The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1877-12-05
An Interesting Question.

Are greenbacks reissuable2 Can the
government put them out second, or
third, or fourth time, after taking them
in? Can it make them a permanent cur
rency by taking them in and paying them
out as bank does with its notes?
This is the question, and very i'm
portant one, involved in case now pend
ing before the Massachusetts supreme
court which will probably be carried for
final decision to the supreme court of the
United States. 1t has been decided that
under the stress of war the government
may issue its notes and make them legal
tender for all purposes, but the same de-
cision virtually declares that the govern
ment cannot do this in time of peace. But
is not this violated by the Revised Stat
utes of 1874 which make certain changes
in the original legal-tender act of 1892
IL is claimed that all acts, the original
legal-tender act included, are repealed by
the Revised Statutes which take their
place, when changes are made. and, there
fore, the only legal-tender act to be found
now is section 1858 Revised Statutes,
enacted in 1874, in time of peace, and,
therefore, unconstitutional. 1t is further
coDtended that the war powers TO issue
notes as legal once does not au
thorize the reissue Of them again and
again, alter the war emergency is past;
that every time they are paid out by ths
treasury 1t is reissue. and as this process
has been going on all the time since tht
war closed, it is an unconstitutional extern
sion of war power to time of peace.
This is the view taken by those who de
sire to get rid of the greeDbacks altogether
Ii it should be judicially sustained, il
would put new face on the whole money
Question. There would no longer be AM
question whether, under the resum ption act
the greenbacks, after being redeemed arr
to be paid out again or not. The secretary
of the treasury would have no authority tc
pay them out. All greenhacks, those re
ceived by the government for taxes, al
well as those redeemed under the resump-
ton act, would have to be withheld anC
retired forever. Every greenback paiC
into the treasury for any purpose what
ever, would have to be cancelled. EST
mating the treasury receipts of currenc,
at $3.50, 600 year, there would be al
annual contraction of this amount, which
would cause the whole greenback issue O
1854 100000 to disappear in a little owe
two years and half. 1t is needless to sa,
that such contraction would derange al
business and degrade all values. Tn
banks would suffer equally with the peo
pie, for the disappearance of the green
} backs in which their reserves are held anC
10 which their notes are to be redeeme,
would force them to supply themseve
With coin to take their place. Instead o
accommodating gold hoard Of 800, 000, 00
to maintain tho greenbacks at par, tn,
treasury would need to have gold enough
to redeem every one of the 1854, 50O,O O
preenbacks outstanding. As the treasur,
mauiiesty could not do this, the result
would be failure of resumption.
1t Is hardly conceivable that the court
viii confirm this view. Still. it shows hoy
rigid is the doctrine of those who desire 1
get rid of the greenbacks, and it is impos-
l sible to tell what the courts will do. Th,
D case pending in Massachusetts adds ne,
element of uncertainty to subject alread
sufficiently beset with doubts L
: Rep.