been thought to be in conflict with the Constitution, because it impairs indirectly the obligation of contracts. That discovery calls for a new reading of the Constitution.

perceive that this varies the case or diminishes its force as an illustration. The creditor who had a thousand dollars due him on the 31st of July, 1884, (the day before the act took effect,) was entitled to a thousand dollars of coined gold of the weight and fineness of the then existing coinage. The day after he was entitled only to a sum six per cent. less in weight and in market value, or to a smaller number of silver dollars. Yet he would have been a bold man who had asserted that, because of this, the obligation of the contract was impaired, or that private property was taken without compensation or without due process

If, then, the legal-tender acts were justly chargeable with impairing contract obligations, they would not, for that reason, be forbidden, unless a different rule is to be applied to them from that which has hitherto prevailed in the construction of other powers granted by the fundamental law. But, as already intimated, the objection misapprehends the nature and extent of the contract obligation spoken of in the Constitution. As in a state of civil society property of a citizen or subject of law. No such assertion, so far as we know, is ownership, subject to the lawful demands of the sovereign, so contracts must be understood as made in reference to the possible exercise of the rightful authority of the Government, and no obligation of a contract can extend to the defeat of legitimate government authority.

was ever made. Admit it was a hardship, but it is not every hardship that is unjust, much less that is unconstitutional; and certainly it would be an anomaly for us to hold an act of Congress invalid merely because we might think its provisions harsh and unjust.

We are not aware of anything else which has been advanced in support of the proposition that the legal-tender acts were forbidden by either the letter or the spirit of the Constitution. If, therefore, they were, what we have endeavored to show, appropriate means for legitimate ends, they were not transgressive of the authority vested in Congress.

Closely allied to the objection we have just been considering is the argument pressed upon us that the legal-tender acts were prohibited by the spirit of the fifth amendment, which forbids taking private property for public use without just compensation or due process of law. That provision has always been understood as referring only to a direct appropria- Here we might stop; but we will notice tion, and not to consequential injuries result- briefly an argument presented in support of ing from the exercise of lawful power. It has the position that the unit of money value must never been supposed to have any bearing upon, possess intrinsic value. The argument is deor to inhibit laws that indirectly work harm and rived from assimilating the constitutional proloss to individuals. A new tariff, an embargo, vision respecting a standard of weights and a draft, or a war may inevitably bring upon measures to that couferring the power to coin individuals great losses; may, indeed, render money and regulate its value. It is said there valuable property almost valueless. They may can be no uniform standard of weights without destroy the worth of contracts. But whoever weight, or of measure without length or space, supposed that because of this a tariff could and we are asked how anything can be made not be changed, or a non-intercourse act or an uniform standard of value which has itself an embargo be enacted, or a war be declared? no value? This is a question foreign to the By the act of June 28, 1834, a new regulation subject before us. The legal tender acts do of the weight and value of gold coin was not attempt to make paper a standard of adopted, and about six per cent. was taken value. We do not rest their validity upon the from the weight of each dollar. The effect of assertion that their emission is coinage, or any this was that all creditors were subjected to a regulation of the value of money; nor do corresponding loss. The debts then due became we assert that Congress may make anything solvable with six per cent. less gold than was which has no value money. What we do asrequired to pay them before. The result was sert is, that Congress has power to enact thus precisely what it is contended the legal- that the Government's promises to pay money tender acts worked. But was it ever imagined shall be, for the time being, equivalent in value this was taking private property without com- to the representative of value determined by pensation or without due process of law? the coinage acis, or to multiples thereof. Was the idea ever advanced that the new reg- is hardly correct to speak of a standard of ulation of gold coin was against the spirit value. The Constitution does not speak of it. of the fifth amendment? And has any one It contemplates a standard for that which has in good faith avowed his belief that even a law gravity or extension; but value is an ideal debasing the current coin, by increasing the thing. The coinage acts fix its unit as a dolalloy, would be taking private property? It lar; but the gold or silver thing we call a dolmight be impolitic and unjust, but could its lar is, in no sense, a standard of a dollar. It constitutionality be doubted? Other statutes is a representative of it. There might never have, from time to time, reduced the quantity have been a piece of money of the denominaof silver in silver coin without any question of their constitutionality. It is said, however, now, that the act of 1834 only brought the legal value of gold coin more nearly into correspondence with its actual value in the market, or its relative value to silver. But we do not

lt

tion of a dollar. There never was a pound sterling coined until 1815, if we except a few coins struck in the reign of Henry VIII, almost immediately debased, yet it has been the unit of British currency for many generations. It is, then, a mistake to regard the

XI.

