BAKER
v.
BALDWIN

U.S. | 1902-11-03
No. 4
187 U.S. 61 Supreme Court of the United States (1902) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 23 S. Ct. 19 · 47 L. Ed. 75 · 1902 U.S. LEXIS 840 · SCDB 1902-033
Cited by 3 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Stephen Baldwin purchased land subject to a mortgage held by Fred Baker and tendered payment in silver dollars coined after 1878, which Baker refused to accept, claiming the federal law making such silver dollars legal tender was unconstitutional. The Michigan courts upheld the constitutionality of the legal tender statute and ordered the mortgage discharged, but the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the writ of error because it lacked jurisdiction to review state court decisions that sustained—rather than struck down—the validity of federal statutes.


© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
Me. Chief Justice Fullee

Mr. Chief Justice Fullee delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a bill filed by Stephen Baldwin in the Circuit Court for the county of Oakland, Michigan, against Fred A. Baker, to compel the release of a mortgage given to secure payment of a promissory note for three hundred and thirty dollars, dated January 12, 1894, and payable in three years thereafter. Baldwin had purchased the land subject to the mortgage, which had been assigned to Baker, and tendered the amount due.-thereon in silver dollars coined after 1878. This tender Baker declined to accept on the ground that the legal tender provisions of the act of Congress of February 28, 1878, entitled

An act to authorize the coinage of the standard silver dollar, and to restore its legal-tender character,” 20 Stat. 25, c. 20, were unconstitutional, and refused to discharge the mortgage as demanded by Baldwin.

The Circuit Court for Oakland County entered' a decree in accordance with the prayer of the bill, and Baker carried the cause by appeal to the Supreme Court of Michigan, which affirmed the decree. Baldwin v. Baker, 121 Michigan, 259. This writ of error was then allowed.

The Supreme Court of Michigan said : “ The sole question presented is whether the act in question, making the silver dollar of 412.5 grains troy of standard silver a full legal tender for all debts and dues, public and private, is constitutional; ” and held that it was. That decision is assigned for error but it was not a decision against the validity of the statute, and on the contrary sustained its validity. As our jurisdiction over the judgments and decrees of state courts in suits in which the validity of. statutes of the United States is drawn in question can only be exercised, under section 709 of the Revised Statutes, when the decision is against their validity the writ of error cannot be maintained. Missouri v. Andriano, 138 U. S. 496; Rae v. Homestead Loan and Guaranty Company, 176 U. S. 121.

Writ of error dismissed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • ST. Louis v. Taylor, 210 U.S. 281 (U.S. 1908)
  • Scott v. Morris Nat'l Bank, 271 U.S. 646 (U.S. 1926)
    …amended by the act of September 6, 1916, c. 448, sec. 2, 39 Stat. 726; Jett Bros. Distilling Company v. Carrollton, 252 U. S. 1, 5-6; (2) Missouri v. Andriano, 138 U. S. 496; Rae v. Homestead Loan & Guaranty Company, 176 U. S. 121; Baker v. Baldwin, 187 U. S. 61.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw