The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1884-03-27

tfINH n inf ~ fNffI infNf Nntn
Iheod Efttnbsfksu are coming 0ui a
their ho'ss sFa'n since he decision n N Q
supreme cont ~ The uriisd Hisief, ~
ofniY, dsrlsiinF constitutions the lsssl
tender ao, Of iNs. or the act 10 prohlh /
the reduction Of the smount 81 ihs ola legal
I tenders, In other soIds ihe tuprsms
| cunt declares that tho government mar
ssue fnd redeem and Reissue ami yet HFsir
re- issue siihoul any special basis, or With
out pTGdioaling TIM Toics upon any basli
hut the governments will. legal tender
notes or psp,r money. The decision hht
y.rIuslly endorsed by Judicial oe'eImins,
ton the gTeeubsek pollog, ard many Of the
more solid aud conservative statesmen and
,inanclsTs and business eeniars have be-
come slarmed q! the possible results OF THU
court decision.
IL Is refreshing, therefore. 10 turn "a
JuD0E FIELDS dissenting opinion aud hsA,
sounder and safer doctrine and
one more 10 accordance with the view,
and sentiments Of the people Of the United
states on Ihis subject of money. He holds
that the government has no constitutional
right 10 issue irrece,mable legal tsndsr
notes as substitute for gold and liver,
but that It can only give paper medium q
constitutional or safe value ia TIE manner
We have indicated, by rsoeiviEg II for all
government dues, and promising 10 redeem
Il upon presentation or within sta.ss.
time Ia coin. The ruling or msJoritJ opin.
lou declares that Il Is not only In tie power
OF congress 10 mako the notes OF the gov
erEment legal tender. but that under
the power 20 coin money aud regulate itg
value, congress may Issue coins Of the same
denominations as those now current, but
Of less intrinsic yelue by reason Of contain
Ing less weight OF the precious metals aud
compel creditors to receive them ~ dr.
charge Of debit.
Briefly, the limo OF argument by which
MR. JusTicE FIELD attacks, and, 20 orr
mind, successfully reiu.es The dam
gerous and far fetched opinion
Of the majority, Is that undoubtedly
the power TO borrow includes the power TO
give evidence OF the loan In bonds, treasury
notes, or In such other form rs mey be
agreed between the parties. These may be
Issued in such amounts On will fit them for
circulation, ard for that purpose may be
made payable to bearer aud transferable by
delivery. Experiences las shown that the
form best fitted TO secure their ready &C.
ceptance is that OF notes pay able TO bearer
in such amounts as may suit the ability OF
the lender, In oil this matter there is only
deslng between the government and the
individuals who trust ". The transaction
concerns no Others. The power whichauthoI-
ICES il is very different one from apower o
deal between parties to pr vste contracts
in which the government 10 not interested
ana to compel the receipt OF these promises
to psy in place of the money for which the
contract stipulated This latter power lie
pot an incident 10 the former; it ia dis
tinct aud lar greater power. There is no
lie gal connection between the two, between
the former, TO borrow from those willing to
lend and the power to interfere with the
contracts OF others. Tho pos
session Of this latter power would rot jus.
tiiy the interference Of the government
with any right Of property of other parties
under the pretense that i.s allowance 10
the holders of the notes would lead to their
moro ready acceptance, and thus furnish
the needed means.
Neither does the power vested in cong ress
to coin money foriifv the position OF the
C curt. in the judgment of the dissenting
Justice. So far from deduciDg from that
power any authority tc impress the notes
of the government with the quality of legal
tender, Its existence seems to him inconsis-
tent with the power to make sny thing but
coin legal tender.
It is in many respects unfortunate that
this opinion of the supreme court was deiv-
cred at this particular time. The tinanciers
OF congress are graphing with the vexatious
bank and money problems OF the day, more
pressing and important now than they have
for years been. and such q dangerous doc
trine from so high o tribunal, turned loose
upon the cropping sud unsettled thought of
the time, may have the tendency to work
double mischief. JUDGE FIELD, however,
has thrown the weight Of bis
great learning and name against
the rest Of the court and
thereby kept the matter still an ouen ques
ton. 1t is not unanimously or even defin-
itely settled yet, and may be expected, as
the latter judge remarked, to continue to
come before the court for adjudication
The dissent leaves the question still open.
This dissenting opinion is pronounced one
of the eblest expositions OF the law that has
come from the supreme bench in many
years, and will certainly assist in holding
the great mass of the legal, as well 40 The
minds, to the old faith OF thu
fathers" in this era of CT ide and changing
financial policies.
THE proceedings ofthe Mississippi valley
to-, IN OF