Newspapers / The Weekly Raleigh Register … / June 2, 1831, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The Weekly Raleigh Register (Raleigh, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
r VfJ ration of tneir year will be ptf sutnedjwoej its continuance unui vf ; noLtns per aatium; one half in atlyancc '.i.. .i!r ait llie lime if -r nff, or subsequent! v,Riv;nticc of their fTS"h to have the Paper discontinued at the ex. girinjr e, exceeding MPaUliO, fwil ba insevtec! (Anf? tfiC?forR Dollar r nun4 t wenty -five ce..s far each subsequent publication : those o -greater lengUy v the same proportion. If inc number of inssrtions be fu marked on tftem. they wiir be! continue4 until ordered ... r-1iarr.d Rccordintrlvii' -. gill, ; : - V y i either can it be doubted that.lhe plea of non asuop,dt rdlowed j the defendants to draw into question at the trial the va lidly ff t1ft cnsideration .in- which the note was given. Every thing vjhich dis af!irms;the contrnct, every thing which hnws it tu be "void, may be given in ev idence on the general issue, in an action of ..assumpsit. Th$ defendants, .there- foret were at liberty, to question ine. va lidity of. the consideration which'Vas the foundation ol the contract, ami inc. con stitutionality of the law in whtch'it origi nateu fft Have they done or . v ; Hadh'e caue besn tried before a' jury, the regular course woulCthave been to tthe rrq'ifst of a uumber of (jur Subscriber, we nubiisb below, the opimoiji nc a Tirijmivy of die Supreme Court of the iUiiiud Sutcn, '.mrtnrtnnt (Viae of Cmil & OthtTS V. iC Mate ' Mksouri. This1 ca: involves the q lestiow of cbnstituiiony, f to Ihe power pf Stale Governments issiiur la pspt r curren cy to serve as a circuiting mjedium." It was jiuch relied upon in debate, hi the last sti sion of'i ur LegisUtu: ngainjit the Bill for establisbinp a Ciuik of the tate. Mi. Chief Justice MamsAalt. delivered :He opinion of the Court; Justices Thomp Jchnso, and M'liEA dissenting. This i a writ of en or to a judgment entered in the Court cf last' reWt, io he State of .Missouri ; affixing a judg ment obtained by the Statei m one of its kferior Courts-agiinst Hirjim Craig and others, on a promissory note the judgment is in these words : "and fterwanU'nt aCourt,".&ci " the parties ;ame into Court by their A.ttorn?js, and, H'itlier party desiring a Jury, the cause i submitted to the Court : therefore, all aod singular the matters a jd things bein? Ken and heard by tJie Court, it s found lj them, that thc said defendants did as vi me upon themselves, in manner and form, as the plaintiff by her counsel al leged. And the iCourt, also find, that-the smsitlpratinn for which the writing ,de :areil upon ar.d the afsumpsit was made, was for the loan ofjloan office certificates, loaned by the State at her loan . office at Ciariton ; which certificates were issued, ind the loan made in the maaner pointed Hit by an act of the. Legislature of the iaid State! of Missouri, approved the 27th lay of June 1821, "entitled an act for the istablishment of loan offices, and the acts1 imcndatory and supplementary thereto : lad the Court do further ffirid, that the plaintifFhas sustained damages by reason of the non-performance of theVassump tions arid undertakings of them, th said defendants, to- the sum of two h ttiilred and thirty-seven dollars and seventy-nine cents, and do assess her damages to that sum. Therefore it is considered," &c. The first inquiry is into the jurisdic tion-of the Court. . : . .'Die twentyfifth section of the judicial act (leclaf-cjs, that a final "judgment or tlecree'in any suit in the highest Court of law or equity of a State, in which a deci sion in the suit ctuld be hail, where i tfrawn in (juestiorii" 41 tlie validity of a statute, of, or an anthority exercised un der any State, on the ground of their be ing repugnant to theConstitution, trea ties or laws fPthe Unitetl States, and toe decision is in favour of such their validi ty," may be reexamined, and reversed or affirmed in the Supreme Court of the United States?' 3 , To give jurisdiction fo this Court, . .it nuist appear in the retard, l. 'Diat the validity of a statute of the iitatc t)f Mis souri was - drawn in question'; on the ground, of its being repugn ant, to t he Coti stiution. of the United States. That tht decision was.jn favour of jits validity. 