Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-11-27

otaGc, anu IL any Dirk Sndil. IN the opinion
Of the Comptroller-Gener become unsafe,
so that its bills ought not to be received at
the Treasury, it shall be his duty to order
their reception to be discontinued by the
tax collectors" 6 Statutes at Large, 5s4. J
In the year l843 the provision above re-
cited and so frequently adopted was re-en-
acted as part of the general law of the
State, and it, was no longer embraced in the
annual supply bill.
Whether contained in the annual slIppiy
bills or in the more durable form of the act
of 1913 we are satisfied that that act was
not included by the Legislature as repeal
Of the sixteenth section of the act incor-
porating the Bank of the State of South
Carolina.
TO sustain this view we refer to the acts
extending the charter Of the bank in dues.
ton. 1t was chartered in the year 1912.
Its charter expired in the year 1852, and
was in that year extended for further term
Of twenty years. In the year previous, in
the succeeding year and in this same year,
the Legislature enacted the provision that
stakes should be paid in specie, paper me-
dunn, or the notes If the specie-paying
banks of the State" 1t, however. re-enact-
ed in its extended charter the provisionthat
the notes of the Bank of the State should be
receivable in payment of taxes, if payable
in form in specie and on demand.
Agaiii in the year 1852, nine years after
the passage Of the act Of 1874, the Legisla-
tlIre for the second time extended the char
ter of this bank, including the original
10th section. If there be a conflict be-
tween these statements, it might well be
argued that the act of 1852 re-enacting the
10th section operated as repeal Of the law
of 1913, so far as it is related to this bank
Whether this be the case, or whether the
two are to be continual as both cont inuing
in force, and as being applicable to different
subjects, the result is the same, that the
18th section remains in force.
This view is further illustrated by the
fact that the four other banks, whose char
tiers were granted prior to 1872, were ex-
tended without any alterations ef their
charters. Notwithstanding the yearly en-
actment that taxes should be collected in
gold and silver or the notes of specie-paying
banks, the charters of the State Bank and
Of the Rank Of South Carolina were extend
ed III the year 1922, and those of the Union
Bank and of the Planters and Mechanics
y
the charters of the State Bank and the
Bank ofSouth Carolina were further ex-
tended, and in each instance the provision
was retained, making the notes receivable
in payment of taxes without reference to
the fact that their notes should be redeem
ed in specie. 1t is difficult to believe that
the Legislature intended the act OF 1S43 to
act as repeal or modification OF these
laws, some passed prior and some subse-
quent TO that date. 1t is evident, again,
that the Legislature of South Carolina
when they intended that the bills of nom
specie-paying banks should not be received
in payment Of taxes, used language perfect
ly adapted to that purpose, and indicated
the process by which it would easily, but
certainly be accomplished. Thus, in the
charters of the banks Incorporated
between the years 1851 and 1896, : found
the provision already quoted, viz: "That
the bills or notes of said corporation, origi-
nally made payable on dehiand, or which
shall have become payable i'll gold or silver
current coin, shall be receivable by the
treasurers, tax collectors, solicitors and
Ctlter public officers in all payments for
taxes or other moneys due to the State, so
long as SAID bank shall pay gold and silver
current coin for their notes. But whenever
there shall be protest on auy of the bills
or notes of said bank for nOn-payment in
specie the comptroller-general shall be au-
thOrized, and is hereby required, to counter
Inland the receipts Of the bills and notes of
the bank in payment Of taxes and debts due
to the State, unless good and satisfactory
cause shall be shown him by the said cor
poration for cOntesting in a court of justice
the pay11leDt thereof" It is thus expressly
enacted tlidt It's bills shall lie receivable tor
taxes so long only as the said bank shall
pay gold or silver current coin for its notes.
\ precise definition is given of what con-
stituteS failure 50 to pay, to wit: protest
for nOn-pay.nent in specie for its notes or
Bills, and mode is prfivided of precluding
their further reception, to wit: the action of
the cOmptroller-general.
Again, when the charters Of the four ear
" banks, the associates of the Bank Of the
State, in date as well as in terms of their
charter, were last extended, in 1852 and
1853, they were subjected to the same re-
strictions as the other banks mentioned.
Their reCharter was expressly made subject
to the condition that their notes should be
received in payInent Of taEes SO long only
as the bank should pay gold and silver cur
rant coin for their notes. The Bank OF the
State was the property of the State. The
State was its stakeholder, and its faith and
credit stood publicly pledged for the pay
ment of its notes.
In the case of that bank all the Specifica-
tions are absent. The Legislature inten-
tionally omitted to say that it's bills should
I, LODI
to redeem them in specie. 1t omitted to
furnish the test of nOn-specie payment, a
protest, and omitted to authorize the comp
to forbid their reception.
1t is scarcely credible under these cir
that the Legislature intended
the Bank of the State to stand upon the
same plan with the other banks. We do
not think twas so intended, or that such
is the legal effect Of the statutes we have
been considering.
The absence, in the case Of the Bank Ofthe
State, of the necessary machinery to pre-
vent the reception of its notes if it ceased
to be a specie-paying bank, affords a strong
argument in support Of this view. The
notes were intended to be received by the
hundreds of tax collectors throughout the
State-a class of men not usually qualified
to decide nice legal questions, and not cleo
ted with view to their capacity to make
such decisions. Yet the question of
whether bank was a specie-paying bank
Or a nOn-specie-paying bank rested in the
Judgment and decision of the collector. Ii
0ne collector held as a matter of law that |
a bank which paid specie on its bills, but
refused to paw specie on its deposits, was a
,pecie-paying bank, he could receive its
notes in payment of taxes. If the collec- |
or in an adjoining district held that the |
payment of its deposits was more impOr- |
ant element than the redemption Of its
notes in specie, and that this afforded the |
est of a specie-paying bank, the notes |
could I've refused by him. Great and ineTi- |
able confusion would result. That such |
confusion was anticipated, and that it was
Intended to be avoided, is evident from the |
lear detailed and precise provisions APP |
Jlied to those banks where the actual pay |
nent of specie by them was intended to be |
eouired. Those details not being proyid- |
ID for the Bank of State, strong argu- |
nent arises that the actual payment Of
Decie was not intended to be required Of |
hat bank.
That the principle of implied repeal or
does not apply to the charter |
# the Bank of the State we are considering, |
s evident also from two other considera-
ions: /. The State Of South Carolina had
publicly undertaken and promised that the
notes of this bank should be taken in pay