The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1885-04-23
The Coupon Cases.

The Coupon Cases.
Ne publish elsewhere synopsis Of
the decision Of the Supreme Court OF
the United States rendered on Mon
day last in the Virginia Coupon cases,
and also Of the dissenting opinion OF
a minority Of the court. From the
decision reached it will be seen that the
legislation designed to consummate q set
Element Of The debt question of Virginia
has been pronounced unconstitutional and
void, and the whole debt condition placed
where it was i'll 1871 under the Walker
Funding bill except about S8,00o.00
funded under the McCulloch Bill OF 1879,
bearing an average interest OF per cent.
and about 1900, 900 funded under the Rid
dleberger bill, bearing per cent. interest
All the rest of the debt bears per cent.
interest The aggregate amount OF the
interest bearing debt, Of the several
classes, is something over $50 900, on
which there is something over $3.O00,000
OF interest due and unpaid. 1t is this
amount the people have to face and Crap
pie with. with the taX-receivable coupons
in full vigor and force The effect must
necessarily be great embarrassment, as
the coupons will absorb all the revenues,
under present laws. before they reach the
treasury leaving the public schools, the
charitable institutions and institu tions OF
Iearning, rs well as the State government
itself. without means Of support. The
Court was divided five to four, the opinion of
the majority delivered by JUST &c Mathews
announcing that the legislation known as
the Riddleberger bill and its enforcing
acts, Was unconstitutional. The dissent
ing opinion delivered by Justice Bradley,
concurred in by three others Of the judges
including the Chief Justice is very able
and carries with it the weight Of the most
profound iurists Oh the bench. The
Court reverses its decision in the Tennes-
see case upon which the Riddleberger
acts were predicated, and it also, substan-
italy reverses the opinion uttered March,
1888, practically involving the same ques-
| ton as that now determined-Ju Justice
Mathews then making one of the majority,
and the only one whohas, apparently change
| his views
This decision rests upon the declaration
that the State, in 1871, in adopting the
Funding bill, with tax-receivable coupons
attached made contract with the creditors
who funded their bonds under it. which
under the Constitution is inyiolable. 1t
disposes of the whole matter as q legal
controversy and leaves the debt question
to be dealt with by legislation This ne
cessarily viii bring it into the political
contests Of the State to again agitate the
public mind, disturb its relations, and in
hict serious injury upon the people. With
the lesson inculcated i'll this last verdict
Of the highest and final judicial tribunal
Of the land, it would seem to be futile to
again attempt to circumvent the plain de-
mand Of this recognized contract by legis-
lative devices. We, however, have not the
space nor the time this week to discuss
this. or in fact, any phase of the question
in its present relations. 1t ought to be
dealt with calmly, fairly and honestly, and
in future references to it we shall endeav-
or TO be controlled by this spirit, as well as
sincere concern for the best interests OF
the Commonwealth.
To summarize the opinion, it reyerses
Sneed and Tennessee, and Antoni anC
Greenhow, and declares that all laws passed
to evade or defeat the coupon, arc
unconstitutional. In the first case, Poin
dexter VS.. Greenhow. coupons were
rendered in payment of taxes. They were
refused because not verified as required BY
law TIE taxpayer refused and the treas
; urer levied upon desk valued at $50 t(
J collect the tax. The plaintiff sued out {
warrant in detinue to recover the desk
But it was dismissed by the Corporation
Court of Richmond. The case was th$r
brought to the Supreme Court. Tht
Court held that the tender of coupons Wa'
payment OF the tax that after such ten
der the tax could not rest upon it,and thai
any interference with his property was ;
trespass which might be redressed by al
[ !
course, makes the duty Of receiving cou
pons imperative upon all collectors. Blu
the Court went further and declared thu
J whole Riddleberger bill and the other act!
} passed in connection with it to be abso
mtely void, as impairing the obligation o
the contract. Where, in two cases tn,
, United States Court of the Eastern Dis
| trict had decided that an action of trespas
: would not lie where the amount in contro
; yersy was less than $500, the court affirm
: ed the Judgment rs not within the juri
5 diction of the court. Where, as in The
: case Of Parsons VS.. Marye, Auditor, it wa
} sought by proceedings against Marye t.
} compel the collecting officers of the Stat
2 to receive. all coupons verified in that suit
. the decision Of Judges Bond and Hughes
r was reversed as being without proecedent
But Notwithstanding these decisions
' which are Of minor Importance, the who'll
t debt legislation is wiped out Of existenc
4 and the coupon declared to be when ten
. dered payment OF taxes without suit o
Identification. The dissenting opinion O
t Judge Bradley took the ground that al
} these proceedings were against the State
{ and therefore forbidden by the Constitn
ton, he making no reference to the deb
: legislation except from that standpoint.
Virginia Coupon Cases
DECISION OF THE U. S. SUPREME COURT
TILE RIGHT or VIRGINIA CoUPoN-HoLD
EES TO. PAY TAXES IN COUPONS AT