1. Tu determine whether the validity 'fa statute of the State Avasdruwn in qnes-iitjj it will be jiroper to inspect the V-eadings in the cause', tas well as the jiient oT the Couri- j i'iie declaration is on; the promissory r.'ti', datel on the 1st ! day of Augvist i 8, promising to pav. tb the Slate of Missttttri, on the lt day of ': November. 18-22, at the loan office in Chariton, the sum of one hundred and ninetyinide dol lars ninety-nine cents, and the two per fnt. per annum, 1he interest accruing on the certificates borrowed from the 1st of October 1821. I his', njote is iohviouslv given for cerlificates leaned -tinder the act, for the esfabTishVnebt of loan ofQ. move the Court to instruct the iury that the act of assembly, Jin pursuance of j upon it: notmng which the note was given, was r?pugrrant j than that. the proi to the Constitution of the United States ; ami to except to the chare of the judges, if in favour of itn validity : or a special 'mlict might have been found by the ju ry, Mating the act of assembly the exe cution of the note iq pay'tnent of certifi cates loaned in pursuance of that act; and referring its validity to th Court. The one course or the Other would have shown that the valKUty-of the act of as sembly was drawn htoi question on the grounw oi irs repiir.r.tjcy to ine Vvonii.u f.on ; and t'oat i'e decision of the Court was in favour of its validity. Hut the one course or the other, v Hnld have re quired both a Court and jury. Neither con'd be pursued where the office of the jury was perftrmed by the Court. In ucn a case, tne obvious substitute tor an instruction to the Jufv, or a spetial ver dict, is a statement by the Court of the points in controversy, on which its judg ment is founded.' This may not be the usual mode idf proceeding; but it is an ob vious mode ;. and if the Court of the S'af e has adapted ir, tliis Court cannot give up substance for form. The arguments of counsel cannot b;i spread on the 'record. J he 'points urgeii in argument cannot appear, liut the mo tives stated by the -'court: ori the record for its judgment, aiid which form a part of the judgment itself, must be consider- as .-t does' not state' in'express terms that this point was inade, it has been contend ed that this court cannot assume the fact that it was mnds'or determined in the tri bunal 'of the State.1 - Tlie record shows; distinctly that' this pamtj existed, and that no other did ex ist ; the special statement of facts made by the court as exhibiting the foundation of its judgment contains this poinraud tio other. The Record shovVs clearly that the cause did depend, -and must depend, oh tliis point alone, if iii such a, case, he mere omission of the court of Missouri, tosav,. ia terms, that,the(act of the Le gislature was constitutional, withdraws that point from the cause, or must close the judicial eves of the appellate tribtmal can be more obvious, provisions of the constitu- tion;-and of an act of donress. may be always evaded : and ;nay be often, as we think they would, be in this case, uninten tionally 'defeated , But this question has frequently occur red : and ha, wc think,, been frequently decided in this court. Smith vs. The State of Maryland, 6 Cranch. 286. Mar tin vs. Hunter's Lessee, l.-Wocat. 355. Miller vs. Nicholls, 4 AVHeat. 311. Williams vs. 7 orris, 12 Wheat. 117. Wilson and others v. The Black Bird Creek Marsh Company, 2 Peters, 245, and Harris vs. ilennte in this term ; are all. wcthink. exnrcsslvin noint. Thsre has been perfect uniformity in the con- -i be jointly and, severally bound for trie payment of the amoynt so loaned, "v. ih interest thereon," &c - Section twenty-third. 4' Tlat the general assembly shall, as soon as may be, cause the salt snrinis and lands at tached thereto,, given by Congress to t!Jis State', to be leased out, and it shall ah ways be the ..fundamental -.condition la such leases, $hat the lessee or lessees shall receive the certijicates hereby rp quired to be issued, in payment for salt, at a price hot exceeding that which miy be prescribed by raw : and all the pro -a- ! !.' - . . . i ceexis ot the said salt springs, tne interdst accruing to the Mate, and a!l estates. pur chased by officers of the said several oifi ces under the provisions of '.'us act, ard all the debts now due or he. eafter to be due ta this State : are hereby nledpred and cqrfstituted a. fund for the redemption of the certificates hereby required to be : i ii . i . . i i issueti, anu uie laiin or me state is Here by also pledged for the same purpose.'.; auction twenty-tourtii.