The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1896-06-07
ONLY A WHITE METAL ORDER.
HON. T.. T.. GAHUARD's NOVEL
SCHEME To DODGE THE BANK
TAX.

Solicitor General Conrad Rules That
the Obligation Is Not a Bank Note
Under the Law or In the General
Acceptance of the Term-The Pa
per Issued at Columbus to Test
the Law.
Columbus. Ca. June 6.-The Columbus
Enquir.r-sun VIII tomorrow publish the
following:
on March Is. 1895. Hon. Louis T. Car
rard. an attorney of this city. submitted
to- Hon. John O.. Carlisle. Secretary OF
che Treasury. au obligation which is set
forth in the Attorney Generals opinion.
and stated in the brief furnished TO the
Secretary of the Treasury. that the Co
lumhus Savings Bank which was state
bank. chartered by the state OF Georgia.
owned certain silver bullion 'and pro-
posed. under the advice OF AIr. Garrard.
90 issue the Obligation set forth IN the
Attorney Generals opinion, published be-
low Mr. Garad cited. among other au-
thorIues. the decision OF the supreme
court Of the United States iu the case OF
Holl.ster VS. the Iious Cooperative AIer-
camille Institution III. United States su-
preme court reports page g. and in
sisted that the obligation was not note
within The meaning of the statute. levy
Ing 10 per cent. tax on the circulation
OF state bank issues.
Mr. Garrard asked the secretary for
an Immediate answer. stating that Il was
MS desire Co take the matter into the
courts III che ruling was adverse, and
requesting that the cOmmi sslOuer Of m
ternal revenue should, without delay, as
sess ule tax, IL the secretary should re-
Tho authorities at Washington declined
20 pass upon the question on the ground
tnhl &c was not q live question, that there
was no ease made upon which an opinion
could he prcdlcated.
Mr. Garrard caused a note 70 be issued
hy the Columbus Savings Bank and passed
over the counter OF the Third National
Bank OF Columbus Ca, for which note
he paid the sum of $40. thereby making
an actual case, and this case was again
submitted 10 the Secretary Of the Treas
ury on april ]. with the statement that
the note had been circulated by both
banks. This obligation was referred to
the Attorney General Of the United States
and the following decision was rendered
by the solicitor general and approved by
the Attorney General, and was received
by Mr. Garrard on yesterday
Washington, ID. c.. ---, lS56.-The Gecre-
tary Of the Treasury's Office. 1 have the
honor 10 acknowledge the receipt of your
letter Of April 30 requesting my opinion
as TO whether the following order IS such
note on the circulation OF which In
neu or money On currency or the United
states, a tax Of 10 per centum Is imposed
by sections 10 and 20 Of the act OF Feb.
5, 1876 Q8 Stat, SID.
The order is as follows:
No. l. ONCE of the Columbus Savings
Bank Of Columbus, ca. $i0-First day OF
April, 1896. Pay to Louis j.. Garrard ten
dollars l$l0 In merchandise silver.bullion.
at retail II. y. Crowen.
Assistant Treasurer.
To G.. Gunby Jordan, President
In HOLSTER vs. Mercantile Institution.
III, y. $. 61. Chief Justice Waite speaking
for the court said From this review OF
the legislation on the general subject and
the apparently studied use by congress OF
words OF appropriate Specification when
ever was intended 20 cover anything
else than promis0ry notes in the CONNER
cial sense of that term. we are led to the
conclusion that only such notes as are In
| law negotiable so as to carry title IN their
circulation from hand TO hand are sub
Jeets OF taxation under the statute.
lt the instrument be expressed TO be pay
ablo IN cash or specific articles" IN the
alternative, or lin merchandise" or in any
other article than money-as for instance,
AN ounce Of god'-(Roberts vs. Smith,
So W. 49D It becomes a special contract
and by the law loses it's character as com
mercal paper. In order to possess the
quality OF neg0tabiilty it should AFFORD on
its face every element to fx its value
Ihe order mere Is not payable In money;
i ls payable in silver bullion, which is
an article OF me~chandise, its value Is
measured IN silver dollars but the order
Is expressly for merchandise and not for
money. II Is not a contract on which an
action Of debt could be obtained bv The
holder Of IT, Tt is not northumberland
be used as currency. viii not pass from
hand 20 hand, by delivery merely, with
out indoraement-can IN short, be used
by the community as money without dam
ger OF total loss to whoever may take
II. Renee, II Is not, In my opinion, such
a note as Is embraced within sections ia
and 70 OF the act Of Feb. s, 1875 Yours re-
spectfully, Holmes Conrad,
Solicitor General
Approved: Judson Harmon. Attorney
General.