The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1873-01-12
Th. R.v.nu. Bo.a Scrip Case.

The Revenue Boad Scrip Case.
The following are notes OF the remarks
of Mr.. Pope. delivered on Friday:
It has been agreed by counsel in the
argument that it should be divided 80 as
to throw portion OF It upon eaoh. The
portion assigned to me will involve the |
questions arising under the Constitutions
of the State and OF the United States.
I. We announce, then, a. our fret pro-
position, that the ACT OF 1872, authoriz.
ing the emission OF the revenue bond
scrip, is against the Constitution Of the
United States, and, therefore, null and
void.
The clause OF the Constitution is in
sbese words: 'Nc State sha!i
emit bills Of credit" 10 Seo, I Art,
Con. q. 8.
, l. In considering this clause, one OF
the fret canons Of construction is to
arrive at the intention by the true mean.
ing OF the words. and the words must be
taken in the sense in which they were
used at the time. The intention must be
drawnfrom the cords, but the rule of
evidence is to let in the light OF sur-
rounding circumstances. This rule mHy
be gathered from the case of Sturges ps
er ps. Peck, {6 Oranoh, 139.
II We 20 back to the Convention which
framed the Constitution OF the United
States, We shall fnd the intention which
aotuated that body while using the inhi-
bitory words, "No State shall emit bills
OF orodit."
II We refer to the old articles of con-
federation, We shall find these words:
Congress shall have tho power to bor-
row money and emit bills OF credit OF the
United States" The report of COM
mittee was made in the Convention of
'89, in which was embodied recon-
mendation to incorporate the same power
in the Constitution then under oonside-
ration. Vide the Madison Papers, e
vol, p. 12320 and the letter of Luther
Martin. Il vol. Eliiott's Debates, p.
3Sl.)
Now, what was done by the Conven-
ton? Mr.. Curtis, in his history of the
Constitution, z VOL. p. 1857 says. re.
ferring to the Madison Papers: ''Fears
were entertained in the Convention that
an absolute prohibition of paper money
would excite the strenuous opposition of
its partisans against the Constitution;
:bot it was thought best to crush it, and,
accordingly, the votes OF all the States.
but two. were given to proposition to
prohibits absolutely the emission Of bills
OF credit" ~
/ II the history gives US the contempo-
raneous spirit which aotuated the trainers
Of the Constitution, as to withholding
this grant of power to Congress, We are
prepared to understand the energy with
this power to the States. For Congress
to have the power, it must be granted; for
the States not to have the power, it must
BIZ inhibited. Hence, the Constitution
as it now stands; the power not granted
to the one and inhibited to the other.
2. The next question is: What was the
character of the thing called bill of
credit, which the trainers of the Consti-
tuition wished to crush; to emit which
they would not grant to Congress and
prohibited to the States? Its character
was we'll understood by Chief Justice
Marshall, q contemporary of the Con
vention aud of the Constitution.
When the courts came to act upon
this clause of the Constitution of the
United States, two things were neceu
sary: l. It was necessary to discover the
particular thing struck ut and to he
crushed. 2. Having discovered the
thing, it became necessary in opt words
to define the thing. prohibited.
Some things were clear. The Constitu-
tion did not mean to include bills OF ex-
change, bank bills OF State, banking
corporations which had been long before,
and were then, III circulation. All snoh
were bills OF credit, undoubtedly, in one
sense; but they we're not the "biIls OF
credit" embraced Within the meaning Of
the inbibitory words.
The history OF what was meant had to
be resorted to, and the thing itself thus
traced and identified. This wa. frat
authoritatively done by Chief Justice
Marshall in the leading case of Craig ps.
Missouri, a Peters 1917 and by Mr..
Justice Story, in his dissenting opinion,
in the case Of Briscoe ps the Bank OF
the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Ill
Peters, 1872 to 337,) and by Mr.. Justice
Mclean. in the same case, delivering
the opinion of the majority of the court
In this connection, refer to the case of
the State 0s. Bills, e MoCord. l4;) to
the history Of bills of credit, by Dr..
Cooper, in Ills appendix to the statutes
at large Of South Csroliuu, 70 vol, p.
1869 aud to Judge Story's commen,n-
fies on the Consultations II vol 3 1853