- 44 I hat tt shall ' be the uuty of trie said auditor. and treas urer to withdraw annually from circula tion, oncrtenth part of the certificates which are hereby required to be is sued. :' ! The clause in the constitution which this- act is supposed to violate is in thtlse words : "No State shall'! 44 emit hillof (of credit, uot to billa of a particular dear creuir. " j What is a bill of credit ? What u'.d the constitution mean to forbid ? ! in this character ; ana directs thevrredit which hntl H:ph Vmifftl v h -,. l audjtar and treasurer to withdraw. tannu-! tj&$ i figrd tender iii pa vmentf dfoj all y,0!)e-tenth of them from circulation. Vet. they werq.in every seVrse Of the wortl Had thcy; been tarme.'l 4Jiils of credit,'? i bills of credit, net vionj, to ihat ttiife : and II I And can this make any real tli.Terence? Is the jiropositipn to be inaintai?ed, that the constitution meant to prohibit names and not things ? That a very important act, big'whh great and ruinous mischief, wliich is expressly forbidden by words most aniirkiQiiattffoe it3 description; may oe ncnormeu tne substitution oi Uo a name ? inth tBut-uP -n one of its mosEHiSSriaftl may. be onenl r .evatfeB.icrInEa new. nirnetoi an oiu inirg r-tj.ccainiut inins. su. We thi hk the ceftlfifcates emitted under, the authority of this act, are' as en'tirvly bills of credit, as if, they had been so de nominated, iii the "act Uaclf. But it is contended, thsit' tlinugh these certificates should be deeiaed bills of crcrdit, according to the common accepta tion of the. terrfi, they are not so in the sense of the constitution ; because,, they. nre not mane a legal tender. The" constitution itself furnishes stri'ction given bv this court to the twen ty-fifth section of the judicial act. That construction is, that it is not necessa ry to state, in term?, on the record, that the constitution or a treaty or law of the United States has been drawn in ques tion or the validity of a State law. on the ground of its repugnancy to the constitu tion. It is suflicient if the record -shows that the constitution, or a treaty or law of the United Suites must have beeiKCon ftrued, or that',lhc constitutionality of a State hiw vnuat have been questioned : and the decision has been in favour of the party claiming under such law. We think, then,, that the, facts stated on the record presented the question of In its enlarged, and perhaps its literal sense, the term 44 bill of credit" may comprehend any instrument bv whiclj a State engages to nav money- at a future no countenance to this distinction. The .pro hibition is general. It extends to all bills turuisroes anviust arumetit iu faVouf of that restricted ctjpstv.ac Tioiyl Iie const itutlnr;,' hv which tho coultsel for the defendant i fi e rrtjr cwracnt!-i.!S' .. .;Tfe ce.rtific'atea for which 'this note wai given, belr.x in truth 4 biils of . credit" in me sense oi tne constitution, we are Droitrt ' J ' to tne inquiry r . , - Ki j Hif- Is the note valid of whfch they forni the ' ! T' : 5 1 I . ralid of vrhfc.Ii they form the consideration? j ,-. ..' , f (t, has been loog'seftied, that a prqinis.e'": jifflde incrinsideratittii of an act .wii?cli torludeh by law i void. It will not bV questioned, 4hat an act forbiiltlen & the' constitutioiiof the United States, w:ti;h4 v the sunre e la vr, iagainst law. Now tie con'stifutuMi forbids It Slate to 4emit bill o'r'rredit.l'nic loan of?thee certificates' i.i the very act whirh is frrbidden- It H nottlie making of them while they Jie in the loan offices ; but the issuing of them-) , the putting them id to circulation, whicli; is me aci oi emrss;ou : tne acr.tnal is lor- f yt) bidden by the constitutiortfShe consrd eration , it: - 9 ed a.H exhibiting the points to whicli those j repugnancy between the constitution of me vjiniuu eiaits ami wit. at vi :uiuuii to the court for its decision. If it wis arguments 'were directed, and the judg nient as showing the decision of the court upon those points. There was no jury to fiod the facts and refer. the lasv to the court j but if thecourt, which was sub stituted for the-jury, has found the facts on which its judgment wa-jrendered ; its finding mast be equivalent to the finding of a jury. Has the court, then, substi, totingMtself for a jury, jp!aced facts upon the record, which, connected with the pleading", show that the act. in pursuance of which this note was executed was drawn into question, oh the ground of its repugnancy to .the Constitution f After finding that the defendants did assume uno.t themselves, tScc. the court