The lawsuit originated when one Mrs. Hepburn attempted to pay a debt to Henry Griswold on a promissory note, which was made five days prior to the issuance of United States Notes that the case questioned. Griswold sued Hepburn in the LouisvilleChancery Court on the note and refused Hepburn's tender of United States Notes to satisfy his claim. She then tendered the notes into the Chancery Court, which declared her debt satisfied.
The Court of Errors of Kentucky reversed the chancery court's judgment, and Hepburn appealed to the Supreme Court, which affirmed the judgment of the Court of Errors.
The Supreme Court found that the US federal government was authorized to coin money, but that power was distinct from the power to make paper legal tender, which was not authorized under the US Constitution. It also found that the treatment of notes as legal tender represented an impairment to enforcing the obligations of contracts. The Constitution prohibits the several states from impairing the obligations of contracts. The Court found no similar constraint upon the federal government, but it held that such an impairment would violate the spirit of the Constitution.
The dissenting opinion argued that the government was threatened by the war and that making the notes legal tender provided the government with the necessary supplies to continue to fight the war.
The majority opinion affirmed that the government holds the power to wage war but that making notes legal tender was not a necessary consequence of that power. It continued that making United States Notes legal tender was unnecessary to fighting a war. All that the federal government needed to do was to make them "receivable for government dues". That argument is similar to the theory of chartalism.
West v. Barnes: an early Supreme Court case on banknotes
Further readingedit
Dietz, James A. (1993). "Personal Policy and Judicial Reasoning: Salmon P. Chase and Hepburn v. Griswold". Northern Kentucky Law Review. 21: 235.
Smith, Bryant (1929). "Neglected Evidence on an Old Controversy—Bronson v. Rodes as a Forecast of Hepburn v. Griswold". The American Historical Review. The American Historical Review, Vol. 34, No. 3. 34 (3): 532–535. doi:10.2307/1836281. JSTOR 1836281.
External linksedit
Works related to Hepburn v. Griswold at Wikisource
Text of Hepburn v. Griswold, 75U.S. (8 Wall.) 603 (1870) is available from:CourtListenerGoogle ScholarJustiaLibrary of CongressOpenJurist
February 15, 2024
hepburn, griswold, this, article, needs, additional, citations, verification, please, help, improve, this, article, adding, citations, reliable, sources, unsourced, material, challenged, removed, find, sources, news, newspapers, books, scholar, jstor, 2010, le. This article needs additional citations for verification Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources Unsourced material may be challenged and removed Find sources Hepburn v Griswold news newspapers books scholar JSTOR May 2010 Learn how and when to remove this template message Hepburn v Griswold 75 U S 8 Wall 603 1870 was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Chief Justice of the United States Salmon P Chase speaking for the Court declared certain parts of the Legal Tender Acts to be unconstitutional Specifically making United States Notes legal tender was unconstitutional Hepburn v GriswoldSupreme Court of the United StatesFull case nameHepburn v GriswoldCitations75 U S 603 more 8 Wall 603 19 L Ed 513 1868 U S LEXIS 1136HoldingCertain parts of the Legal Tender Acts are unconstitutional Case opinionsMajorityChase joined by Nelson Grier Clifford FieldDissentMiller joined by Swayne DavisOverruled byLegal Tender Cases 79 U S Wall 12 457 1871 The lawsuit originated when one Mrs Hepburn attempted to pay a debt to Henry Griswold on a promissory note which was made five days prior to the issuance of United States Notes that the case questioned Griswold sued Hepburn in the Louisville Chancery Court on the note and refused Hepburn s tender of United States Notes to satisfy his claim She then tendered the notes into the Chancery Court which declared her debt satisfied The Court of Errors of Kentucky reversed the chancery court s judgment and Hepburn appealed to the Supreme Court which affirmed the judgment of the Court of Errors The Chase Court The Supreme Court found that the US federal government was authorized to coin money but that power was distinct from the power to make paper legal tender which was not authorized under the US Constitution It also found that the treatment of notes as legal tender represented an impairment to enforcing the obligations of contracts The Constitution prohibits the several states from impairing the obligations of contracts The Court found no similar constraint upon the federal government but it held that such an impairment would violate the spirit of the Constitution The dissenting opinion argued that the government was threatened by the war and that making the notes legal tender provided the government with the necessary supplies to continue to fight the war The majority opinion affirmed that the government holds the power to wage war but that making notes legal tender was not a necessary consequence of that power It continued that making United States Notes legal tender was unnecessary to fighting a war All that the federal government needed to do was to make them receivable for government dues That argument is similar to the theory of chartalism The majority opinion was explicitly overruled by Knox v Lee and other Legal Tender Cases 79 U S Wall 12 457 1871 in which Chase dissented See also edit nbsp Money portalList of United States Supreme Court cases volume 75 West v Barnes an early Supreme Court case on banknotesFurther reading editDietz James A 1993 Personal Policy and Judicial Reasoning Salmon P Chase and Hepburn v Griswold Northern Kentucky Law Review 21 235 Smith Bryant 1929 Neglected Evidence on an Old Controversy Bronson v Rodes as a Forecast of Hepburn v Griswold The American Historical Review The American Historical Review Vol 34 No 3 34 3 532 535 doi 10 2307 1836281 JSTOR 1836281 External links edit nbsp Works related to Hepburn v Griswold at Wikisource Text of Hepburn v Griswold 75 U S 8 Wall 603 1870 is available from CourtListener Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress OpenJurist Summary of Hepburn v Griswold at Teogatha Law Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Hepburn v Griswold amp oldid 1130480554, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
