
    R. Blackwell & Co., Appellants, v. The Auditor of Public Accounts, Appellee.
    APPEAL FROM FAYETTE,
    Where a contract is made with the state to print the laws, &c, for so much in state paper “ at its specie value, when the same shall become due and payable,” the amount to be paid by the state is not to be ascertained by an arbitrary valuation of the paper, made by the officers of the state, under a law passed subsequent to the contract, but by the market or current value of the paper?
   Opinion of the Court by

Justice Lockwood.

This is an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiffs on a special contract to print the laws and journals at a specified rate.

The only question in the case is, whether the plaintiffs were hound to receive state paper at an arbitrary valuation fixed upon it by the legislature, subsequent to the making of the contract. In the contract made with plaintiffs, the state agreed to pay them state paper, “ at its specie value, when the same shall become due and payable.”

The facts in the case show that plaintiffs had in all respects performed «their part of the contract, and that had they failed, they would have been liable to a heavy penalty. The case also shows that state paper was only worth thirty cents on the dollar when the contract was completed and the money became due, and that the auditor, under a statute passed subsequent to the making of the contract, paid plaintiffs the paper at the rate of thirty-three and one-third cents on the dollar. As the contract appears to have been entered info in good faith, and in the ordinary manner of making such contracts, the court can not believe that it was the intention of the legislature to violate the contract. The law requiring state paper to be issued out of the treasury at a fixed rate, does not necessarily apply to this contract, inasmuch, as the plaintiffs were to be paid out of the contingent fund, a fund over which the governor has exclusive control, and could have paid the plaintiffs their demand according to the contract, and, no doubt, the legislature supposed the plaintiffs would be paid, in that manner, the full sum they were entitled to. The officers of government have, however, put a construction upon the law, by which the plaintiffs have not received the amount stipulated to be paid them.

This being a case not foreseen by the legislature, and which, had they foreseen, they would have provided for; the court feel constrained to say, that justice and good faith require that the plaintiffs should recover the difference between the value of the paper and the rate they received it at. The judgment must therefore be reversed.

Blackwell, for appellants.

Cowles, circuit attorney, for appellee.

Judgment reversed.  