The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1878-10-24

2 that the total amount of United
vi" States notes, issued or to be is
e sued shall never exceed 100000
RI" 900, and such additional sum, not
t i" exceeding S5o,OoO,OOO, as may be
5 temporarily required for the redemp-
| G ton of temporary loan" Now this
| was both a promise and contract,
t made by the Government with the
people in order that the securities
might have a fixed value, and not de-
pend upon the will Of a majority in
Congress. It is said that one Congress
cannot by legislation bind any future
Congress; and this may be true as re-
CARDS ordinary legislation. But will
the Greenbackers carry it SO far as to
say that a future Congress cannot be
bound by the contract of its predeces-
sor? If SO what are any government
bonds or even greenbacks worth? Ii
so any subsequent Congress can at one
fell swoop, wipe out the national debt.
Accept this principle, and all the rest
follows. Would it be wise to break
this promise even it power is conced-
ed? Would it be honest? Would it
be just? Is it possible that the laws
of morality do not apply to a govern
) ment; and that what is fiat saoiaad-
ling on the part of an Individual, is
UNSUITABLE and honorable on the part
Of a nation? Tie Republican party
) do not SO understand morality.
i But there is another obstacle still
more fatal. Congress may break
! faith. Tt has done wicked things and
foolish things before; and we all un-
derstand how little of morality a Con-
gressn1an elected on the Greenback
ticket, would remember after his ar
, rival at the capital. Too many Of our
congressman are totally oblivious Of
the presence of God in Washington,
and this is drawing it very mild 1t
might not be difficult for them, / say,
to break faith But fortunately, there
is a law above even Congress = the
Constitution, and this takes away
from Congress the power to do this
, which IS proposed. And if a law, is
suing $322,OOO,OO0 more greenbacks
and making them legal tender, were
enacted, the courts would at once
hold it unconstitutional and void.
!, paper it was written upon. Until the
Judges Of the Supreme Court Of U.
S. are so bitten by the rag money
spider, that they forget their own de-
cisions and betray the law, no such
enactment can stand for moment.
!, But don't take my word for this
LIE. us review briefly the history of
!. the Legal Tender acts. The circum-
; stances are all in your memories.
: Civil war was raging. The public
treasury was empty and public credit
we'll nigh exhausted. IL the words of
the Supreme Court q. S.
illegal Tender Cases IL Wall 54O)
" Moneyed institutions had been com
"pellcd to suspend specie payments.
Taxation was inadequate to pay even
= the interest on the public debt, al
ready accrued, and it was impossible
: to await the income of additional
taxes. The necessity was immedi-
= cate and pressing. The army W as I'M
"paid. There was then due to the
soldiers in the field nearly score of
e millions of dollars. The acquisitions
" from the war department for sup
"plies exceeded fifty million, and the
! g current expenditure was over one
: g million per day. The entire amount
"of coin in the country, including
that in private banks, was INSULT
"cient to supply the need of the gov
eminent three months, had it all
been poured into the Treasury. For
{" eign credit, we had none We say
" nothing Of the overhanging paraly-
g sis Of trade and of business general
y sly, which threatened loss of conf
:, "dence in the ability of the govern
, "ment to maintain it's continued eX-
:, "istence, and Herewith the complete
destruction of all remaining National
:, "credit.'
Y 1t was under such circumstances
Q that the greenbacks were made Legal
. Tender, and even then, not without
). fear and trembling lest it serve as a
I precedent. Under such circumstances
: clearly the act was lawful if it ever
0 could be so. 1t was question of life
0 or death. Congress was urged on by
the overwhelming necessity which
l "knoWs no law" 1t was a struggle
LII Dull CbCLO1l, Vic llSU HOW VI
). nature; and Congress did this and had
the right to do it, just as a shipwreck-
!. ed man, floating on plank, only large
8 enough to bear his weight, may push
Il therefrom any other who tries to
u cling to it, even though that other
;, drown.
: Bvt even when justified by the pres
sure of this necessity, many able jul
e rists doubted the constitutionality OF
: the laws. The question was taken tc
}. the Supreme Court, U. S. and in the
case of
! Hepburn VS., Griswald Wall 6O3,
e the legal tender clause was held in
e valid. The court then consisted oil
) eight judges. OF these five concurreG
S in holding the laws unconstitutional
: among them Chief Justice Chase, wh(
e was Sec'y of the Treasury when thu
acts were passed. After this decision
h Judge Grier resigned and the cour1