Year: 1869

The Er amincr il its last reply TO us, or rath-
er in attcmpting.to vindicate its own strange po-
siton on the public debt question. is satiiactory
TO us, and especially so hen taken in connection
with an article in that paper OF 4 subsequent date
which we copy below. We have always regard
ed the Examiner as the leading paper of the par
ty on the coast, and FOR that reason was especial
ly solcitous that it should be in harmony with
the Democratic press, platform, and masses of
the party on this debt question. We had rather
see the Eramiaer correct on this debt issue, and
we believe we now have the proof that it is than
the conversion OF all the mongrel sheets on the
coast We repeat that there is neither a sug ges-
tion or hint at either partial or complete repu-
dation" in any article we have ever written on
the subject, and that all such charges or nsinl-
ations from either Democratic or mongre presses
are both ungcnerons and unjust, false in theory
and in fact. There is no semblance to rcpudia-
iion in contendng for the payment, with usury.
Of every dollar the Government hon estly and
equi!ably owes whether the debt be n legal one
or only an honorable one. Here is the Examiner
article Of the 9th inst, complete:


lis CfffCT.-ln CUSe Tue supreme OOuTJ UC-
cides hat the Legal Tender act is unconstitu-
tionll and that greenbacks are not lawful money,
what will be the effect upon contracts made on
a erecnback basis? Can creditor enforce the
payment in geld of a note payable in currency =,
given at time when greenbacks were worth
twenty five cents on the dollar less than gold !?
We think not. The principle has been settled in
the case already fcrred to in which it was held
by the Supreme Court that note given in Geor-
gia during the war, payable in dollars. could
only be collected on the basis of the worth Of
Confederate currency as compared with gold, at
the time the contract was made. The Cincinnati
Gcsefte he leading Radical organ of the West
in an article on the subject. says: 'Thesc (Con-
cderatc) notes were illegal but the de fcto
government forced their circ ulaion, and there
fore the parties who contracted in them were in
nocent. Their value was shifting but still they
had sufficiently definite relation 20 coin, so
that il is easy to ascertain their actual value in
gold and silver And this is the measure OF the
judgment. This rule applies completely to
the greenbmcks in case they shall be declared
not a legal tender. is what we have declared
for a long me. 1t robs such decision Of all
its tcrrors. for it gives assurance that no man
shall be made, by any arbitrary shifting of the
measure OF value. to pay more than he agreed to.
Ii provides that in all cases OF contracts in cur
rency which is not lawful money, but which was
made so by the Government Tor the TIM. the
debt shall he al listed by its coin equivalent at
the time


This article of the Examiner announces the
correct doctrine. and precisely what we have
been coutc nding for all the time The Govern
ment stances in the same relation to its creditors
as does Individuals and most assuredly neither
the Eraniiner or any other honest party will
claim more for the bondholder than is granted to
the plow holder. The Government has not a
dollar, but must draw from the tax payer what
il pays to its creditors. Then il Congress has
exceeded its constitutional limits in making
greenbacks legal tenders, The bonds for which
greenbacks oDly were received by the Govern.
ment must be met and paid, if paid in gold or
gold bonds, at the relative value they held to
gold at The date Of the transaction. just as the
balance due on the Georgia farm must be paid
under the decision Of the Supreme Court referred
to.


The position held by the Examiner in the
above article is identcally that OF the HERALD,
now, and in the past. The holder of $50 bonds


is not preferred creditor because his bonds are
payable in legal tenders. or their relative value
in gold at The date OF the purchase of the bond.
There is nothing left in dispute between the Err
dminer and the HERALD. We feel at home on
this debt and legal tender question, and shall
reour TO it again. only however. as vital issue
distinguishing Democracy from mongrelism