The herald., 1896-06-22
SPECIFIC CONTRACTS LEGAL

. w nat oolgatlon can pc only dlScnarged
in gold?' is the caption of an article in the
Selected Corporation Cases, a weekly pub
lished by a law publishing firm. The, arti-
Gle treats OF subject OF general interest
Concerning some remarks made by us in
our issue of May 11th on the attitude OF
ton, as. exemplified in the case of Black
VS.. Sadlier, there has come to us, pres una
bly, from its author q very Interesting
nances," by Nj. D. Kenyon, superinteni.
ent OF banks of the state of Minnesota,
containing certain marked passages
which we copy at length
THE courts had fully determined in 1871
in the case cited (Trebilcock V. WILSON,
that they would enforce. specific perform
ance of contracts providing for payment
in specie either in gold or silver as dis
tinguished from greenbacks. The first act
containing the discriminating clause was
ton was undertaken by congress pre-
sumably with full knowledge of the scope
Of the decision Of the courts, and the po-
sition silver held relative to other mon
eys,. and. that it might be Disseminated
against by contracts. payable in either
eonrress o enacts That siiver ms doIars
be legal tender at their nominal value for
all debts and public dues except where
otherwise expressly stipulated in the con-
tract.
This clear reading of statutory pro-
vision, made after the decision Of the
court that contracts might be enforced,
wherein it was stipulated that some other
money. than silver should be paid leaves
silver legal tender, except where other
that is a contract payable in gold may be
paid in silver dollars. unless there is an
express stipulation that it shall not be
paid in silver. The agreement to pay in
gold does not contain an express stipula-
tion as to silver, and as such an agree
ment was good against silver before the
enactment, the legislation has determin-
ed that in order to be effective against
silver, there must be an express stipula-
ton thai. silver will not be accepted in
We have quoted at such length from
the honorable superintendent Of banks
because we are In doubt whether he in
tends the above to be a statement of the
law as it is, or of the law as it should be.
In either case we take issue with Mr..
Kenyon in his Interpretation of the clause
hereinbefore quoted in italics.
The case of Woodruff V, state of Miss.
decided in April, 1896, (Which. to be per-
cided since Mr.. Kenyon wrote his pamph-
let) affords an excellent opportunity of
showing the opinion of the United States
case there was an appeal from the decision
of the supreme court of Mississippi con-
STRUNG certain bonds, which acknowledged
promised to pay said sum- as being pay
able only in gold coin. The United States
supreme court held that there was not an
therefore the bonds were solvable in other
legal tender, Chief Justice Fuller saying.
the presumption was that where no one
kind of money was specified. the bonds
were payable in any kind"
Justice Field, concurring said: 81 am OF
the opinion as stated. that no CONNER
cial money transaction, not immoral in
its character or detrimental to the general
interests Of society, can be held or de-
ciared to be inyalid because 1s it is enforced
established or recognized by the govern
ment."
Justice Peckham dissenting on the ground
that the court had Jurisdiction n RI
verse the decree of the state court. said !:
whatever presumption the law may make
based upon the grant of power to borrow
money, as to the right to make the obliga-.
tion given therefor payable in lawful
money generally, the presumption IS of no
force in the face of a contract to pay only
in some particular medium. and whether
that con tract is to be found expressed i'm so
many words and in plain and perfectly un-
implied from all the language which Is
used in the. contract Is unimportant
and immaterial. Thai it may be implied has
pany. % Wall 105."
This being the opinion of the highest
tribunal of the nation, let US see whether
law should be- 1t is well known and
equitable principle of the law of contracts.
tain way cannot be fulfilled by doing that
thing in any other way. Therefore. if
promise to pay in gold coin or in gold bull
lion. or in any other manner, it is only by
payment in. the medium specified that !
may be discharged. Again, when promise
to pay my. debtor a certain sum in gold
coin, that is a specific agreement on my
part not to tender him payment in silver.
or in copper, or in legal tender notes, or, in
fact, in anything except gold coin.
In this connection We recall recently
reading some interesting correspondence
in the Chicago Law Journal. wherein it
was indignantly denied that a Nebraska
judge had announced in advance that he
would hold Intellectual a clause in an obli-
cation requiring. payment in gold coin:
when the question as to the validity Of
contracts for payment. of any particular
Eind of money shall be the subject of
judicial construction" says the correspon
dent of the Chicago Law Journal, 1.-The
courts of Nebraska will be found in per-
feet harmony with the courts throughout
the country" And so we may add we be-
lieve will be the courts of Minnesota.