Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-02-18
PARSONS COUPON CASE.
JrDGE HuCHESS OPINION.

Circuit Court in the now celebrated
case Of Edwin Parsons against certain
officers of the Commonwealth was de-
lycfed at Norfolk when Judges Bond
and Hughes were both sitting. Judge
Bond delivered the oral opinion Of the
court. and announced that Judge
Hughes would file a written opinion
which Judge Hughes has done. His
opinion is as follows:
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT,
EASTERN DISTRICT or VIRGINIA,
At NORFOLK, llTH FEBRUARY,
1885: Edrin Parsons r. Norton
Moryc. Auditor Of Virginia; Samuel
{. Grecnhor, Treasurer; and II, u.
Nunford, Commissioner Of Rcre-
me.-h Equity. on Notion .tor a
Preliminary Injunction.
This motion was heard on the 10th
February. II. J.. Maury and ID. IL.
Chambcrlayne for complainant. and +.
5. Blair. Attorney-General of Virginia,
for the defendants.
On the llth February Judge Bond
delivered an oral opinion assigning rea-
sons for granting the preliminary in
junction. and announced that Judge
Hughes would file written opinion.
The following is the opinion after
wards filed by Judge Hughes:
This bill is brought by Edwin Par
sons. a resident Of New York, and a
holder of the bonds of Virginia issued
under the funding act of March 30,
1871. The defendants are Morton
Maryc. Auditor of Virginia; Samuel
&. Grccnhow. Treasurer and x. Il.
Nlunford. Revenue Commissioner ol
Virginia in Richmond.
The bill sets out the history and
provisions of the funding act of 1871.
rcciting that the bonds it authorized
were issued. with coupons attached. re-
ccivable at and after maturity for all
taxes. demands, and dues to the State,
and that this rccciyablity Of the
coupons tor taxes constituted
the chief value of the bonds.
II alleges that large number of Gre
ditor> were induced TO surrender their
old bonds on the faith Of the new. be
cause Of tins rccciyaLility Of the con-
ponS in taxes. and that thereby a con-
tract was made between the State and
the holders Of the new bonds; that the
latter should have the right not only to
tender the coupons directly in payment
Of taxes, but should also have the right
to transfer them to any taxpayer OF
the State. with their quality Of rccclya-
bilty for taxes annexed.
The complainant sets forth that Inc is
the owner Of s4.9SG of said coupons
past due and unpaid. cut BY himself
from genuine bonds ISSUED under the
funding act Of 1871. and that they are
genuine and receivable for taxes by their
cNprc,, tenor. He alleges that other
coupons cut by himself from the same
bonds have been pronounced genuine by
- mr, IN the mode prescribed by the
laws of Virginia; and have also been
a,ccrtaincd to bc genuine by this court.
lie insists. therefore. that the coupon,
now IN question are by every test gen
umc. valid. and legal. and entitled to be
received according to THEN tenor in pay
mcnt Of all taxes due the State.
These ayormcnts imply that thi, COM
plalnant has held as an investment OF
hlS own. for Sciics of years. the bonds
from which the coupons IN question
were cut; that they have not been
bought in market N speculation; and
that lac j., now seeking TO render these
securities available by transferring them
TO Taxpayers. 10 hc used IN payment OF
their dues Ia the State of Virginia. He
alleges that this right TO transfer them
would make them worth to him % cents
IN the dollar.
The complainant alleges that Virginia
has for long time refused and still re-
fuses to pay the coupons III money and
that she has. moreover. enacted certain
laws intended TO destroy their rccciya-
bility in payment Of ducs to herself, to
ms own great damage and injury, and
III violation OF her contract with him in
that respect.
He particularly complains that the
state has passed an act iorbiddng the
receipt of hi, coupons for license taxes.
and providing that the Auditor and
90 I
grant licenses until the applicant cN-
mbitS evidence that he has deposited the
amount of the license taxes IN gold,
silver. and Treasury ami national bank
notes; and he AYERS that he has the
right to have his coupons received IN
payment of license taxes whenever they
may be rendered by any person owing
such taxes: and claims the right to
such procc,, a> may Dc necessary TO re-
0uirc the officers charged with such du-
tcs to receive his coupons IN payment
of license taxes. and thercupOn to issue
licenses precisely As If payment had
been made IN money itself.
He sets forth, that relying upon hi,
right 10 transfer his coupons to those
who are taxpayers of the State, hc1as
made arrangements with sundry taN-
payers to use the coupons in question
IN payment of their taxes and license
taxes now due, and that by such arrange
mcnt lac would receive payment IN large
part for his coupons but tha; the tax
collectors of the State refuse and the
defendants refuse 10 accept the said
coupons according to the terms of the
contract.
He file> with his bill list Of the
coupons. amounting TO S4.9SG, upon
which it l. founded, which identifies
them by their numbers. letters. and
dates.
lie pIayS for an injunction against
the defendant, TO restrain them from
refusing to receive the particular cou-
ponS thus identified. He also pray>
for q specific performance on defendant,
part of the states contract with HIM
self evidenced by these particular ,ou-
ponS. and for general relief.
The defendants file an answer, among
other things setting up the Acts of the
General Assembly of Virginia. which
require coupons to bcveriiicd By Il jury.
and denying that these particular cou-
pon, have ever been 81 verified. The