The daily gazette., 1879-03-11
From the N. Y. Herald.
The New Test OfLegal Tender

The New Test OfLegal Tender.
The question whether the constitution
has conferred on Congress the power to
make anything but gold and silver legal
I nder for private debts has been before
the Supreme Court in several shapes, but
always with important limitations. The
Court has decided in ALI Oregon tax case
tbst State law may make taxes payable
in gold, in spite of the Legal Tender act;
but that was on the ground that State
may levy taxes in kiud-for instance, in
wheat or wool or labor-and this of course
left the legal te nder question untouched.
In Hepburn against Griswold the Court
decided that contracts made payable in
"dollars" and which was made before the
Legal Tender act was passed must be
payed in coin or its equivalent, which
was declaration that the Legal Tender
| act was not retroactive. 1t is true the
Court added:-"We are obliged to con-
clude that an act making mere promises
to pay dollars legal tender in payment
of debts previously contrac ed is not a
means appropriate, plainly adap.ed, really
calculated to carry into effect any express
power vested in Congress; that such an
act is inconsistent with the spirit of the
constitution, and that it is prohibited by
the constitution But in point of fact
the case before it-Iiepburn against Girls
wold-concerned only claim that an
agreement to pay "dollars" made before
tie enactment of the Legal Tender law
could not be redeemed in greenbacks
In Bronson against Rhodes tie Court
decided that coin contracts are valid
the Legal Tender act to tha contrary not.
withs'anding. Finally, in Knox against
Lee, the Court, reversing Hepburn against
Griswold. held that the Legal Tender act
was retroactive, aud covered contracts
for the payment of "dollars" made either
before or after the passage Of Legal
! Tender law.
What the Supreme Court has there
fore actually decided concerning the
Legal Tender act is that it was constitu
tional as an exer else of the war power
Justihable on account of extreme neces.
sity, and to save the country; that being
enacted, it covers contracts to pay idol.
lars" whether made before or after lis
enactment, and that it does not cover
contracts to pay gold or any other spe.
cific kind of dollars, whether made be.
fore or after its passage. The Court ba.
never been required to decide whether
or not the constitution confers upon
congress the power to declare paper
notes legal tender for private debts il
), the ordinary course of legislation in tim,
OF peace. No case involving this ques
ton has ever come before it, and q
course court decides only the question
, actually before it. A court does no
move of itself--it is moved.
1t is plain, therefore, that this question
remains open so far as the Suprem,
Court is concerned, and it is this ques
ton which two citizens, General Butle,
and Representative Chittenden, hay,
agreed to bring before it. That they ca,
, , do this in perfectly regular, proper an,
effective manner is maintained by cana
BILE lawyers, and General Butler, VIII,
ranks very high at the bar of the Suprem
Court, not ouly has no doubt of it, bu
in hs reply to Mr.. Chittenden state
: precisely the manner in which it NAV b
: done.