Confederate money transactions Phillips v. Hooker – North Carolina, 1867 (62 N.C. 193); Dearing’s Administrator v. Rucker – Virginia, 1868 (59 Va. 426); Leak v. Commissioners of Richmond County – North Carolina, 1870 (64 N.C. 133); Dinwiddie County v. Stuart, Buchanan & Co. – Virginia, 1877 (69 Va. 526)
“Every contract for the payment of Confederate notes was essentially a contract of hazard.” – Justice __ Joynes, in Rucker “[Laws legalizing wartime acts were passed] at a period when anarchy would follow war, and when it required the voice of law to dispel chaos and reproduce order. It is impossible to estimate the disastrous consequences which would flow from a failure to carry out and enforce these wise enactments. .. the bonds of society would be loosened and anarchy would reign supreme.” – Justice __, in DinwiddieReaction to the new federalism and Virginia’s problems of partition In Matter of Hughes – North Carolina, 1867 (61 N.C. 58); Antoni v. Wright – Virginia, 1872 (63 Va. 833); Higginbotham’s Executors v. Commonwealth – Virginia, 1874 (66 Va. 627)
“[States rights doctrines] are, however, old fashioned doctrines, and have now but few avowed supporters anywhere. Every day’s history but teaches the melancholy lesson that the federal courts, the federal legislature and executive will, in the end, absorb every vestige of the rights of the states.” – Justice Waller Staples, in Antoni “For years after the rage of battle had ceased she [Virginia] was kept in subjection to military power, under the rule of aliens and strangers, unacquainted with her laws, her traditions and her sufferings – and yet her statutes exhibit the gratifying spectacle of an honest endeavor … to make some provision for the payment of her creditors.” - Justice Staples, in Antoni | “In this [wartime] condition of things, was every man to stop his ordinary avocations and starve, or else be tainted with treason and deemed guilty of an illegal act if he received a Confederate treasury note? … On what principle, then, can it be said that the courts are called upon to … search into the private dealings of the people and all the ramifications of ordinary business, and declare of no force – in effect confiscate – all contracts based upon the consideration of Confederate notes? What good can result?” – Chief Justice Richmond Pearson, in Phillips
“[O]ur state is not an independent nation, but is a member of the Union, and the attempt to withdraw, and the war consequent thereon, was a revolt, and subjected our citizens, who participated in it to the charge of treason, unless the State had a right to secede. That question we must suppose to have been settled by the result of the war.” – Justice __, in Hughes
|
EMPIRE OF LAWS - The Legal History of the 50 American States > 3. OLD SOUTH LEGAL HISTORY > 3.4 The Old South: Civil War and Reconstruction (1861-1877) > 3.4.1 The Old South (1861-1877): Law and War > 3.4.2 The Old South (1861-1877): Coming to Grips with Emancipation > 3.4.3 The Old South (1861-1877): Restoration, Reconstruction and "Redeemer" Laws >