proceeds to find that the consideration for which -the wriiing declared upon and the assumpsit was made, was the loan of loan office certificates loaned b) the State ces., That act directs that loans on personal f.eciu ities shalr be made of sums less than two hundred dollar1. This note hir one hundred and ninety-nine do't lar icty-nme cents. ; Theact directs thatthc rtificates 'issued by the Stab S'.all c:ivry two per cent; interest from ti; vale, w!iic!nleri,st shall be calculated n tlic amount of the oUn. The, note rromises to repay the sum, with the two ler cent interest;accrumg n the certifi cates borrowed, from the 1st dav of Oc i ;!!,,0f1f21-. It cannot be doubted that I v'Ci!'c!'.ition is on a onto "iven in pur ;, - ui ii. uct which1 has Deco" men nt her loan ofT'ce at Chariton : which cer tifi"ates were issued aiid the loan made. in the manner pointed out by an act of the Legislature of the said State of Mis ouri, approved the 2 0.1 Jane 1821, en titled." &lc. ' Why did not the court stop immcdia.te ly after the usu.v firnling that the defen dan'tS'assuioe upon themselves? 'Why proceed to fini that the note was givjen tor loan office certificates issued under the act contended to be .unconstitutional, and loaned in pursuance of that act ; if the matter thus found wa irrelevant to the qustion they were to decide r Suppose the statement made by the court to bs contained in the verdict of a j.nrv which concludes . with referring to tiie court the valid v of (he note thus ta- ken in pursuance of the act ; would not such a verdict bring the coustitntionalitv of the -act, as well as its construction, . di rectly before the court r Would : such a verdict would find that the consideration of the note was loan of fice certificates, issued and loaned in the mui.ner prescribed . by the act. What could be referred to the court by such a verdict, but the obligation of the law ? Itrfinds that the certificates for which the note was given, were issued in pursuance of, the act, ' and that, the j contract was made in . Conformity vvitjh. it. "I Admit the obligation of the act, and the verdict is" for the plaintiff r deny its obligation, ami the verdict is for the; defendant On what ground can it's obligation be con tested, but its repugnancy -to the consti tution of the United States-? No other is su22;ested. At any rate,' it is open to that objection. If'it'bc- hju truth repug nant to the constitituiion of the United States, that repugnancy might have '-biieii urgetl ry the Stat, and may consequent ly be urged in this coort ; rsince it is pre sented by the' tacts nil the Ireconh which I we re found by the court that tried the It is impossible to doubt that, in. point presented, we arc to inquire, . 2. Was the decision of the court in fa vour of its validity ? The judgment in favour of the plaintiff is a decision m favour of the, validity ol the contract, and consfquently of the va lidity of the law by the authority of which the contract was made. The case is, we think, within the twenty-fifth section of the judicial act, and consequently within t!c jurisdiction of this court. r This bridgs us to the great, question in the cause : Is the act ofthe Legislature of Missouri repugnant to the constitution of the United States ? The counsel for the plaintiffs in error maintain, that it is repugnant to the con stitution, because its object is the omis sion of bills of credit contrary to the ex press prohibition contained in the tenth section of the first article. !v The act under the authority of which the certificates loaned to the plaintiffs ?n error were issued, was pasf'd cn the 25th of June 1821, and is en tilled 44 an act fr the establishment f lou pflices." The provisions that are material to the pre sent inquiry, are comprehended in the third, thirteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth. twenty-third and twenty-fourth sections ofthe net, which are in these words : Section the third enacts: 44 that the auditor of public accounts and treasurer, under the direction of the governor, shall, and they are hereby required to- issue certificates, signed by the said auditor and treasurer, to the amount of two hun dred thousand dollars, of denominations not exceeding ten dollars, nor less than fifty cents (to bear such device as they 1 it.. x ' it. r.ll: We think ijiliemuM J:1n.me imy- I v. I 4 k mw- t n inf t 1 Imc rortitiritn chill IIII IUI Ilia KXJ (Ml A IHD ul llllVULV OUUU day: thus including a certificate given for money