The case of
Craig v.
Missouri, 4 Pet. 410, in which it was decided that
the act of the Legislature of the State of Missouri, passed 27
July, 1821, entitled "an act for establishing loan offices," was
repugnant to the Constitution of the United states, revised and
confirmed.
The pleadings in the cause bring the question whether the act of
the State of Missouri by virtue of which the certificates which
form the consideration of the writing obligatory on which the
judgment of the state court was rendered be constitutional or not
directly and plainly before the court, and the decision of the
state court was in favor of its validity. Consequently the case is
within the twenty-fifth section of the Judicial Act.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the
Court.
In 1826, an action of covenant was instituted in the circuit
court for the County of Cape Girardeau by the State of Missouri
against Morgan Byrne, the plaintiff in error.
The declaration charges that the defendant, on 26 October, 1822,
executed his certain writing obligatory, by which he promised to
pay to the State of Missouri, on 26 October in the year 1823, the
sum of $135 and the two percentum per annum on the said amount, it
being the interest accruing on the certificates borrowed (by the
said Byrne of the state) from 1 October, 1821, at the Jackson loan
office for value, which said sum the defendant refuses to pay,
&c.
The defendant appeared and pleaded in bar of the action that the
said State of Missouri, by an act of the legislature thereof
entitled "an act for the establishment of loan offices,"
Page 33 U. S. 41
approved by the governor of the said state on 27 June, 1821,
divided said state into five districts, in each of which districts
was established a loan office, and by said act the auditor of
public accounts and treasurer of said state, under the governor
thereof, were required to issue certificates signed by the said
auditor and treasurer to the nominal amount of two hundred thousand
dollars, of denominations not exceeding ten dollars, nor less than
fifty cents, in the following form, to-wit,
"This certificate shall be receivable at the treasury or any of
the loan offices of the State of Missouri in discharge of taxes or
debts due to the state for the sum of _____ dollars, with interest
for the same, at the rate of two percentum from this date, the ___
day of _____,"
and that by said act said certificates were made receivable at
the treasury of said state and by all the tax gatherers and other
public officers in payment of taxes and other moneys then due or to
become due to said state or any county or town therein, and by all
officers, civil and military, in said state in discharge of
salaries, and by said act it was further made the duty of said
auditor and treasurer, according to the provisions of said act, to
deliver to the clerk of said general loan offices a proportional
amount of the certificate, by the said act required to be issued as
aforesaid, and certain commissioners by said act required to be
appointed were by said act empowered to loan said certificates to
the citizens of said state residing within their respective
districts at interest not exceeding six percentum per annum on the
amount, and to secure the repayment of the said loans by mortgages
or personal security, and by said act, the salt springs belonging
to the state were to be leased out on the condition that the lessee
or lessees should receive said certificates in payment for salt,
not exceeding that which might be prescribed by law, and that the
proceeds of said salt springs, the interest accruing to the state,
and all estates purchased by the said loan offices under the
provisions of said act, and all debts then due and to become due to
the said state were by said act pledged and made a fund for the
redemption of the said certificates, and by the same act the faith
of the state was also pledged for the same purpose. And the
defendant further saith, &c., a large sum was deposited at the
loan office at Jackson, &c., and that he has received from said
loan office
Page 33 U. S. 42
the nominal sum of $135 in said certificates, for the loan of
which certificates and no other consideration whatever, the said
defendant made and executed to said state said writing obligatory
mentioned. And said defendant avers that said loan office
certificates, so loaned to said defendant as aforesaid, were bills
of credit, emitted by said state in violation of the Constitution
of the United States, all which said defendant is ready to verify,
wherefore, &c.
The plaintiff demurred generally to this plea, and the defendant
joined in demurrer.
The court sustained the demurrer and rendered judgment for the
plaintiff. This judgment was brought by writ of error into the
supreme court of the judicial district in which it was rendered,
the highest tribunal in that state which could take cognizance of
it, where it was affirmed.
The defendants have prosecuted this writ of error, under the
twenty-fifth section of the judicial act.
The pleadings in the cause bring the question whether the act of
the State of Missouri, by virtue of which the certificates which
form the consideration of the writing obligatory, on which the
judgment of the state court was rendered be constitutional or not
directly and plainly before the Court, and the decision of the
state court was in favor of its validity. Consequently the case is
within the twenty-fifth section of the Judicial Act, and the only
question before this Court is did the state court err in
pronouncing that judgment? Is the act in question repugnant to or
consistent with the Constitution of the United States?
This question was ably argued, and fully considered by the Court
in the case of
Craig v. State of
Missouri, 4 Pet. 410. In that case, a majority of
the Court was of opinion that the act was repugnant to the
Constitution, and the judgment of the state court was reversed.
That decision is expressly in point, and on its authority the
judgment in this case also must be
Reversed and the cause remanded, that judgment may be
rendered for the defendant in that court, the plaintiff in
error.
This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the
Page 33 U. S. 43
record from the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri for the
Fourth Judicial district and was argued by counsel, on
consideration whereof this Court is of opinion that there is error
in the rendition of the judgment of the said court in this, that in
affirming the judgment rendered by the Circuit Court of the County
of Cape Girardeau in the State of Missouri, that court has given an
opinion in favor of the validity of the Act of the Legislature of
Missouri, passed on 27 June, 1821, entitled "an act for the
establishment of loan offices," which act is, in the opinion of
this Court, repugnant to the Constitution of the United States,
whereupon it is considered by the Court that the said judgment of
the said Supreme Court of the State of Missouri for the Fourth
Judicial District ought to be reversed and annulled, and the same
is hereby reversed and annulled and the cause remanded to that
court with directions to enter judgment in favor of the defendant
to the original action.