The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1877-05-24

ing classes, whose interests are all involved
throughout the entire State in securing these
much needed reforms by the selection OF dele
gates to the August convention who are OF ant
from the taxpayers of the Commonwealth.
On motion, the papers thro ughout the State
were requested to publish the proceedings of thi:
meeting.
DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF AP
PEALs IN THE SALT CAsEs.-A report of the
decision of the Supreme Court of Appeals in
the case Of the County of Dinwiddie VS.
Stuart, Buchanan & Co., involving the va
lidity OF war contracts, has been looked for
ward to with no little interest by the men,
bers of the legal profession and the people
generally of the County of Augusta, mas
much as it is thought to bear very material
ly upon large and important case now
pending in the Circuit Court of Augusta, in
which the holders of County bonds issued
during the war, are claiming payment.
The following synopsis has been kindly
prepared for this paper by a young and
promising member Of the legal profession
formerly of this city but now OF Richmond,
and whilst it embraces the prominent points
of the decision, yet is necessarily imperfect,
from the fact that the document, in full,
covers forty pages of closely written legal
cap, and is one of Judge Christians best eff
forts.
The synopsis is as follows:
This is an appeal from decree of the Cir
cult Court of Dinwiddie county affirming the
validity of a contract made by the County of
Dnwidde with Stuart, Buchanan & Co. for
furnishing the people of that County with
Salt, during the late war. The contract was
made pursuant to the terms of an act of the
legislature of what is called the Richmond
government, in contradistinctlon to what is
called the restored government of Virginia.
The authority under which this contract
now sought to be enforced is an act of the
legislature of Virginia passed May 9, 1862,
entitled can act to authorize the County
Courts to purchase and distribute salt
amongst the people, and provide payment
for the same"
1t was under this act that contract in this
case was made.
The counsel for the County assal this
Contract upon two grounds.
First. That the act under which it was
~
of an unlawful and usurped government,
and that contracts made under this pretend
ed authority are illegal and void.
Second. That all such contracts come
within that inhibition of the present State
Constitution which declares that mo coun7
ty, city, or corporation shall levy or collect
any tax for the payment of any debt con-
tracted for the purpose of aiding any rebel
lion against the State or against the United
States"
AS to the first ground upon which counsel
claim that this contract cannot be enforced,
viz: that it was made under the pretended
authority of an unlawful and usurped legis-
lature, it is sufficient TO say, that the Rich
mond Government, as well as the Confeder-
ate Government, Of which it formed a part,
have been repeatedly recognized by this
Court, by the Supreme Court of the U. S.,
and by the legislature of the restored gov
errment, as at least, having all the attri-
291. 302, 1872; % Graft. 62S; "a Graft. 10; z
Wall 1902. 1888; Wall 1.
In Walker VS.. Price 81 Graft. 722, Judge
Anderson, speaking for the whole Court,
and referring to the act of the legislature in
reference to Confederate Currency, says,
1.-THE plaintiff contends that this act has no
force or validity as law. 1 do not concur
in that opinion. 1t was an act of the legis-
lature OF the State which had the power to
enforce all its enactments. 1t had the force
and effect Of a law of the State and was as
obligatory on all the citizens of the State as
any law passed by subsequent legislatures.
Chief Justice Chase in Texas VS.. White,
Wall 702, says, st is rot necessary to at
tempt any exact definition of within which
the acts of such State government must
be treated as valid Or invalid. 1t may be
said, however, that acts necessary to peace
and good order among citizens, such, for ex-
ample, as acts sanctioning and protecting
marriage and the domestic relations, gov
erning the course of descents, and other
similar acts, which would be valid if emana-
ting from lawful government, must be re-
garded in general as valid, achen proceeding
from IN actual though unzawfM gorern-
ment." See also Evans VS.. City of Rich
mond, Chase's decisions by johnson, sol.
Upon these authorities, as well as upon
the general principles of international law,
the government which had its seat at Rich
mond during the late civil war was gov
ernment de .facto, and all its acts in the or
binary administration of law, and in the in
terests OF society, and for the protection of
civil rights were valid, and all contracts aris-
ing out of the laws of such a government
will be enforced after the restoration of
peace to the extent of their just obligations,
unless it be shown that such laws were en- :
acted, or such contracts entered into ssfor
the purpose of aiding any rebellion against
the State or against the United States.
On the 2Sth Feb, 1866, an act was passed
by the legislature OF the restored govern
ment the very object of which, as shown by
ITS title and preambles, was ''to give effect
tO ri nj ookc
during the late war; Which, after refer
ence to the existence and actual supremacy
OF the Confeder ate Government, and the
State Government as part of it, enacts
among other things ''that all contracts and
agreements OF every kind and nature whatso-
ever, whether executory or executed, all
rights and titles OF every kind and nature
whatsoever, acquired or to be acquired by
any person under either of the governments
aforesaid and not inconsistent with the Con-
stitution and laws Of the United States, shall
be held and taken to be, and to have been.
at all times, of the same force, virtue and eff
feet as if no question had ever been made as to
the lawful authority of the said governments
or either Of them"
Thus it appears that by express legislative
enactments the restored government of Vir-
Snla recognizes as lawful, all contracts
made and all rights and titles acquired un-
der the authority Of the Richmond Govern.
ment which are not repugnant to the Con-
stitution and laws OF the United States or
the Constitution of the State.
AS to the second ground upon which the
validity OF this contract is assaied, to w.t.:
that it comes within the inhibition of that
sec. OF the State Constitution which declares
that mo city, county, or corporation shall
'leEy or collect any tax for the payment of
ANY dept created for the purpose of hiding
''any rebellion against the United States OF
against any State.''
The purpose of the act was to furnish salt
for the people of this Commonwealth, net
to soldiers armed in rebellion against the
State or the United States, but to the whole
people OF the Commonwealth women, chill
dren, Old men, non-combatants, slaves-all
which make up the people of the Common
wealth. This article of prime necessity, alb
solutei! essential for the preservation of hui
man life and animal life was to be furnished
and distributed, by the terms Of the act,
through the agencies of the civil govern.
ment, and not the Military. Neither the
Military officers were called upon, nor Mill
cary orders issued, to effect its distribution.
N. .-.1