The Goodland republic. [volume] (Goodland, Kan.) 1891-1907, 1893-12-01
srArEs AND sILYER.

| OF marQu0 anu T0pTISd1, COLI money!
emit bills of credit, make anything but
gold and silver coin tender in pay
ment of debts"
Under the provisions above quoted,
the supreme court of the United States
and the courts of last resort in many
of the states, have held that bills of
state banks incorporated under the
laws of a state, is not a violation of
that provision which says that "a state
cannot emit bills of credit, ''Sand that,
too, when the state is the principal
stakeholder of such corporation. Bris-
coe VS.. Bank of the Commonwealth of
Kentucky, Ill Pet. 257.)
The state Of Kentucky by it's legisla-
ton gave said bank charter in and
by which the bank was established in
the name and behalf of the common
wealth of Kentucky, under the direc-
ton of a president and II directors to
be chosen by joint ballot of both
houses of the general assembly.
A section of the charter provided
that the stock of the bank should be
the exclusive property of the common
wealth of Kentucky, and that no indi-
vidual should own any part of it.
The capital stock was fixed at $1,000
600 and it was authorized to issue
notes in the usual form of bank bills,
payable on demand. It was contended
that as a state was prohibited from is
suing bills OF credit, it could not do in
directly that which it could not do di-
rectly.
The court says, "This doctrine is
startling, as it strikes fatal blow
against the state banks which have a
capital of nearly four hundred millions
of dollars, and which supply almost
the entire circulating medium of the
country" The court even proceeds to
lay down the following doctrine, viz:
"The federal government is one of
delegated powers. All powers not del
egated to it, or inhabited to the states,
are reserved to the states or to the peo-
pie. A state cannot emit bills of cred
it; or in other words it cannot issue
that description of paper to answer the
purposes of money, which was denomi-
mated before the adoption of the con-
stitution, bills of credit. But state
may grant acts of incorporation for
the attainment of those objects which
are essential to the interests of society
This power is incident to sovereignty,
and there is no limitation in the feder-
al constitution, on its exercise by the
states, in respect to the incorporation
of banks"
In short the gist of the foregoing de-
cision is that state which authorizes
corporation, although the state be
the sole stockholder) to issue bank
notes is not prohibited by the consti-
tuition, because there is no restriction
as to incorporating companies.
Again, in New York VS.. Min, I'll Pet
102) it is held that "a state has the
same unlimited jurisdiction over all
persons and things within. its terrific
rial limits as any foreign nation, when
that jurisdiction is not surrendered or
restrained by the constitution of the
United States
In Paup ct al VS.. Drew, 10 How 218,)
it is held that. legislatures of states
may provide by law that bills of a state
bank shall be receivable for all debts
due the state.
In the light of the foregoing decisi-
ons in reference to one clause of sec
ton 10 of the constitution, may not
the states have the same rights as to
others, and therefore, while it may not
coin money, may it not grant charter
or charters to companies which can
coin money; if not, why not?
The reasoning is the same. There is
no restriction as to granting charters
to companies in the one case more
than the other; in fact, no restriction
as to organizing corporations of any
kind. The coming of money is as
much "for the attainment OF those OBJ
jects which are essential to the inter
ests of society" as the issuing of bills
of credit by state banks. The objects
are the same in both instances, to make
a medium of exchange to facilitate
commerce and trade. It is true that in
the Briscoe case the court says that
the bank bills are not exactly like the
bills of credit issued by the colonies,
but it admits that they are for the
same purpose, viz: to circulate as
money, and by a parity of reasoning, it
may be said that the coin In use at the |
adoption of the constitution of the
United States was not the same as
since, for before it was pounds, shiIl-
ings and pence and since that time, !
dollars, multiples and subdivisions
thereof, but used to circulate as money.
Taken then literally, and as interpret
ed by the supreme court in finding a t
way to allow state bank issues to stand