PRESIDENT GRANT'S CABINET, AND MEMBERS OF THE FORTY-SECOND CONGRESS.

Louisiana-William Pitt Kellogg, J. Rodman | New Jersey-John W. Hazelton, Samuel C.

ner, De Witt C. Giddings, John Hancock.

Illinois-Charles B. Farwell, John F. Farns- | Texas*-William S. Herndon, John C. Con-
worth, Horatio C. Burchard, John B. Haw-
ley, Bradford N. Stevens, Henry Snapp,*
Jesse H. Moore, James C. Robinson,
Thompson W. McNeely, Edward Y. Rice,
Samuel S. Marshall, John B. Hay, John M.
Crebs, John L. Beveridge.†
Missouri-Erastus Wells, Gustavus A. Fink-
elnburg, James R. McCormick, Harrison
E. Havens, Samuel S. Burdett, Abram
Comingo, Isaac C. Parker, James G. Blair,
Andrew King.

Arkansas-James M. Hanks, Oliver P. Sny-
der, Thomas Boles.
Michigan Henry Waldron, William

-

L.

Stoughton, Austin Blair, Wilder D. Foster, Omar D. Conger, Jabez G. Sutherland.

Florida-Josiah T. Walls.

Iowa-George W. McCrary, Aylett R. Cotton,
William G. Donnan, Madison M. Walden,
Frank W. Palmer, Jackson Orr.
Wisconsin-Alexander Mitchell, Gerry W.
Hazelton, J. Allen Barber, Charles A.
Eldredge, Philetus Sawyer, Jeremiah M.
Rusk.

California-Sherman O. Houghton, Aaron
A. Sargent, John M. Coghlan.
Minnesota-Mark H. Dunnell, John T. Averill.
Oregon-James H. Slater.
Kansas-David P. Lowe.

West Virginia-John J. Davis, James C.
McGrew, Frank Hereford.
Nevada-Charles W. Kendall.
Nebraska-John Taffe.

XII.

THE CIVIL SERVICE.

IN SENATE.

1871, March 3-The sundry civil appropriation bill pendingMr. TRUMBULL moved to add the following new section:

That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby, authorized to prescribe such rules and regulations for the admission of persons into the civil service of the United States as will best promote the efficiency thereof,

and ascertain the fitness of each candidate in respect to age, health, character, knowledge, and ability for the branch of service into which he seeks to enter; and for this purpose the President is authorized to employ suitable persons to conduct said inquiries, to prescribe their duties, and to establish regulations for the conduct of persons who may receive appointments in the civil service. ?

Mr. WILLIAMS moved that it be tabled; which, on a division, was disagreed to—yeas 25, nays 26.

The section was then adopted-yeas 32, nays 24.

The House agreed to this and other amend

*Qualified December 4, 1871, vice Burton C. Cook, resigned.

Qualified December 4, 1871, vice John A. Logan, resigned.

Qualified February 9, 1872, vice John Edwards, qualified March 22, 1871, and unseated without a division.

Qualified December 4, 1871, vice Thomas W. Ferry, resigned. This is a copy of a joint resolution offered in the House, January 30, 1871, by Hon. William H. Armstrong, and referred to the select committee on the reorganization of the civil service, with the exception that his resolution contained the following additional clause:

The President is also authorized to prescribe fees to be paid by all persons applying for appointments, except such classes of honorably discharged soldiers as he may exempt, which fees shall be applied to the payment of the expenses of making such inquiries.

ments added by the Senate, without a yea and nay vote.

IN SENATE.

appropriation bill, and the question being on 1872, March 7-Pending the legislative as in Committee of the Whole, appropriating concurring in Senate in an amendment made $50,000 to enable the President of the United States to perfect and put in force such rules as may from time to time be adopted by himMr. CARPENTER moved to substitute for that the following:

That all laws or parts of laws under which the present civil service commission is appointed the same are hereby, repealed. by the President of the United States be, and

Mr. TRUMBULL moved to lay the amendment on the table; which was agreed to—yeas 29,

nays

21:

YEAS-Messrs. Ames, Anthony, Bayard, Boreman, Buckingham, Casserly, Cole, Conkling, Corbett, Davis of West Virginia, Edmunds, Flanagan, Frelinghuysen, Goldthwaite, Harlan, Hill, Johnston, Kelly, Morrill of Vermont, Pratt, Schurz, Scott, Sherman, Stevenson, Stockton, Trumbull, Vickers, Wilson, Wright-29.

