The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-02-02

/ her control, shall make his tender In cer-
D tain way. She justities this from the very
: pecessity Of the case, because she says that
' papers purporting TO be my obligations
, are in circulation which are spurious or
, forged, ard for the protection alike Of my
b0na:fide creditors and my treasury. ! re-
. quire that II you have the bond you shall
produce il, or II you haven't the bond
, bring the certificate Of the man from whom
, you procured It., so that IL the coupon is not
, genuine the offender can be discovered and
punished for his unlawful act. IL will be
seen. therefore. that the bill steers clear OF
the contract, and is but the exercise by the
State OF her police power.
Again, the bill provides that no person
shall sell coupon without license except
to licensed broker.
The apparent objection 10 this Is that il
, prohibits the citizen from selling his own
property to whomsoeyer he pleases. II
looks like melting out harsh measure OF
justice to say that the citizen shall not. ex-
cept TO one, sell his coupon, which il a
commodity, just rs he would his wheat or
: corn. and anything that is his own. but
: we have abundant precedent for It. There
Is an act OF Congress now in force which
imposes special-llcense tax upon the
farmer for selling his own tobacco to any
|, one but a licensed broker.-Section 3,2l4,
Revised Statutes OF 1870.
Here the farmer raises his tobacco on his
own land. II is his. He has acquired it
by labor and the expenditure Of money;
it is for sale like his wheat or corn. But
, the Government says ii he sells his own to
any person except it be q licensed broker
he shall pay a license tax. II Congress can
pass such law, no lawyer will doubt the
right OF q State Legislature to do the same,
for understand that the power OF Con-
gress TO do anything must be expressly
granted to it by the Constitution, while 4
State Legislature may do anything that is
not prohibited either expressly or by me-
cessaiy implication by the Constitution OF
the State OF the United States. In the one
we look for an express grant ot power,
while in the other we look for a limitation
upon a complete power. This precedent
will suffice to demonstrate the right to
enact the law.
Again, the bill prohibits citizens OF this
State from buying coupons from any one
but licensed broker, or from going to
Baltimore to buy them and bring them back
IN the state. had some difficulty at first
upon this point, but ! am satisfied that 1t
can he sustained. a precedent for 1t is
also furnished by the act OF Congress
(sectIon 1866. United States Revised Sta
tutes) which imposes fine upon any person
who purchases tobacco or snuff upon
which the tax has not been paid. We have
upon our own statutc-book further
precedent for it. The duelIing act provides
that any person resident IN thiS State who
by previous agreement goes out OF the
State to engage in duel, and inflicts upon
his adversary 4 mortal wound, he shall be
guilty of murGer in Virginia. II will not
be contended that the making OF the agree
ment j. the offence. for il nothing else
were done It would be no offence. The
consummation of It is the inflictiOn OF the
mortal wound, and this, though done in
foreign jurisdiction, is made murder here.
This is but the exercise by the state OF
power over her Olrn citizen-so here she
saws to her 0,cH citizen that it shall be a
mi.demeanor for him to buy in Baltimore
coupons and bring them back in this STATE.
It has been held that q negro and white
person resident in Virginia who went to
the District Of Columbia and were mar
ried aud came back into this State violated
Virginia law and could be punished. Kim
ncy's case, 80 Grat.] | am asked the ques-
ton il il would be in the power OF the
State TO say TO one Of her citizens that he
should not 90 10 Baltimore and buy
piece OF calico. answer, unquestionabIy
she can If the calico is infected with dan
gerOus or contagious disease. Her right
to protect her citizens from the dangers OF
having such contagious disease communi-
Gated through the calico. think. Is clear.
So here to protect her Treasury and her
creditors from being deirauded by the in
PRODUCTION OF forged coupons she inhibits
their purchase and introduction by one OF
her own citizens.
Again II may be said that the bill in
fringes the power given to Congress by the
Constitution to regulate commerce between
the States. Other States have the same
thing this bill proposes to do; indeed, have
gone much further. Notably is this true
in the State Of Maine, upon whose statute
book is Il law providing for the election OF
Il commissioner. who alone shall have the
power 10 buy liquor and bring il into the
State for sale. (sectiOn 80, page 500, Rev.
Stat. Maine, 1871. and another law, which
prohibits town officer from buying liquor
from any other person than the licensed
commissioner. These laws have received
the sanction OF the highest appellate tri-
bunal OF that State. In the case OF the
state as. Belfast. IS Maine. page 1877,
town officer bought liquor in New York
and brought il into the State. The liquor
was seized, and the Court held the law TO be
constitutional and contiscated the liquor.
Not satisfied with this, the same State has
/ declared by law now in force that no ac-
| ton shall be maintained for liquor sold TO
any citizen OF Maine in violation OF law.
and the Supreme Court OF the State mas de-
cided the law constitutional. In that case
citizen purchased from Il merchant in
| New York liquor on credit, and made de-
| fault in PAYMENT. The merchant brought
suit. and the Court held that the liquor
having been sold to n citizen OF Maine IN
violation Of law, no action would lie 10 re-
cover IT. purchase price.-jj Maine, page
$40.
our own statute-book has upon II 4 law
that provides that any person who receives
in this state any bank-note issued In an-
other State of less denomination than 80
shall be guilty OF misdemeanor.-Code
1873, chapter 1914, section Is.
These precedents will, think. relieve
: the bill of any objection that 1t interferes
with the right OF Congress to regulate COM
merce between the States. IL should be
borne i'm mind that the whole theory OF the
bill is based upon the fact tnat there are In
circulation spurious and forged coupons,
and its object is TO provide means to de-
tect them. II matters not how repulsive
this Riddlcberger legislation Is to us. 1t is
the law-so held to be by the highest
courts, and the people have overwhelm-
ingly declared their unalterable purpose to
settle the public debt upon no other basis
than that contained in the bill. 1t thus
becomes our duty to effectuate the settle
ment. This we do without necessarily en-
dorsing the settlement. We have accepted
il simply because the people. in the exer-
/ cise of their saYereion right, nave declared