Bonds of American corporations, payable in money of the United
States or in fixed amounts of foreign currencies, which originally
were sold in this country to bankers, but are now held by foreign
corporations which purchased them abroad after the effective date
of the Joint Resolution of June 5, 1933, and elected to demand
payment in foreign currencies,
held subject to the Joint
Resolution and payable dollar for dollar in United States legal
tender. So decided upon the authority of the case last
preceding.
279 N.Y. 495, 790; 18 N.E.2d 673; 19 N.E.2d 89, reversed.
Certiorari, 305 U.S. 594, to review judgments, entered on
remittitur from the Court of Appeals of the New York, reversing
judgments of the Supreme Court, Appellate Division. Both suits were
brought to collect interest coupons from bonds of an American
corporation payable alternatively in dollars or in fixed amounts of
certain foreign currencies. In the first case, judgment was
rendered by the New York Supreme Court, Special Term, for the
exchange value of Swiss francs, and was reversed by the Appellate
Division. In the second case, judgment at Special Term held against
the right to recover exchange value of Dutch guilders, and was
affirmed by the Appellate Division. For opinion at Special Term in
the first case,
see 254 App.Div. 839; 164 Misc. 498; 299
N.Y.S. 862.
Page 307 U. S. 266
MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
As did Nos. 384 and 495, this day decided,
ante, p.
307 U. S. 247,
these cases involve efforts to enforce foreign currency provisions
of bond obligations payable in money of the United States and
optional fixed amounts of foreign currencies. The obligations are
essentially similar to those in Nos. 384 and 495, but differ in two
respects: (1) the bonds, originally sold in this country to a group
of bankers, [
Footnote 1] were
offered by that group not only in this country, but also abroad,
and (2) the present holders are foreign corporations, some of whose
bonds were bought in foreign countries. These distinctions do not
remove
Page 307 U. S. 267
foreign holders from the operation of the Joint Resolution of
June 5, 1933.
Respondents did not purchase their bonds or elect to demand
payment in foreign currency until after the effective date of the
Resolution. The court below held the Resolution was not applicable.
[
Footnote 2]
It is respondents' contention that their bonds represent a form
of private international obligation, in no wise subject to the laws
of the United States. However, they seek to enforce that obligation
in this country, and Congress has, as it constitutionally may,
provided that multiple currency provisions of dollar obligations
are against public policy here, and thus, unenforceable. The
Constitution provides
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which
shall be made in Pursuance thereof, and all Treaties made, or which
shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be
the supreme Law of the Land, and the Judges in every State shall be
bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State
to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Courts in this country, State and Federal, can no longer enforce
the contractual provisions which respondents have proceeded on,
irrespective of their place of making.
In the absence of any claim of international rights based upon
the treaty provision of the Constitution, it is enough that
respondents' bonds are "obligations payable in the money of the
United States," as we have this day held.
Under the governing principles announced in Nos. 384 and 495,
the multiple currency provisions of respondents' bonds are within
the operation of the Resolution, and their coupons are
dischargeable dollar for dollar in current legal tender money of
the United States.
Reversed.
Page 307 U. S. 268
THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS, MR. JUSTICE BUTLER,
and MR. JUSTICE STONE think the judgments in these cases should be
affirmed for reasons stated in the opinion of MR. JUSTICE STONE in
No. 384,
Guaranty Trust Company of New York v. Henwood,
and No. 495,
Chemical Bank & Trust Company v.
Henwood.
* Together with No. 591,
Bethlehem Steel Co. v.
Anglo-Continentale Treuhand, A.G., et al., also on writ of
certiorari to the Supreme Court of New York.
[
Footnote 1]
Some bonds were originally issued to stockholders in No. 590
[
Footnote 2]
279 N.Y. 495, 18 N.E.2d 673; 19 N.E.2d 89.
