New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1870-02-08

directly the creditors contract for the sake Of the iod
ydua debtor but contrary 70 It's spirit TO affect rnotsy
yate property shall not be taken for pu6l.s
person ~'na Sa asPp9sa Of @ liberty
property without due course of law are opposed e
the acts under consideration. The argument too fine
for my perception by which the indirect effect Of greed
public measure. in depreciatng the value OF land:
a law invalid. as taking private ,s property fcs
public use d or as GepvnS ne Ss %
a maritime power would thus be unconstitutional,
because me Sa n% b eve p %"s a. mSeS %
abolition Of the tarR iron. sugar would In like
pIoyed in The manufacture Of those articles Yet no
statesman. however warm an advocate or MN iarns has
topal As takng private property he principle sound
every successive Issue OF Government Onds during tho
void because by increasing the pubic dent =
whole argument OF the injustice OF the awan injustice
Which, oG, :, e ye e and Of T oppopn To-
spirit OF the Constitution-is too abstract and
intangible for application to courts u justice, and
legislation Of Congress void by the decision 81 Court
IN would authorize this Court to inforce theoretical
views OF the genius Of Government vague notions
OF the spirit OF the Constitution aud of abstract justice
by declaring void laws which did not square with them.
Il substitutes our ideas OF policy for Judicial
ton on underlined code Of ethics for the Consultation aud
q court OF Justice for the national Legislature.
Upon the enactment of these legal tender laws, they
were received with almost universal acqaiescence.
debts In existence. when the law Was passed 10 the
amount OF thousands Of millions OF dollars though
gold was the only lawful tender when
the debts contracted. An equal, II noe
larger amount Is due under contracts made
their passage under tho belief that legal tenders
would be valid payment The two Houses Of Congress-
the President who signed the bill and II Courts OF
last resort, being all bat one that have passed
upon the question. have expressed their belief
| IN the consttutODauty Of these laws. With all
this great weight OF authority. this strong
OF opinion among those who have passed
the question before have been called to decide IT.
whose duty 10 much II IL ours. 20 pass upon IL
I'm the light OF the Constitution. Are To their
action to disturb contracts to declare the void, be-
the necessity for s does not appear
| other COurtsf Such Ia not my idea OF the
relative functions OF the legislative and judicial depart
ments OF this Government Where there ~ choice %
means selection Is with Congress, not the Court III
the act to be considered IN any essential TO tie
execution power the degree OF that
necessity for the Legislature and not for the Court 70
! determine.
In the case Of wheaton" from which have already
quoted fully the Court that where the law nei
objects intrusted the Government 20 undertake hers
| to inquire into degree Of It's necessity would
10 pass the line which circumscrbes the judicial de
| partment, and TO tread on legislative GROUND LUIS
Court discaims all preensions 10 such power ihia
sound exposition OF Of the Court IN TINS cas1
of relieves from embarrassment or nesit<
ton In the case before IL had entertained douDA
OF the cOnsttutonay OF the law must nave heh she
law valid until those doubts became convictions bnt AZ
have very decided opinion that Congress acted within
the scope authority must bold the law 10 De con-
stitutOnal and dssenl from the opinion OF Tue court
am authorized to say that Mr.. Jnsuee S"ajne sne
| Mr. Justice Davis concur ia this OPINION