ten dollars, nor less than fifty cents. Under such circumstances, it was impossible to doubt their real character and object, as a paper currency. They were to be emitted by the government; and they were to be gradually withdrawn from circulation by an annual withdrawal of ten percent. It was wholly unnecessary, that they should be declared to be a legal tender. Indeed, so far as regarded the fees and salaries of public officers, they were so.[1] The minority were of a different opinion, upon various grounds. One was, that they were properly to be deemed a loan by the state, and not designed to be a circulating currency, and not declared to be so by the act. Another was, that they bore on their face an interest, and for that reason varied in value every moment of their existence, which disqualified them for the uses and purposes of a circulating medium. Another was, that all the bills of credit of the revolution contained a promise to pay, which these certificates did not, but were merely redeemable in discharge of taxes, &c. Another was, that they were not issued upon the mere credit of the state; but funds were pledged for their redemption. Another was, that they were not declared to be a legal tender. Another was, that their circulation was not enforced by statutory provisions. No creditor was under any obligation to receive them. In their nature and character, they were not calculated to produce any of the evils, which the paper money issued in the revolution did, and which the constitution intended to guard against.[2]
Page:Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1st ed, 1833, vol III).djvu/243
CH. XXXIII.]
PROHIBITIONS—BILLS OF CREDIT.
235
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Joseph_Story%2C_Commentaries_on_the_Constitution_of_the_United_States_%281st_ed%2C_1833%2C_vol_III%29.djvu/page243-1024px-Joseph_Story%2C_Commentaries_on_the_Constitution_of_the_United_States_%281st_ed%2C_1833%2C_vol_III%29.djvu.jpg)