Monopolies -- United States; Railroads and state -- United States
Was the making of the notes a legal tender necessary to the carrying on
the war? In other words, was it necessary to the execution of the power
to borrow money? It is not the question whether the issue of notes was
necessary, nor whether any of the financial measures of the government
were necessary. The issuing of the circulation commonly known as
greenbacks was necessary, and was constitutional. They were necessary to
the payment of the army and the navy and to all the purposes for which
the government uses money. The banks had suspended specie payment, and
the government was reduced to the alternative of using their paper or
issuing its own.
Now it is a common error, and in our judgment it was the error of the
opinion of the minority in _Hepburn_ v. _Griswold_, and is the error of
the opinion just read, that considerations pertinent to the issue of
United States notes have been urged in justification of making them a
legal tender. The real question is, Was the making them a legal tender a
necessary means to the execution of the power to borrow money? If the
notes would circulate as well without as with this quality it is idle to
urge the plea of such necessity. But the circulation of the notes was
amply provided for by making them receivable for all national taxes, all
dues to the government, and all loans. This was the provision relied
upon for the purpose by the secretary when the bill was first prepared,
and his reflections since have convinced him that it was sufficient.
Nobody could pay a tax, or any debt, or buy a bond without using these
notes. As the notes, not being immediately redeemable, would undoubtedly
be cheaper than coin, they would be preferred by debtors and purchasers.
They would thus, by the universal law of trade, pass into general
circulation. As long as they were maintained by the government at or
near par value of specie they would be accepted in payment of all dues,
private as well as public. Debtors, as a general rule, would pay in
nothing else unless compelled by suit, and creditors would accept them
as long as they would lose less by acceptance than by suit. In new
transactions, sellers would demand and purchasers would pay the premium
for specie in the prices of commodities. The difference to them, in the
currency, whether of coin or of paper, would be in the fluctuations to
which the latter is subject. So long as notes should not sink so low as
to induce creditors to refuse to receive them because they could not be
said to be in any just sense payments of debts due, a provision for
making them a legal tender would be without effect except to discredit
the currency to which it was applied. The real support of note
circulation not convertible on demand into coin, is receivability for
debts due the government, including specie loans, and limitation of
amount. If the amount is smaller than is needed for the transactions of
the country, and the law allows the use in these transactions of but one
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account