Year: 1870

POSTPoNEMENT OF THE LEGAL TENDER CASES.


WASHINGTON April 11.-Mr Potter of New
York read the Supreme Court this afternoon letter
from James NJ. Carlisle, who is absent from Wash
ngton professional business upon the subject of the
cases Of Denning and Latham against the United States
which were set for argument to-day, and In which he
stated that his associate counsel was suffering from Sc
indsposton. AS further reason why the cases
Generals brief was filed only on saturday last.


The AttOrneyGeneral expressed his surprise at Mr..
Carses absence, that gentleman was present In the
court when the motion made to argue those cases
which still pending, not having been disposed or by
the opinion In the other cases involving the legal tender


ClefJustice Chase remarked that as the principle in
the OF Dennng and Latham affected by the de-
cson pronounced by the Court they were passed over


Associate Justice Nelson made similar remark


The Attorney-General said he could only bow to the


Associate Justice Miller did not understand that the
to which reference was made had been passed over


The ChefJustice observed that it directed by


The Attorney General said he not Of It, as
1t took place before the Oh ms term OF
such understanding He found here those cases stand
ing for argument and thinking was OF Importance to
the public he had made the motion for rearglment.
II the subject involving the consitutionaty OF the legal
tender act to be reargued at ALL the sooner the better
IL would be for all parties because there were at tins
moment great interests pending IN connection with con
in gold or egal tender notes. He had objection under
the circumstances stated by Mr. Potter 70 delay the ar
gument for the convenience of counsel but he desired it
be heard during the present term OF the Court. He
thought any other disposition would be injurious to both
public and private interests Mr. Carlisle, he stated, had
on Saturday withdrawn his brief on the legal tender
question.


Mr.. Potter replied that Mr.. Carlisles engagement
elsewhere prior any order understanding to
the reheang OF the argument In those cases. and beside
the counsel I'm them was Ill. He could not what
Inconvenience would result to the public, f the argi-
should not be heard this year or fifty years hence
Nothing but the abstract question could be heard The
decision already made worked to debtors injustice.
Ninetynne of hundred of the debts contracted eight
years ago had long since been Hqudated. He was at a
loss know how the question was to be settled otherwise
than had been settled by this Court 1t was decided
by the judges who heard the argument; five against
three. Unless OF the judges had changed their
minds he at loss TO know how the question could
otherwise be decided. He reason why argument
should be reOpened.


Associate-Justiee Davis said the only question was
whether there should be continuation OF time. The
having been set for reheartng, three OF them
himself and Justices Strong and Swayneat that end or
the bench would agree that the argument should be
postponed until next Monday, but no longer.


Chase was understood to say that the two
OF DenniDg and Latham was not argued because
the principle they contained argued In the other
similar cases. and had been his duty to make the
nouncement.


After further conversation II formally announced
the argument was postponed until next Monday