COXGR1> 



319 



tion for the issue of demand notes, said : " The 

 proposition is a new one. No precedent can be 

 urged in its favor ; no suggestion of the exist- 

 ence of such a power can be found in the legis- 

 lative history of the country; and I submit to 

 my colleague, as a lawyer, the proposition that 

 this amounts to affirmative authority of the 

 highest kind against it. Had such a power 

 lurked in the Constitution, as construed by 

 those who ordained and administered it, we 

 should find it so recorded. The occasion for 

 resorting to it, or at least referring to it, has, 

 we know, repeatedly arisen ; and had such a 

 power existed, it would have been recognized 

 and acted on. It is hardly too much to say. 

 therefore, that the uniform and universal judg- 

 ment of statesmen, jurists, and lawyers has de- 

 nied the constitutional right of Congress to 

 make paper a legal tender for debts to any ex- 

 tent whatever. But more is claimed here than, 

 the right to create a legal tender heretofore un- 

 known. The provision is not confined to trans- 

 actions in juturo, but is retroactive in its scope. 

 It reaches back and strikes at every existing 

 pecuniary obligation. This was well put by 

 the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Pendleton), 

 and I concur with him, that substituting any- 

 thing for gold and silver in payment of debts, 

 and still more of precedent debts, is of very 

 doubtful constitutionality. But, in looking at 

 the Federal Constitution, the question is : has 

 the power been given ; is it there ? Can you 

 put your finger upon it among the grants of the 

 Constitution ? If not, if it is not there at all, 

 you have not the power, and there is an end of 

 the whole matter.'' 



Mr. Bingham, of Ohio, took the position that 

 Congress had the power to declare what should 

 be a legal tender, and said : 



" In the first place, the Constitution has ex- 

 pressly provided that Congress shall have pow- 

 er to regulate commerce with all foreign na- 

 tions, among the several States, and with the 

 Indian tribes. This general provision of the 

 Constitution has frequently undergone inter- 

 pretation in our Supreme Court, and the effect of 

 this language has been matter of deliberate con- 

 sideration with every man who has ventured to 

 issue a treatise upon the Constitution of the 

 Whoever takes the pains to 

 look into either of these authorities the de- 

 cisions of the Supreme Court or the writers 

 upon the true construction of the Constitution 

 will discover that they all agree in this, that 

 this power to regulate commerce includes the 

 exercise of all powers necessary to the exist- 

 ence of commerce among the "several States, 

 and extends even to its prohibition, when the 

 public necessities require it. This, I undertake 

 to say, is matter of agreement among all who 

 have written upon the construction of the Con- 

 stitution, and is substantially the ruling of the 

 Supreme Court. Sir, if there were no limit in 

 the Constitution upon this general power of 

 Congress to regulate commerce, I would say 

 at once that the Congress of the United > 



might make anything money which it pleased. 

 But there are certain limitations in the Con- 

 stitution. Money has a twofold office. It de- 

 termines the standard of value on the one hand, 

 and it discharges obligations on the other. 

 There is a limitation, and I am free to admit it. 

 That brings me to the very pith and marrow 

 of this debate. 



What is that limitation ? That is the im- 

 portant point. I desired to-day to ask the at- 

 tention of my excellent friend from Vermont 

 (Mr. Morrill) to the question whether the 

 Constitution of the United States has declared 

 what shall be a legal tender. He did not find 

 it convenient to yield to me for that inquiry. 

 I stand here to assert that the Constitution 

 of the United States has nowhere declared 

 what shall be a legal tender. I stand here to 

 assert further, that nothing has ever been made 

 a legal tender in the United States at any 

 time, in discharge of private obligations, or of 

 public obligations, or of universal application 

 in States and Territories alike, except that 

 which was made so by act of Congress. Your 

 Constitution^ I repeat, never made gold and 

 silver a legal 'tender. It never made anything 

 a legal tender in the discharge of debts. The 

 Constitution simply conferred the power on 

 Congress by its general grants of power to de- 

 clare by law what shall be a legal tender. 

 Gold and silver and copper, if I recollect aright 

 and if I am wrong I hope the venerable 

 chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means 

 will correct me have been all made alike legal 

 tenders, at one time or other, by act of Con- 

 gress." 



Mr. Morrill, of Vermont, next rose and said : 

 " I ask my friend from Ohio to point out as 

 many words giving Congress the power to 

 make paper money a legal tender. In relation 

 to foreign coin, everybody who made a con- 

 tract did so with his eyes open to the fact that 

 Congress might make a change in regard to 

 that matter. But when it comes to making 

 paper money a legal tender, there is not a word 

 in the Constitution about it. v 



Mr. Bingham, of Ohio, immediately replied : 

 " Says the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Mor- 

 rill), ' I ask my friend from Ohio to point out 

 as many words giving Congress power to make 

 paper money a legal tender.' 



" Sir, the gentleman's question is answered 

 by asking another of him : Point out the words 

 in the Constitution giving to Congress the power 

 to make gold or silver coin, either foreign or 

 domestic, a legal tender. There are no such 

 words. The gentleman seems to infer, because 

 Congress is expressly authorized ' to regulate 

 the value of foreign coin,' it is therefore in 

 words authorized to declare foreign coin a legal 

 tender. Such a conclusion is by no means self- 

 evident. The Constitution declares that no 

 State shall make anything but gold and silver 

 coin a tender in payment of debts.' Xo one 

 doubts, I presume, that any State of the Union 

 may make the legalized gold and silver coin of 



