Year: 1870

WASHINGTON, February 7.-The
opinion delivered to- day by Chief
Justice Chase on the legal tender
question Is very long, and after an
able review of tho case, it says: No
one questions the general constL1u-
tionality, and not very many, perhaps.
the general expediency Of legislation
by which currency notes have been
authorized in recent years. The
doubt is as to the power to deelsre a
particular class of these notes to be
legal tender In payment Of pre.exist-
ing debts only. The ground upon
which this power is asserted is
not that the issue Of notes was
not an appropriate and prudently
adopted means for carrying on
the war, for that is admitted: but
that making of them legal tender to
the extent mentioned was such a
means. Now we have seen that all
notes issued there, not declared as
legal tender at all, constitute very
large proportion and that they ciTeu
lated freely without discount. It
may be said that their equality in cir
culation and credit was due to the
provision made by law for the re-
demption of this paper In legal tender
notes, but this provision, if at all
useful in this respect, was OF trlflng
importance compared with that which
made them receivable for Govern
ment dues. All modern history testi-
fies that in time of war, especially
when taxes are augmented, large
loans negotiated and heavy disburse-
ments made, notes issued by the
authority of the Goverpment and
made receivable for dues to the Gov
eminent always obtain at first
ready circulation, and even when
not redeemable by coin on demand,
are as little, and unusually less sub
ject to depreciation than any other
notes, for the redemption of which
no better provision is made, and the
history Of legislation under considera-
ton is that it was upon this quality
of legal tenders that the reliance of
the circulation was originally placed
for receivability. The clause appears
TO have been in the original draft of
the bill in which the legal tender
clause seems to have been introduced
at the latter stage of its progress.
These facts certainly are not without
weight, as the evideRce that all use
full purposes of the notes would have
been fully answered without making
them legal tender for pre- existing
debts.


1t is denied by eminent writer's that
the quality Of legal tenders adds any
thing to the credit or usefulness of
the Government notes. They insist,
on the contrary, that it impairs both.
However this may be, it must be re-
membered that it is the means Of an
end to be obtained by the action of
the Government; that implied the
power of making notes legal tender
is claimed under the COnstitu-
ton. Now, how far is the Govern
ment benefited by this means? Ger
tainly it cannot obtain new supplies
or services at a cheaper rate, for no
one will take notes for more than they
are worth at the time of the new cen
trail price. They will rise in the ratio OF
depreciation, and this is all that could
happen if the notes were not made
legal tender; but it may be said that
the depreciation will be less to him
who takes them from the Govern
ment, If the Government will pledge
to him its power to compel his credit
ors to receive them at par in payment.
This Is, as we have seen, by no means
certain, If the quantity issued be ex


cessive and redemption uncertain and
remote. Great depreciation will take
place if, on the other hand, the guam
tity is only adequate to the demands
of business and confidence iu early
redemption is strong. The notes will
circulate freely whether made legal
tender or not; but if it be admitted
that the same increase of availability
is derived from making the notes
legal tender under existing contracts,
it by no means follows that
any appreciable advantage is gained


by compelling creditors to receive
them In satisfaction of pre- existing
debts; and there is abundant evidence


that whatever benefit is possible from


that compulsion to some individuals


weighed by the losses of property, de-


rangement of business, fluctuations


of currency and values, and increase


of prices to the people and Govern


ment, and long train Of evils which
flow from the use of an irredeemable
paper currency. 1t is true that these
evils are not to be attributed alto


gether to making it legal tender, but


this increase of these evils certainly


widens their interest and protracts


their continuance. We are unable to


persuade ourselves that an expert


ence Of this sort is an appropriate and


plainly adopted means for the execu-


ton of power to declare and carry on


war. IF it adds nothing to the utility


of the notes, it cannot be upheld
as a means to end in the fur


therance OF which the notes are


issued: nor can it on judge


ment be upheld as such, if, while


facilitating in some degree the circu-
Iation notes, it debases and Injuries


the currency in it's proper use to a


much greater degree; and these con


siderations seem to us equally appll-


cable to power to regulate commerce


and to borrow money. Both powers


necessarily involve the use of money


by the people and by the Government,
but neither, as we think, carries With


it an appropriated and plainly adopt
ed means to It's exercise and power


of making circulating notes legal


tender in payment of pre-existing
/ debts. But there is another view
which seems to US decisive.


To whatever express power the i'm
| piled power In question may be re-
| ferred, In the words stated by Chief


Justice Marshall, words appropriate,


plainly adapted, really calculated.
are qualified By the limitation that