borrowed. Rut the language oi the constitution itself, anl the niiscliief to be prevented, which ,wcfcn vfi vim the history of our country, equally limit the interpretation ot the "terms. The word 4k emit," is never employed in describing those contracts bv which a Statb frnds it self to pay money at a future dfty for Ser vices actually received, or for money-borrowed for present use ; nor are instru ments executed for such purposes,; in common language, denominated bills of credit." To k4 emit bill of credit," con veys to the mind the idea of issuing pa per i uteri ded to circulate through the com munity for ilfc ordinary purposes, as pio ney, which paper is reedeemable at a fu ture day. This is the sense in which? the terms have been always understood. ' At a very early period ot our colonial history, the attempt to supply the Want of the precious metals by a paper medium was made to a considerable extent and the bills emitted for this purpose Have been frequently denominated bills of cre dit. During the war of ourlrevolution, we were driven to this expedient ; jand necessity compelled us to use it to a most fearful extent. The term has acquired an appropriate meaning ;-and . 44 bilts of credit" signify a paper medium, intended to circulate between individuals, and be tween government and individuals for the ordinary purposes of society Such a mediuih has been always liable tocon siderable fluctuation. Its value !is jcon tinually changing; and these changes, often great and sudden, expose individu als to immense loss; are the sources of ruinous sacculations, and de9trov all con fidence between man njid man To. cut up. this mischief by the roots, a mischief which was felt through the U. States, and which deeply affected the interest? !&nd prosperity oi an ; the people aeciarea in cription. that tribunal must be bold in-? deed, which, without 'the aiil of othcjLex planatory word. could venture, on this construction, ft is the less admissible in this case, because the same clause of theconstitution contains asubstantive pro hibition to the enactment of tender laws. The constitution, therefore, considers the emission of bills of jcredit,.,atid the enact ment of tender laws, as distinct opera tions, independent of each other, which may be sepantely performed. Both are ftirbidden. To sustain the one. because it is not ajso the other ; to say that bills of credit may be emitted, if they be not made a tender m payment ot debts ; is ia effect, to expunge that distinct inde pendent prohibition, and to read the lause as if it had been, entirely omitted W e are not at liberty to -do this. The history of paper money has been referred to, for the purpose of showing that its great mischief consists in being made a lender : and that therefore the general words of the constitution may be restrained to a particular intent. of "c red which constitute the ''con side rations the act of emitting bill of ' creifit in tht mode prescribed by the law of Missopn which act is. prohibited by the s const itrf' tion of the Utiitel States., i . Cases which we cannot distinguish from his in j.Vinciple, have beeib decided in': State courts of -great respectability ; and in thisf court, fn the case of the Spring field Rank' vs.' Merrick et af." 14 Mae. Rep. 322, a note was made payable" iii certain hills, (lie leaning or nesotiatinsr ot -.which was prohibited by-statute," in flicting a penalty for its violation.- The lote was held to be void. Had (his rudt been made in consideration 'of these bills, instead 6f being made payable in them, if would not have been less repugnant to the statute ; and would consequently have been equally void. ; , liiHontc?. Knickerbocker 5 Johiiii Rep. 327, it was decided that an agree ment for the sale of ticket in a lottery, not autlioristd by the Legislature of the State, although instituted under the au' i of this note, is the eimisiofvof bills, f "X- I' lit by the Sftt&pihtjZ&ctf's1 4 constitutes the ''consideration lis i r "-''i't .Vf ,.';i;r,.v t,:i!. ..r-i.f.Y; ir.vw . ' c i-,: ithority ot the government of anothe:' - T . . a Y as it evenrue, that the evils ot pi-f St ate. is contrary to M.p AirrV r, i per money resulted solely from the qual- f thl. !av;. a;l(l ;voiJ Thc co'ns;tie,raii.:ili it v- ofiU being made a tende,fv this court would not teel itselt authbriseato 'disre gard the plain meaning of words, ia search of a conjectural intent to which apJ.Yo'rk, abiroml with ortseo theTsamts Ion whicli the agreement Was founded be