Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1886-12-20

The Ownership ofthe Coupons
| 10 the editor Of The alexandria Gazette:
HAyMARKET, Va, Dec. IS, 1SS6.-The
| question the ownership Of those coupons
rendered in payment Of taxes due the State
refused acceptance by the State officials, fol.
lowed by levy, and G suit for damages fl!
ibis illegal act, has been ably discussed from
| every point Of view by eminent lawyers
with the result, should say, of establishing
beyond doubt that the State has.now not
the shadow Of claim to them. This view
of the case must, l should imagine, be the
reason why some gentlemen ofmy acquain-
tance have come TO what seems to me o most
erroneous conclusion with regard TO u SUBJ
ject somewhat allied 10 the above; viz, the
ownership Of the coupons lately rendered in
| payment cf State taxes, GId simply refused
by the State, and without any further ac.
| ton upon her part. Undoubtedly 3 legal
tender Of the State dues has heeu made.
| but she has received nothing, and has given
no receipt. Those gentlemen maintain that
the mere tender of the coupons constitute an
| absolute discharge Of their obligations 10 the
etate-in other words that they Aave
paid their tsxes. One Of these gem
| tlemen who was a plaiutin in one
of the cases lately tried at Rich
mond insists that Judge Bond actually
made plain ruling to this effect in that
case. Another maintains that lie retains
the coupons rendered, properly verified, to
serve him as receipt III full that Ee has
paid the State the taxes due FROM him.
Will not some of the other legal authorities
raga 10
| first question, kindly inform Us through the
medium OF your columns, whether the above
vew5 are correct. Or are. as in NY hum ne
judgment | conceive them to be, ntterlv
| erroneous and without foundation. Csnuot
the State, SO long as she nbs,aiGs from TIE
course she has hitherto pursued oi mnking
an illegal levy to collect her dnes within
reasonable time. compel the payment of
these unpaid taxes, eithar with thoce ecu
pona already rendered with some othe:s, or
IN current money of the na:icn ? Il they
will kindly answer tbs above they Will hc
doing great service not uniY % tie gentle
men in question and TO those Wha pTob&bty
mold the same views, hut 10 !hose, who like
myself, hold that they mos ciar:.a,icul-
~ wrong. Legal teusier j. BOW 8
phrase Of such common occurrence, that
possibly they MAJ also he kinG enough
to give us the definition OF ono
and its legal result; Is shs fal-
lowing q strained 2ia,. u the practical
effect Of s. legal tender? Icu hold note Of
mine TO yourself for ten do!a.s payable on
d certain day. On tEEt Day. accompanied
by q friend, call on you with q ten-dolar
gold piece marked so that l, us well as my
friend, can hereafter Identity it. 1t hop
pens that about this time number OF spu-
rioua gold coins are known by you ;c be in
circulation in yonr vicinity. For some rea-
SON you believe that | am one likely TO try
and pass this spurious coin. ] enter your
Office and say, Here are the ten dollars
owe you on my rote." You look 81 it, sus-
wont give up your note" 'Al right" I
it is it is yours. am done with tho trans
action" Shortly after leave the coin is
lost. In due time the note is protested and
you bring suit. ssy that you would ne
non-suited My friend, as Il witness to the
transaction, would be my receipt, and the
mark or the coin would prevent you using
1t to play any false game upon me by sub
stitnting spurious coin.
But suppose that instead Of forcing the
coin upon you say, Every well, l will put
it back in my pocket" Then at the proper
| time you protest the note and sue me. In
reply I say to the court, Her is the indenti-
cal gold piece formally and legally rendered
in payment of this claim, and | now pay it
into court in its discharge. Result, the costs
Of protest and OF suit fall on your shoulders
In the first case | made an actual pay men.
OF your claim. In the second, | simply
made you legal tender but did not dis
charge your claim, but the consequence Of
refusal falls on you. In the same way with
the coupons in question. Had their tender
| been followed by some such action as above
the claim that the taxes they represented
was paid would be valid one, and NC fo.
NAL receipt Of the State would be necessary,
! if the fact of such action could he otherwise
proven. As it is, simply o lega! tender in
| payment of the taxes was made, but the
fact remains that they were not paid, and
the mere refusal OF the coupons by the State
does not pay them, and she. in due time,
will see that they are paid in some form Or
| another.
Whilst on this subject will you permit me
to congratulate my neighbor, Msj. Jamea
| Pursell, on the able and decisive manner in
which be has placed the boot on the other
leg, refuted the views OF Speaker Stuart and
R.Tay lor Scott, when they respectively bring
| forward their charges of political inconsist.
ency and want of patriotism against those
who think they are doing the State 3 service,
when they tender and compel her orsdeem
her own promise to accept thcse4 coupons.
Let the present Legislature Of The State and
those self termed patriots outside Of the
Legislature exercise one half of the abilities
they now display in devising meaus to get
around her just obligations, to paying these
! obligations, or to coming to an honorable
compromise with her creditors, and. my
( word for it, the dreadful Consequences ot
their own course, both political and fnen.