NAYS-Messrs. Alcorn, Blair, Caldwell, Cameron, Carpenter, Chandler, Clayton, Cooper, Hamilton of Texas, Hitchcock, Kellogg, Logan, Osborn, Pomeroy, Pool, Ramsey, Rice, Saulsbury, Tipton, West, Windom-21.

March 11-The amendment appropriating $50,000, as above, was concurred in-yeas 25, nays 21:

YEAS-Messrs. Ames, Anthony, Blair, Cole, Cooper, Corbett, Davis of West Virginia, Edmunds, Ferry of Michigan, Flanagan, Frelinghuysen, Hamilton

*Messrs. Conner and Hancock qualified December 4, 1871; Mr. Herndon December 12; and Mr. Giddings May 13, 1872, in place of Mr. William T. Clark, unseated on that day, and who had qualified, on a prima facie certificate, January 10, 1872.

† Messrs. Houghton and Coghlan qualified December 4, 1871; Mr. Sargent, January 10, 1872.

of Maryland, Johnston, Kellogg, Kelly, Morrill of
Maine. Morton, Norwood, Nye, Pratt, Schurz, Sher-
man, Trumbull, Vickers, Wilson-25.
NAYS-Messrs. Alcorn, Boreman, Caldwell, Chan-
dler, Clayton, Gilbert, Goldthwaite, Hamilton of
Texas, Harlan, Hill, Hitchcock, Howe, Lewis. Os-
born, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Spencer, Sprague, West,
Windom, Wright-21.

IN HOUSE.

1872, April 12-The Committee of the Whole reduced this appropriation to $10,000; and the House concurred in the amendment of the committee-yeas 115, nays 58:

gress or a delegate from a Territory, respecting any appointment or removal, such member or delegate may, in writing only, give his advice or opinion respecting such appointment or removal. And such member or delegate may also, without being requested so to do, give, in writing, to the President or head of Department any information which such member or delegate may have of the misconduct or unfaithfulness of any person in the civil service. Any such information, advice, or opinion given to the President or head of a Department by any member or delegate, shall YEAS-Messrs. Ames, Archer, Arthur, Barry, Beatty, be regarded as official, and shall at all times Beck, Bell, Beveridge, Bigby, Biggs, Bird, Boles, be open to the inspection of members and Braxton, Buckley, Buffinton, B. F. Butler, F. Clarke, delegates; and copies thereof shall be transCobb, Coburn, Coghlan, Comingo, Critcher, Cros-land, De Large, Donnan, Dox, Du Bose, Duell, Duke, Dun-mitted to either House of Congress whenever nell, Farwell, Forker, Frye, Garrett, Golladay, Good- called for by them for information or publicarich, Haldeman, Hambleton, Hancock, Handley, Hanks, tion. All appointments and removals concernHarper, J.T. Harris, Havens, Hays, G. W. Hazelton, J. W. Hazelton, Herndon, Houghton, Kerr, Lamison, ing which communications shall have been Lamport, Lansing, Leach, Lewis, Manson, Marshall, received by the President or heads of DepartMcClelland, McGrew, McHenry, McIntyre, McJun- ments from members or delegates shall be kin, Mercur, Merriam, Merrick, B. F. Meyers, Morey, Morgan, Morphis, Negley, Orr, Packer, Palmer, reported to Congress at the session thereof Peck, Pendleton, Perce, E. Perry, Prindle, Rainey, next after such appointment or removal shall Randall, Read, W. R. Roberts, Rusk, Sargent, Sawyer, have been made, together with all correspondScofield, Seeley, Shanks, Sheldon, Sherwood, Shober, Slater, J. A. Smith, Snapp, Snyder, T. J. Speer, ence with or communications from members Stoughton, Stowell, Sutherland, Taffe, Terry, Thomas, or delegates respecting the same. Turner. Tyner, Van Trump. Vaughan, Walden, Wallace, Wheeler, Whiteley, Williams of Indiana, Williams of New York, J. M. Wilson, J. T. Wilson,

Wood-115.

