Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-02-05
COupons Must he Verified.
be EdltOr OF tie Dispqtch

The question of the obligation to
prove the coupons genuine in case OF
trial under &C: of January IA, 1882,
Ceupon-Killer No. /, and the right of
the tax-collector to collect and hold the
money until the coupon is proved to be
genuine according to the requirements
of the said act, would appear to be set
tied by the construction given 70 the
law on that point in the opinion of the
court in the case Of Antoni rs. Green
how.
think the following extracts from
that opinion (U. S. Rep, S. c., Up.
~, rs, 779,) MAKE that as plain as
language can make It:
4atoRi as. Greeatow.
Il. AS to the payment of the tsxes
in advance:
''ID this connection it must be borne
in mind that the legislation the validity
of which is involved relates alone TO
the collection of taxes levied under TIE
authority Of the State for the purposes
of revenue. ProEptnoss in the payment
of taxes by the citizen is as important
as promptness by the State in the diG-
charge Of its own Obligations. In fact,
ordinarily the last cannot be done with
out the first. Hence, under the revenue
system OF the United States, the coilec-
ton of the revenue in tAe manner pre-
soribed by law cannot be restrained by
judicial proceedings. The only remedy
for an Illegal exaction is payment under
protest and suit 20 recover back the
money paid. The reason is, that as it
is necessary the Government should be
able to calculate wiah certainty on its
revenues, it is better 0hatthe individual
should be required &c pay what is de-
mandeG under the forms OF .sw, and sue
to recover back what he pays, than
that the Government should be embar-
raised in ito operations b. stay Of
collection.
What the Legislature has done is
only to say that before this remedy
can be reserted 20 the amount Cue for
taxes shall be deposited in she Treasury.
That being done, the suit may 20 on.
If in the suit it shall be determined
shat the coupons rendered are genuine
and in law receivable, the cellectcr will
be required TO accept them, and the
money will be restored. II, however.
the judgment is against the coupon
holder, the taxes will be paid, anG the !
State will have suffered no inconve-
nience for want Of its Just revenues. !
Looking at the case, therefore. as one
the collection Of the pubic
revenue, we cannot see that Che re-
quirement Of the advance of the taxes
rs q condition TO the employment OF
The remedy is such an impairment OF
he contract as makes the requirement
invalid.
"Thea as to the manner Of the trial.
rhe deposit Of the coupons with the
Court Of Appeals, il the sa.t is to 20
IN, cannot be considered unreasonable.
L the trial had been conducted under
'he old Law the coupons would have to
DC at some time surrendered, and the
,rseise stage Of the case in which this
s &c be done is by no means important
o far as the present question is con-
eined. Neither does the positive re-
uireEent Of ar issue as to the genuine
ess and receigability Of the coupons
nd . tsial by jury affect the validity of
he law. Under the old Law this sane
ssue might have been raised and the
ame trial by jury required. 1t GER
ainly is cot an Impairment OF an old !
smedy to make THAI imperative which
efore was. discretionary.
Without pursuing the subject i
lrther. we say that in our opinion the I
Iurth section Of the act OF 1882 does
1t impair the obligation of any con- ?
act which the State has made with the
'lders Of its interest coupons" b
As to tho amount Of 5awages that =