ing d legal, the agreement was void- The books bold' of Massachusetts aiAr'Newi of fact, - the constitutionality oftthe act under which the. certificates -"were issued that formed the considerafioh of ijthis bote, constituted thc only real question made by the parties, and tire only real question decided by the courtvUlixrt the record i to be inspected witrvi judicial cyesfV and, their constitution, that no State should emit bills of credit. If the prohibition means any thing, if the words: at t no? empty sounds, it must comprehend the emission of a paper medibn bv a State uoveriiiiieiu, 101 u.c juqiwc yi vuyiuiuu circulation. j What is the character of the -certificates issued by authority of the act vnder consideration ?. "What oifice are they to perform ? Certificates signed by thejaudi tor and treasurer of the State, are to be issued bv those officers to the amount of be receivable at the treasury, or any of two liundred thousand dollars, of dehom- the loan offices ofthe State of Missouri, in the discharge of taxes of debts due to the State, for the sum of 8 with interest for the same, at the rate of two per centum per annum from this date, the day of 182 ." The thirteenth section declares : "that the certificates of the said loan office shall be receivable at the treasury of the State, and by all tax gatherers and other public officers, in payment of taxes or other mo-1 neys now due to the Mate .or to any couni ty or town therein, and the said certin-; cates shall also be received by ali officersy civil and military in me state, anu, in me discharge of salaries and fees of office." .The. fifteenth section provides : 'that the commissioners of the said loan ofnees shall haye poyyer,ta make loans of the certificates, hixitizens of, thi , State, re sTdihg within iheir lespeciive districs on-lyv-and in each district a f t portion shall bY loaned to the citizens of each county therein, .according to the number there of." &c. ' Section sixteenth. "That the said commissioners of each of the said offices are further authorised to make- loaQs on personal securities by theifi deemed good and sufficient, fur sums less, than two hundred dollars ; whicn securities ' a: shall not conducted by the language of;;aiy pari, oi u:r. lusirumeiK ivii w.e UO xlioi think that the history of our ;jcbtintry nroves either, that being made ;a tender in payment of debts, is an essential qual- ity ohbuls ot credit; or the only nnschiet resulting rom them. It may, indeed, be the most pernicious ; but that will not authorise a court to convert a generatrja to a parti e alar prohibition' We learn from Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts, vol. 1, p. 402 that bills of, credit were emitted for the first time in that coloar in 1G90. An army returning unexpectedly from an exped". tion against Canada, which had proved As disastrous as tne pian was magmneenti found the government totally unprepared to meet their claims. Bills of credit were resorted to, for rliet from thi9 embar rassment. They do not appear to have been made a tender : but they were not on that account the less bills of credit, nor were they absolutely harmless. The emisssion. however, not being considera ble, and the bills hd'm soon redeemed,, ihe experiment would have been produc tive jf not much 'mischief, had it not been followed by repeated emissions to amuph larger amount. The subsequent history of Massachusetts abounds with proof of the evils with which paper money is. fraught, whether it be or be not a leal tender. Paper money was also issued in other colonics, both in thenorUi r rid .south; and whethe'i made, a tender or not, " was pro d'jctivle! of evils in prnportion to the quan tity cipitted. In the warvhich commenc ed in America ia 1755tVifginia issued pa per money at severaVle'ions, under the appellation of treasuWnoteUr. T'his wa maoe a lenuer. remissions were aiter wards made in T769, TtfJll, and ia 1773. These were not macfe a lender; but tliev circulated together ; were equal lv bills of credit ; and were productive of the satrre effects. In 175 a 'conside rable emission, was madeTor the purpose's of the war. The bills were declared to be current,' but Mere nob made a tender. In 1776,' an atiditidUal emfsston was made, and the bills were tfeclared to he a tender. The bills of .1775 r and 17G circulated together ; were equally bil's of credit; and were .productive of ;ithe same consequences. . . ? Congress emitted bills of credit to a large amount:; and-did not perhaps could not, make a legal lender. Thi? potyer resided in the States. In May 1777 tlie Legislature of Virginia passed an act" for :he first time making ihe bills cf credit issued under the authority of Congress a tender so far as to extinguish interest.