the ini-
tial step?
ST. AUGUSTINE, FLoRIDA.-It is not
generally known that this is the oldest
settlement in the United States. A gen.
tleman writing from there for a Northern
paper, under a recent date says:
This is the oldest settlement in the |
United States. The order is: St. Angus |
tine, 1865; jamestown, 1907; Albany
and New York, 1912; and Plymouth, |
II 4 = l. 4 "a e 81