The Greenville enterprise. [volume] (Greenville, S.C.) 1870-1873, 1870-03-02
contrscts" he completely overmas.
ters the Chief Justice. He save,


contracts" he completely oyermas.
ters the Chief f.Justice. He save,
But it is said :h.. the Law e IN
conflict with the spirit, IL not the
letter, of several provisions of the
Constitution. Undoubtedly it is a
law inipairiDg the obligation of
contracts made before it's passage :
but while the Constitution iorbids
the States to pass such laws, it
does not forbid Congress on the
contrary, Congress ID especially
authorized to establish a uniform
system Of bankruptcy, the essence
OF which is to discharge debtors
from the obligation of their con-
tracts, and in pursuance of this
power Congress has three times
passed such q law, which in every
instance operated on contracts
made before it was passed. Such q
law is now in force, yet its consti-
nationality has never been ques-
toned. How it can be in accord.
ance with the spirit OF the Oonsti.
tuition to destroy directly the cred.
itors contract for the sake of the
individual debtor, but contrary to
it's spirit to affect remotely its val
ne for the safety Of the nation, it is
difficult to perceive. ~
$50 it 10 said that the provisions
that private property shall not be
taken for public use without Just
compensation, and that no person
shall be deprived Of life, liberty,
or property without due course OF
law, are opposed to the acts under
consideration.
"The argument is too fine for my
perception by which the indirect
effect of a great public measure in
depr eciating the value of lands,
stocks, bonds, and other contracts,
renders such q law invalid as tax
ing private property for public use,
or as depriving the owner of ii
without due course of law.
!" A declaration Of war with q mar
itine power would thus be uncon-
stitutional, because the value of
every ship abroad is lessened. 25
or 30 per cent, and those at home
almost as muchi The abolition of
the tariff on iron or sugar would
mike manner destroy the furnaces
and sink the capital employed in
the manufacture Of these articles.
Yet no statesman, however warm
an advocate of high tariffs, h a 6
claimed that to abolish such du-
ties would be unconstitutional as
taking private property. '' "',.
"Ifthe principle be sour d, every
successive issue of Government
bonds during the war was void, be,
cause, by increasing the public
debt, it made those already in pri.
vate hands less valuable.
"This whole argument of the in
Justice of the law ian injustice
which, If it ever existed, will be
repeated by now holding it void. J
and of it's opposition to the spirit
Of the Constitution is too abstract
and intangible for application to
courts of justice, and is, above all,
dangerous as q ground on which to
declare the legislation of Congress
void by the decision of q court. 1t
would authorize this court to en-.
force theoretical views of the geni.
us OF our Government, or vague
notions Of the spirit Of the Consti.
tntion and Of abstract Justice, BY
declaring void laws which did not
square with them. 1t substitutes
our ideas of policy for judicial con.
struction, an underlined code OF
ethics for the Constitution, and a
court of Justice for the National
Legislature" .'r' '... '.s.
he closes his opinion thus:
!" Upon the enactment of these le
gal-tender laws they were ieceiveo
with almost universal acquiescence
as valid. Payments were made ir
the .legal-tender notes for debts in
existence when the law was passed
to the amount Of thousands of mil
lions Of dollars, though gold was
the only lawful tender when the
debts were contracted. An eqnal
II not larger, amount is now due
under contracts made since their
passage, under the belief thai
these legal-tenders would be valid
payments. - ss,Ra 'tr s.... ...
!" The two House of Congress, the
President who signed the bill, and
fifteen State courts of last resort
being allFbut one that have passed
upon the question, have expressed
their belief in the constitutionality
Of these laws. g.-- .....s,..,a..,-''
With all this great weight O,
authority, this strong concurrence
Of opinion among those who have
passed upon the question before
we have been called to decide it
whose duty It was as much as it il
ours, to pass upon il in the l;pb,