Experience has shown that statutes changing the well established rules of the common law, give rise to many new and difficult questions. But there are often cir*101cumstances-which require such changes, and remedial statutes ought to he liberally construed, so as to effect the purposes for which they were designed.
The- contracts and other transactions between our people during the late war, could not be construed and adjusted upon fair and equitable principles, under the strict rules of the common law; and the Convention and Legislature, for the purpose 'of affording just remedies in such cases, wisely enacted the ordinance of October 18th 1865, and the acts of 1866, chs. 38 and 39.
The contract before us comes fully within the policy established by these remedial statutes. The property sold by •the plaintiff brought extravagant prices, and he ought to be satisfied with their value in present currency. By presumption of law, the note sued on was solvable in Confederate currency, and the evidence introduced by the plaintiff did not rebut that presumption. The collateral contract which he seeks to enforce, was not sufficiently definite to take the note out of the operation of said statutes. By the terms of the sale, Confederate or State Treasury notes, or bank bills, would have discharged the note, if the creditors of the estate of the intestate would have taken them in the payment of debts.
In the case of Sowers v. Barnhart, at this term, there was an express collateral contract, certain in its terms, i. e. “to be paid in good money after the' war.” . The note in this case was payable in currency, and this word must be interpreted according to the state of facts, and the popular understanding of the term at the time the note was given.
As the presumption created by the statutes was not rebutted by the evidence of the plaintiff, his Honor was right in holding that the value of the property must be estimated by the jury: Garrett v. Smith, at this term. The judgment in the Court below is affirmed, but the plaintiff must pay the costs of this Court, as he appealed from a judgment in his own favor, of which he had no just right to complain.
Pee Oueiam. Judgment affirmed.