Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1879-01-11
The Legal Tender Acts.

When Gov. Garcelon asserts, as he does
in his Address. that 1.-THE legal tender act
was manifestly and indisputably viola
ton of the constitution, he states only his
own opinion upon the matter. It may be
thought by some who read his confident
assertion of the illegallty of the legal ten
der act, that the decisions of the Supreme
Court sustain his views. This, however, is
not the case. On the contrary the Court,
in the legal tender cases of 1871 (so-called)
decided that the legal tender acts are con-
stitutional
Justice Strong delivered the opinion OF
the Court, which in the opening stated the
controlling questions in these cases to be as
follows: "Are the acts of Congress,
known as the legal tender acts, constitu-
tional when applied to contracts made be-
fore their passage; and secondly, are they
valid as applicable to debts contracted
since their enactment ?" The conclusion
Of the Court as stated in the words of their
opinion was, ''that we hold the acts OF
Congress constitutional as applied to con-
tracts made either before or after their
passage" s 'fa
This decision overruled a previous de-
cision, in the case of Hepburn vs.. Girls
void, declaring the legal tender acts I'M
warranted by the constitution so far az
they applied to contracts made before
their enactment. But that previous de-
cision was made by divided Court, and
bya Court having less number of Judges
than the law then in existence provided
the Court should have, while the latter
and final decision was made after the
cases had been heard before a full Court
and after the most careful consideration.
When. therefore, Governor Garcelou
declares the legal tender acts unconstitu.
tional. he flies directly in the face of the
Supreme Court of the United States. He
shows disrespect to the highest judicial
tribunal ip the land, setting an example
which does not become the Chief Execu
tive Of the State, who of all men shonlt
treat at least with fairness and common
courtesy the decisions of so eminent ,
body Ms that which is appointed by tn,
constitution to expound its own meaning
and that Of the laws of Congress
Of the circumstances in which the coun
Try was placed when the legal tender act
were passed we all know. The Court il
its opinion as read by Justice Strong saws
ss'we do not propose to dilate at length nm
on the circumstances in which the coun,r,
was placed. when Congress attempted ts
make treasury notes a legal tender The,
are Of too recent occurrence to justify en-
larged description. losss -
Suffice it to say that q civil war was the,
raging which seriously threatened the over
throw Of the government, and the destruction
OF the Constitution itself 1t demanded tn,
equipment, and support of large arlpiec an,
nsvfeS. and The employment Of money to al
extent beyond the capacity Of all ordnar,
sources Of supply. Meanwhile the publ,
treasury WAS nearly empty, and the credit q
the government, If not stretched 10 its ut
most tension. had become nearly exhausted
MonGyed institions had advanced largely o
their means, and more could not be expected
of them They had been compelled to sus
pend specie payments. Tsxation was made