The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1873-04-04
Weare inclined to think the iufallib1elaw-

Weare inclined to think the ipfallible law
yer of the Dispatch is wrong, and that The
'sspecifc performance is applicable to real
estate only. If ga contracts to pay Z one
hundred barrels OF flour next Christmas"
and fails to comply, we think BIS only rene
dy is in suit for damages to recover its
value in money Wing.
But real estate is the very thing which the
Wing says the law invests with no such pri-
yilegcs as it does money. If the law will
compel specific performance even in the case
of land-that is. make man pay inland who
promises to pay in land-our case against the
4 Wing is made out. ..
The law as to contracts to deliver personal
property, as laid down in q recent case, is
this: "Where breach Of contract occurs,
the law aims to place the injured party, so
{ /" far as money can do 1t, in the same posi-.
ton he would have occupied If the con-
",ract had been fulfilled" Here money, It
is assumed, may be inferior in value to-in-
vestel with fewer privileges thaa-the thing
which the defendant contracted to deliver.
That is to say, if A contracts to deliver B
one hundred barrels Of -four next Christ
mas and fails to do it, A will sue him and
recover an amount sufficient to place him
8 so far as money can doit. in the came posi-
/" ton he would have occupied if the con-
tract had been fulfilled" in other words.
will compel the payment of money enough
to buy the -four, even If -four has advanced
one hundred per cent. between the date of
the contract and the time when it Is to be de
liyered. This is as near specific performance
as any man could reasonably ask; and is
meant to be, and is, exactly equivalent TO it.
Ills q matter Of convenience to oil parties to
such suits that money should be accepted. !
But the Wings article is mere evasion
. of the question at issue, as We shall proceed
to show. The Whtg of Tuesday said:
'.As allthe value which money possesses Ii
derived from the law, which invests It with
the exclusive privilege Of paving debts, Il
would seem but reasonable that the Govern
ment should have the right to regulate the
& terms on which it should be used"
i Now, let us republish our reply, altered
so as to obyfate the Wings criticism, and il
win still be an unanswerable REPUTATION q
that papers proposition. Here 1t is:
* g But there Is another serious error in tht
Wings little paragraph. The law does moi
invest money with the exclusive privilege
OF paying debts. On the contrary, as WI
told the Whig a year ago, the law allows
: every man to pay his debts in whatever arti
Gle OF merchandise or property he. promises
to pay them In. II A gives htle-bend
which iss in its nature just like any other
bond, he redeems it with land. The courts
will compel Specific performance If he
contracts to pay B one hundred barrels OF
-four next Christmas, the law will allow
him to pay -four. Near the Old Mar.
ket in this city there is now standing
"a house whose owner pays ground
rent annually in wheat. The contract was
made by the original purcbaser-we know
not how many years ago-and that contract
is still good. So many bushels of wheat are
rendered every year. In word, what q
man promises to pay the law allows him to
pay. IL he contracts to pay wheat, he may
pay wheat; If corn, corn; if tobacco, to-
bacco5;; and If he contracts to pay money
why should he not pay It.? No man can give
a reason worthy of moments considera
tion.'