NAYS-Messrs. Ambler, Banks, Bingham, G. M. Brooks, Burchard, Burdett, R. R. Butler, W. T. Clarke, Conger, Cotton, Dawes, Eames, Ely, Finkelnburg, C. Foster, W. D. Foster, Griffith, Hale, G. E. Harris, Hay, Hibbard, Hill, Hoar, Holman, Hooper, Kelley, Kellogg, Kendall, King, Lowe, Maynard, McCormick, McCrary, Monroe, Moore, L. Myers, Packard, A. F. Perry, Peters, Poland, Potter, E. Y. Rice, E. H. Roberts, Sessions, H. B. Smith, Sprague, Starkweather, Stevens, Stevenson, Storm, Strong, W. Townsend, Twichell, Upson, Wakeman, Waldron, Whitthorne, Willard-58.

The amendment of the Senate, as amended, was then concurred in.

Subsequently, in conference committee, the sum was fixed at $25,000.

IN HOUSE.

Mr.

1872, April 19-This bill, reported by WILLARD, from the Committee on the Civil Service pending:

A Bill to preserve the independence of the
several departments of the Government.
Be it enacted, &c., That hereafter it shall
be unlawful for any member of either House
of Congress, or delegate from a Territory,
verbally or in writing, directly or indirectly,
or by any agent or third person, to solicit
or recommend, or advise the President of
the United States, or any head of a Depart-
ment, or of any bureau thereof, or any official
who has by law power to nominate or appoint
to positions in the civil service of the United
States, to nominate or appoint, or to refuse to
nominate or appoint any person to, or to re-
move any person from, office or employment
in the civil service, except as hereinafter pro-
vided.

SEC. 2. That whenever the President or the head of a Department shall, in writing, ask the opinion or advice of a member of Con

SEC. 3. That any person who shall violate any of the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof shall be fined not less than $100, and not more than $1,000.

Mr. BUTLER moved that the bill, with the pending amendments, be recommitted to the committee; which was agreed to-yeas 97, nays 79:

Beck, Bigby, Bingham, Bird, J. G. Blair, Boles,
YEAS Messrs. Ames, Averill, Banks. Barber,
Braxton, Bright, Buckley, B. F. Butler, R. R. But-
ler, W. T. Clark, F. Clarke, Coburn, Coghlan, Co-
mingo, Conger, Critcher, Crocker, Darrall, De Large,
Dickey, Donnan, Dox, Duell, Dunnell, Farwell,
Golladay, Goodrich, Harmer. Harper, G. E. Harris,
J. T. Harris, Havens. Hays, G. W. Hazelton, J. W.
Hazelton, Kendall, Kerr, Ketcham, King, Lamison,
Lamport, Lansing, Maynard, McJunkin, McKee,
Mercur, Moore, Morey, Morgan, L. Myers, Niblack,
Packer, Palmer, I. C. Parker, Peck, Perce, Peters,
Prindle, Rainey, Rusk, Sargent, Scofield, Seeley,
Sessions, Shanks, Sheldon, Shoemaker, Slater, Sloss,
J.A. Smith, Snapp, Snyder, R. M. Speer, T. J. Speer,
Sprague, Stoughton, Sypher, Taffe, Terry, W. Town-
send, Turner, Twichell, Tyner, Van Trump, Wad-
dell, Walden, Wallace, Wheeler, Whiteley, J. M.
Wilson, J. T. Wilson-97.

NAYS-Messrs. Acker, Adams, Archer, Arthur,
Beatty, A. Blair, J. Brooks, Buffinton, Burchard,
Burdett, Cotton, Cox, Crossland, Du Bose, Duke,
W. D. Foster, Frye, Garfield, Garrett, Getz, Griffith,
Eames, Eldredge, Ely, Farnsworth, Finkelnburg,
Haldeman, Hale, Halsey, Hambleton, Hancock, Hand-
ley, Hanks, Hay, Hibbard, Hoar, Holman, Kelley,
Lowe, Lynch, Manson, Marshall, McClelland, Mc-
Cormick, McCrary, McIntyre, Merriam, Monroe,
Morphis, Orr, Packard, H. W. Parker, A. F. Perry,
E. Perry, Poland, Potter, Price, Read, Ritchie, E. H.
Roberts, W. R. Roberts, Rogers, Roosevelt, Sherwood,
Starkweather. Stevens, Stevenson, Storm. Strong,
Sutherland, Swann, Upson, Voorhees, Wakeman,
Waldron, Wells, Whitthorne, Willard, Young-79.

I.

Executive Order.

WASHINGTON, April 16, 1872.

The advisory board of the civil service, having completed the grouping contemplated by the rules already adopted, have recommended