Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-04-22

TIE Common Gases.

traeted from the opinion Of the SUI
preme Court Of the United States in
the coupon cases. But whilst there is
life there Ia hope; and 'there Is lie
in the old land yet"
The opinion Of the court as published
in brief seems to be clear upon almost
every point. And yet we notice that
there are one or two points which are
not clearly brought out.
But before alluding to those points,
let us say that the strength of the court
was on the side Of Virginia. She had
Chief-Justice WAITE, and Justices
BRADLEY, MILLER, and GRAY on her
side. On the other side were HARLAN,
WOODS. BLATcHFORD, FIELD, and
MATTHEWS. IL the votes could have
been weighed instead Of being counted,
the State Of Virginia would have gained
her cases. The debt question is not
the only question-and not the most
important question--involved in these
cases. The eleventh amendment to
the Federal Constitution is rem
dered imperative. The decisions,
as the dissenting opinion of Bradley
GRAY, MILLER, and Chief-Justice
WAITE shows so clearly, were in vio-
lstion of the Constitution Of the United
States. If one man in the right is al
ways in the majority, it is to be hoped
and believed that tine views Of the four
will eventually prevail--if not in these
debt cases, certainly in all cases in
which it is attempted to evade the
eleventh amendment by suing States
officers instead of suing the State itself.
The act of January 20, 1882, is the
I" coupon-killer." This act is adjudged
TO be demonstrations for reasons as
signed. But the opinion nowhere says
that the State Of Virginia has not a
right to require the genuineness Of the
coupons to be proved. The same court
few years ago decided that the State
hadthatright; and we do not believe that
that tribunal has reversed that decision.
However, it either has or has not de-
cided that the coupon-holders cannot be
required to prove the genuineness Of
their coupons. If it has so decided,
the coupons will be counterfeited to the
extent probably Of hundreds of thou
sands of dollars. Bank-notes and green
backs are counterfeited often enough
now; but think what the result would
be il the banks or persons were forced
to take them as presented, good
and bad together, without inquiry as
to their genuineness. The result would
be at least as much counterfeit money
as genuine. In fact, no bank could
exist. Every one would be shut up.
So with coupons. We know no reason
for assuming that the country will not
be flooded with counterfeit coupons if
the collecting officers are to be
compelled to take good and bad
ms presented. Therefore, we repeat,
we do not believe that the decision has
gone to that extent. Let us assume,
then, that the court has not decided
that the coupons are to be received
whether genuine or not. Then all is
plain sailing, and all the different de-
sisions of the court made heretofore
and on Monday will be consistent with
one another.
But the court decided that the cou.
pon-killing bill did not provide the
right remedy. That act compelled q
man to pay money whilst waiting fol
his coupons to be proved genuine. II
provided that the coupon-holder should
have no other remedy than the one pro-
vided in that act. 1t provided that fol
his relief there should be issued no in
junction, no supersedeas, no mandamus
no prohibition, "no other writ or pro
cess whatever" 1t also provided tina
for taxes nothing should be received
hut gold, silver, United States treasury
notes, and national-bank currency. Tn
act went too far.
The act above referred to il, we re
: peat, the coupon-killer. Its harsh fea
lures we have just stated. Now, ever
II that act is unconstitutional, that fac
does not argue that the Legislature ma,
not require the coupons to be prove,
genuine in some other way. The cour
decided that the coupons are good onl,
in the hands Of Taxpayers. That is
that Mr.. PARSONS had no cause of &C
ton against the Auditor based upon tn
allegation that the Auditor would no
receive PARs0Ns's coupons in paymen
Of somebody else's licenss-tax. Tha
was . just decision. II, there
fore, the Legislature shall provid
proper method Of proving the coupon
to be genuine, the court viii uphold tn
law. Atany rate, asst has been thre'
yesrssincs the coupon-killer was passed
II may be taken for granted that tb'
new law would be good for three years
ard We have no doubt that ii would b
held good ell the time. The reader
must remember that i requires very
few changes in the phrsseology Of law
70 take j, out from under any decision
Of court.
We only wish to show that Virginia.
condition h mot hopeless. notwithstsad-
I'M these unrighteoas decisions Of
erAxLEY MATTHEWS. Tho Virginia