Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-02-04
THURSDAY. FEBRUARY 4, 1886
Proving a Negative.

Supreme Court oil the Oniteu otaVeS
said on Monday last as to the veriiica-
ton of coupons. If the coupons are to
be verified, they must be verified ac-
cording to the law-the act Of January
Id, 1882; and this act that court pro-
nounces q "valid enactment" Mr..
STANLEY MATTHEWS is bad man,
but hardly bad enough to induce his
"wicked partners T" to decide that the
law requires 3 man to prove a mega
tive--to prove that coupons are not
genuine. Mr.. MATTHEWS, on the con-
trary, said:
"The right of the plaintiff to pay his
license in coupons is affirmed by the
opinion in the case Of Royal Us. The
State of Virginia, and his remedy to
have them received for verifcation and
to recover back the money paid for his
license is secured to him by the terms
of the act of January ID, 1882, which,
for such purposes, was upheld by this
court as valid enactment in Antoni rS.
Greenhop."
That says, as plainly as words could
say, that the money must be paid first,
then the coupons must be verified, and
lastly the money must be refunded and
the verified coupons received. Any
lawyer who should practice law with
GU. having done so would find that he
had penalty to pay.
In the case Of Cha6iR sS. Taylor the
Supreme Court of the United States
says:
"Chaffin rendered to the defendant,
who was treasurer Of Henrico county,
Va, in payment ofhis State taxes due on
his property situated in that county
tax-receivable coupons, which the de-
PENDANT refused to receive, and after
ward levied on and seized the plaintiffs
horse, and sold it to force him to pay
his taxes in another medium. The
plaintiff then sued the defendant for
trespass, and the defendant pleaded the
act Of the Legislature of Virginia, COM
harding him to refuse said coupons and
to levy notwithstanding such tender.
The Circuit Court held that defense to
be a good one. The plaintiff appealed to
the Supreme Court Of the United States,
which held such State laws to be I'M
constitutional, and remanded the case
to the Circuit Court, with instructions
to have it tried by jury. When the
case came on to be tried the defendant
offered plea that the coupons had not
been verified and identified according to
the provisions Of the act Of January
IA, 1882, before said tender, and the
plaintiff did not prepay his taxes before
said tender in money according to the
provisions Of said act. The plaintiff
objected to said plea being received,
for the reason that the judgment of the
Supreme Court Of the United States pre-
cruded defendant from making it. The
Circuit Court oyerruled that objection.
and gave judgment against the plaintiff.
lie then sued out writ of error. JUS
tice Matthews delivered the opinion OF
the court. lie held that every question
of law in the case had been covered by
the former judgment Of this court, and
that the proper action OF the Circuit
Court upon the mandate of this court
would have been to have entered Judg-
ment in the pleadings in favor OF the
plaintiff and proceeded to an assess
ment of damages. The judgment Of
the lower court is reversed, and the case
is remanded to that court, with direc.
tons to take further proceedings in &C.
cordance with law and in conformity
with this decision"
II will be seen that in this case the
defendant did not plead in the Circuit
Court of Henrico county that the cou-
pons had not been proved to be genuine,
but merely pleaded the act of the Legis-
lature commanding him not to receive
coupons. IL his plea had been that the
coupons had not been proved to be gen.
aine, it would have been sufficient.
After the case had been remanded, he
put in this plea, but it was then too
late. II is clear from the decision in
Sands rs. Edmuads, as shown by the
extract first above quoted, that we have
correctly stated the opinion and decision
Of the Supreme Court in Cha0in rs
Taylor.
This is not new point. We made
il over and over again last year after
the decisions of April, 1885 in the Vir'
ginia cases. On the 2Sth Of April
1885, we said:
.Now, we viii add that the coupons
must be genuine, Just as the gold oil
silver coins, or greenbacks, or bank
notes, must be genuine. When the
court says that tender OF coupons re.
lierss the taxpayer from liability To
levy, II means as to coupons just what
Il would mean as to bank-notss were il
70 say thsta tender OF bsnk.notes re.
sieyes the taxpayer from liability tC
levy. In other words, the coupons
\ gfeenbacks, bsnk.notes, or gold or sil
Aeer coins, must DO genuine"
The same claim had been set up theI
as DOW that the court had decided
that it was not necessary to prove tn,
coupons genuine. The public wer
misled and the price Of tax-receivabl
coupons ran up In this city in April q
high as 81. On Tuesday last they raj
up TO 42--l6 points below what the,
reached in April, 1885, when the bond
holders gained such "gIorious vic
tory" over poor old Virginia. So tia
IL Is evident that experience has laugh
even spectators In, coupons lesson.
Nor was the point made by Nj
STANLEY MATTHEWS in Sands %
kd@umds new one for him. He mad
the sslDs point last year. We quot