- It was not until March 1781 that Virgin- fect.,'L'hcy turn urjWi the Question whe- ther the pariicular case is, within '.the? principle, not on the principle Kself.' Xi has never been doubted, that a note given on a consideration which is prohibited by : law, is void. ITad the issuing or circula tion of Jiruficaties of this, or of any I other description been prohibited by a statute of Missouri, could a suit havts been' sustained in 4 he courts of that Statev'i on a note given in consideration of tluv pri.cert'ificuteii'? If it could not, arew eirohibitiorts of the cimstitution ti be hefif tess sacreif tiian those of a State' law ' . i iiiations not exceeding ten dollars;, nor less than fifty cents. The paper ;mj'ports on its face to be receivable at the treasu ry, or at any loan office of the State of Missouri, in jdjs charge of taxes or i debts due to the sfafe4 : 7 i i The law makes them receivable in dis charge of all tales, or debts the to the State, or any Couiity or town therein ; and of all salaries and fees of office, to all )flicers civil and military witjiin the Stale ': and for salt sold by the lessees, of the public salt works. It also pledges the faith and funds of the State fur their redemption. .: " ' I jjlt seems impossible to doubt thej inten tion of the Legislature in passing this act," or to mistake the character of these cer tificates, or Ihe office they we're tp per form. The denominations o. the bills, from ten dollars to fifty cents, fittcH them for the purpose of ordinary circulation ; and their reception ii payment of taxes, and debts to the -government and to Cor porations, and oisalaries ariS fees, would give, the in currency. They were, to be pui into circulation ; that is, eiftitted by tlie government, tin addition to all these evidences of an intention to make these certificate!!, the oHnary circulating medi- tt)nof the country the- lavyspeuks ofjia fsel as art mgiD- all the bil.U ot)t)( the impendence -and Hbcitv j It had beo determined independently of the acts of Congrvsn on that Subject' that? sailing under the licefrse ofj an eueT my is illegal. . Patton vs. Nicholson, Wheat. 204i was a suit brought in one ot the cou i js of this district on a not given' 1 try Nicholson to iattoi!, both citieus of Che tinited Mates, for a British f1ehscv The i Unih.d States were therl at, war with Great Britain j but the license was pro cured uithbutan infercourae with thft enemy. VThe judgment of thev circuit court vas in favour of tiie defendant and the-plaintiff sued out a" vfrri t of error. 'Hie counsel lor the defendant in crr.ir was stopped, the Court declaring that: ihe use of a license frtxn the enemy being unlawful, offe citizen had no right to pur chase from otsell to another such a li pi ue, to be n-iydjoTi board an . AmciicaJV Vea-el. The consideration for which tlsf Me was given being unlawful, it follo-A' ed of cours that the note was'v.ohf; i A majority of the court feels sonHtrainr ? to say that the consideration on W'hiclii "the note in this csk? was given, is aainsit the highest law of the land, and tiiat the note ft Keif is njterSy void. In renil'iB'j judgmeut Vr the plaintiff, the court for i the Suite of Missouri decided in favour of the Valithfy. oi' a law which is rpu uant tohe coiiRtitutum of Ihe U. States . In tUe'afgumenh we have been remind ed by one side of the lignity of a sove reign Mate; of the humiliation of her sub nnitting herself to this tribunal ; of the. dangers which may result from .Inflicting a wound that digwity : by the othef Vf ihe shil superior dignity of the pcopfa of ihe United States ; who have .pokrii r" their wif j. in terms which we exunot uhfc -understand. J ) . To these admonitions, we can onlr an wor :' that if the exercise of , that Juris diction Wiiich has been imposed tipoti us by the contitatioii and hiv of the Uniteil Stales, shall be calculated ;to" bring-o' tlios dftogpis which have ben indicated or if it bhathte indispensable to ttu prf- servalton ot the union, and consequcntfy iu ' r " h k S ' . H 1 1 -, -:lr 1 p. 1 ii 45" 1 7 1 T I h 1- f lj
The Weekly Raleigh Register (Raleigh, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
June 2, 1831, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75