The daily state chronicle. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 188?-1891, 1890-07-16
Is THE SUE-TREASURY BILL
CONSTITUTIONS
Especial Cor. of STATE CHoN1CLE

/
GOLDSBoRO, N. c., July IA He who
can witness the efforts of the farmers of
this country to free themselves from the
difficulties of their environment, with
Indifference, is worse than brute
Therefore, although in no sense a poll
tician or leader of thought, it has oc-
Cured to me that discussion of the
question of the constitutionality of the
Sub Treasury bill might not be out of
place, and | hope entirely without bene
fetal results.
take it that the bill in it's main
features is one to provide more flexible
currency, and III greater volume than
we now have. Ii 1 am correct in this,
am of the opinion that the bill is consti
tutional.
In Knox v. Lee and Parker & Davis,
10 Wall, 457-6SO which are some of the
Legal Tender cases-the Supreme Court
of the United States says, in speaking
of the right of the United States Con-
gress to make a paper legal tender:
ITO asst rt, then, that the clause enabl
ing Congress to coin money and regu-
late its value tacitly implies denial of
all other power over the currency of a
nation is an attempt to introduce a new
rule of construction against the solemn
decisions of this court. So far from its
containing lurking prohibition, many
have thought that it was intended to
confer upon Congress that general power
over the currency which has always
been an acknowledged attribute of sover-
eighty in every other civilized nation
than our own, especially when consider
ed in connection with the other clause
which denies to the States the power to
coin money, emit bill of credit, or make
anything but gold and silver coin ten
der in payment of debts"
In Mil!iard V. Greenman 10 U. s. the
same court says: GA constitution, es-
tablishing frame of government, de-
claring fundamental principles and Gre
| ating national sovereignty, and intend
| ed to endure for ages and to be adapted
| to the various crises of human affairs, is
not to be interpreted with the strictness
| of private contract, ''again "the breadth
| and comprehensiveness of the words Of
| the constitution are nowhere more strik-
ingly exhibited than in regard to the
powers over the subjects Of revenue, f.
nance and currency" again ''Mr. Justice
Johnson is coucurring with the rest of
the court 60 Wheaton 864) in upholding
the power to incorporate bank, gave
the further reason that it tended to give
effect to that power over the currency
of the country, which the trainers of the
constitution evidently intended to give
to Congress alone,' again "It appears to
| - I'll
cons, quence, that Congress has the
power to issue the obligations of the
United States in ST ch form, and to i'm
press upon them such qualities as cur
rency for the purchase of merchandise
and the payment of debts, as accord with
the usage of sovereign governments
In McCulloch VS.. State of Maryland
4 Wheat, the same court says: "Bu
there is no phrase in the instrumen
which, like the articles of confederation
excludes incidental or implied powers
and which requires that everything
granted shall be expressly and minutely
described" Again: "The sword anl
the purse, all the external relations, AM
} NO INCONSIDERABLE PORTION OF THE IN
3 DUsTRY OF THE NATION, are entrusted t.
it's government"
e From these extracts, and more Ger
tainly from the general reasoning of tn
Supreme Court in these decisions,
think it apparent that the Congress Q
the United States has the power to PRO
: VIDE for the issue of bills of credit, Ger
tificates Of deposit-or whatever you ma
term them-to be used as money, upol
deposit of farm, or other products il
c warehouses or other designated places
It There is no better reason for issuing Gel
q tifcates to be used as money upon de
posit of the product of the mine tha
% there is upon the product of the farm
r The main purpose being to create
d circulating medium, the building {
le warehouses, aud electiDg keepers, &c
< are but incidents, and are equally 3
J" legal, and think more so, than the pro
n tective feature that is introduced int
all tariff bills-the Mills bill and all.
might have been inclined to think thu
it was obnoxious to the charge of beir
class legislation, if it was not for tt
opinion of our court in State vs.. Ha
Is wood 104 N. G.
E. w. G. MUNROE