New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-03-24
ON CARONDELET STREET.

Gold remains steady in New York at
1121, and the Herald suggests that at this
price il is still subject to the manipulation
Of Spectators. However this may be the
"cliques" Of Wall street seem to have
pretty well abandoned the field, at least
for the present, leaving gold entirely to
the influence Of general causes. We OBJ
serve that the Chicogo Tribune and other
Western papers manifest an unfriendly
disposition toward the funding bill, on
the ground that the compulsory exchange,
on the part Of the banks, of 6 per cents
for the new d per cents will force many
of those institutions, especially in the
West, to wind up their affairs and 60 into
liquidation. This, the Tribune argues,
will unnaturally contract the currency,
without bringing US any nearer to specie
basis.
It has been stated that tee recent de-
cision of the Supreme Court in the illegal
tender case does not apply to interest
which has accrued, since the illegal ten
der" act, on obligations entered into before
that act was passed. The following letter,
addressed by Mr.. J. W. Wallace to the
Philadelphia Ledger, shows that this view
is erroneous:
WASHINGTON, D. c., March 8, 1870.
To the Editor of the Money Article of the Ledger:
When the decision in what is called the
legal tender case was made, the Supreme
Court of the United States consisted of eight
Judges, the number then Fixed for it by law.
And the decision that notes of the United
States, when rendered in payment of con-
tract made previously to the. passage of
was no lawful tender, was concurred
in by fire Judges, not by three, as
assumed in the paragraph quoted. These
five judges were the Chief Justice and the
Justices Nelson, Grier, Clifford and Field.
Judge Grier left the bench before the opin-
ions were delivered, but he was on it when
the case was argued in conference, and
when the Judgment of a1firmance Of the
Court of Appeals Of Kentucky, which had
decided the tender bad, was irrevocabIy
and perfectly agreed on. And this in sub
stance, is stated in the opinion OF the court,
as officially printed, though not in others
that | have seen.
While on the sueJect, ana since nave
seen ii stated that the decision does not ap-
ply to interest which has accrued since the
legal tender acGs, on obligations given be-
fore them, and that, under the decision, in
terest on such obligations may be paid in
paper, may take leave to add that the de-
cision did apply to interest just as much as
to principal. Part of the tender made in
the case was exactly for interest; interest, l
mean, which had accrued after the passage
of the legal tender act. The Court of APP
peals made no distinction between princi-
pal and interest, bat held the tender bad
in toto. And so the Supreme Court held it.
Lmay add that on no great constitutional
question, where professional and public
opinion has been largely divided, do recall
a case for many years where the judges
were unanimous, or nearer to unanlmlty,
than in the present one. That the case was
not hastily adjudged, may be believed, not
more from its importance than from the
fact that the question involved in it was, in
one case or in another, and with more or
less fullness, argued at the bar not less than
sir different times, anc was held very long
under advisement.
lam your obedient servant,
J. W. WALLACE.
At the last session of the Council an or
dinance was introduced, providing for the
sale of the city stock in the Jackson Rail-
road Company. The minimum price is
fixed at $4,000. Are we to infer from
this that some secret arrangement has been