Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-07-04
,roc, and demand something he did not

tract and demand something ne III" "o'
bargain for.
suppose you lend 5000. to be paid win
1000 bushels OF wheat. on the Isl OF hu-
gust next. on that day wheat Is wof.
less than a dollar per bushei. and you
fnd that YOU have made a losing bargain.
Would you have the impudence TO tel
YOUR debtor that honor required MIN
10 pay you In gold and not In wheat
Was IL his fault that wheat had fallen
In the market. or your fault to nave made
such bargain?
The law I'm reference to the payment OF
a debt in deprecated coin Is thoroughly
well settled, and from this STANDPOINT,
also, IL will be seen that our silver dol
lars. though commercially at a discount
are nevertheless, fully within the terms
OF contract to pay coin. IL may DC re-
marked IN passing that there Is sub
stantial difference Though the law per-
haps does not recognize the Distinction
between the debasement OF coin by
act OF the government and the use by
the government Of a coin OF standard
weight and fneness. which. by the vicis-
STUDIES OF trade or the continuance or
spectators. has lost "A portion OF Its
commercial. value OF course, the ma
ton as a debtor must use In paying It's
obligations the money which II coins as
II
DO. But IL happens. in this case. that
the government has not debased its coins
They contain precisely the same quantity
of pure metal now that they dii in 1885,
and, IL silver Is less desirable now than
it was then. let those who are responsible
suffer.
Among many concurrent authorities. !
select the following: And. first. the mixed
money case. (Sir j. Dayiess Rep. ~. In
that case, briefly stated, a man had given
a bond In England for the payment OF 100
in Dublin az a future day, I'm current
and lawful money Of England" and be-
tween the date and the maturity Of the
obligation. queen Elizabeth. by proclama-
lion. recalled all the existing coinage
and issued a new and deblsed coinage,
called mixed money. which was declared
to be lawful and current money OF Ire
land, and receivable for all debts at the
value fixed by the proclamation. When
the bond fell due. the debtor made
tender Of the flC0 i'm the debased money,
ard the question was whether this was
a good tender or not. on q reference 70
the judges, IL was resolved. among other
things, that although at the time Of the
contract, pure money OF gold and silver
was current I'm the kingdom where the
place Of payment was appointed, yet the
mixed money, being established before the
day OF payment, might well b. rendered
in discharge OF the obligation. and the
creditor was bound TO accept II. And
this ruling has never been reversed IN
England.
Mr. Sedgwick says: In cage OF a con-
tract to pay a specified sum of money
there il usually no difficulty In estimating
the amount TO be paid. The monetary
system OF country may. however be-
tween the time of contract ana tic date
OF payment, be disturbed arI altered in
one OF two ways-the currency may nave
become deprecated, or new standard
may b. adopted In such cases the con-
tract will be discharged by a due payment
in any coin which is made by law Of
equivalent value at the time Of payment"
Nothing is said about commercial value.
THE LEGAL-TENDER CASES.
In the legal-tender cases az Wall. 5i9).
Strong, Judge delivering the opinion OF
the court. said: THE obligation OF a con-
tract to pay money is 10 pay that which
the law shall recognize as money when
payment is made. III there - anything
: tiled by decisions ii Is this. ana We
do not understand il to. be controversial.
No one ever doubted that debt OF yl.'oO
contracted before 1884 could be paid by 100
they contained no more gold than 81
eagles such as were coined when the con-
tract was made. and this not because
OF tn intrinsic value OF the coin, but be-
cause OF its legal value"
The reason H." says POthier, that IN
money We do not regard the coins which
constitute 1t. but only the value which
the sovereign has been pleased that they
shall signify cont. Sale 40.
Now, / ask, seriously and deliberately,
If this plain and universal rule OF law
applies to all other creditors, why should
il not apply 10 creditors Of the United
States and require them 10 accept stand
ard silver dollars, though commercially
in payment Of their claims?
Upon what principle OF ethics or Of posi-
tive law can they claim exemption from
its obligations. and occupy higher plane
Of dignity and merit than that Of ordinary
creditors?
II it was inexpedient in 1871 10 declare
the act Of February p. 1862. unc0nsttu-
tional and thus destroy the legal-teuder
quality Of greenbacks should not the
same argument apply TO silver. when the
consequences Of its demonstration are
disastrous ana conspicuous? III,
now" said Mr.. j. Strong. "by our deci-
sion IL be established that these debts
and obligations can be discharged only
by gold coin; II contrary TO the expecta-
tons of all parties TO these contracts.
notes are rendered unayali-
able the government has become an in
strument Of the grossest injustice. all
debtors are loaded with an obligation II
was never contemplated they should as
sumo, a large percentage Is added To
every debt. and such must become the
demand for gold 70 satisfy contracts that
ruinous sacrifices, general distress. and
may be expected. These con
sequences are too obvious 10 admit Of
question"
And this is the conclusion OF the whole
matter IL the foregoing views are cor
rect, IL is perfectly consonant with the
strctcst principles Of justice and honor.
that the government should utilize its
silver in discharsing the national obliga-
tons. If that policy were adopted we
should probably not have 50 long To wait
for the international conference AID the
international restoration of silver 10 its
proper rank as a mOney-metal
SAMUEL ID. DAVIES.
Richmond, July /, 1925.
CONGRATULATIONS.