Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1856-02-22


kncvscn: the fact that she does owe the three dol
lars, and, aso from promising, as all other debtors
are rourec 10 do that when she has tue ability, she
will pay principal and interest! We seriously ASK II
mis- has not somewhat Of tho odor OF Reputation i
We are aware that the committee will urge IN rndi-
cation OF this bill and in support OF their views the 20
section oithe 6Slh chapter of the Code, which says
that .the fund cr internal improvements shall not be
charyea5le with any consequence of pay
nen of any instalment being suspended; hut, we ASK
in all earnestncss is that righteous provision lsit
or would it be regarded as equity or justice oetweeh
man and mani and, If not, by what leserdeman II
transformed into propriety when the State is party
and The party proposing such an evasion Of reasona-
hle and lust obligations! But we contend that this
provision of the Code never contemplated such a
condition Of affairs as has been in existence in Eir-
gna for several months last past. 1t was, doubtless
enacted upon the suppostion that the STATE ro"f" ~"
xays be ready 10 pay upon tie prcse"td'0" % any an"
az CLAIMS asccrtaincd to he Just, and to require her
creditors be prompt in presenting their callns aa
TO notify them OF the consequences If they were moi
prompt. We will not believe that any Legislature
that ever assembled in the capitol OF Virginia. III an
tcipation of long series Of months, during whlch
the State would be totally unable to meet her solemn
obligations would have enacted such law. 1t is to-
tally irrelevant to the matter III issue TO enquire
whether when the Legislature was not IN session. ana
the creditors of the commonwealth were clamorous
for their money, and actually suffering for the want
of it, the Board of Public Works did right or wrong
n agreeing to pay interest the drafts othose cred
tors. The Legislature is now in session, ana it is
competent for that body to EXPLAIN modify repeal
that law And the question is, is that law right
or is it wrong! II it is right then 80, sso is tho bill
of the Finance Committee II, however, il is wrong,
then that bill should be amended in a very important
particular before it assumes the solemn aud binding
form of law.
The report of the committee, in review of the trans
actions of the Board of Public Works, is very elabo
rate, but not so clear and satisfactory aud just us
little further investigation by the committee could
have made it. One example will indicate our mean
ing. On page II of the report, the committee say:
u this place proper to notice the fact reported To
the Senate on the 10Th of January, by the Second
Auditor that the SUN OF $o1O,5US Us Is yet due on
tue eutre amount Of bonds issued by the Common
wealth. This loss is occasioned by the hypotheca-
tons and advances to Seden, Withers & Co., and
others" and in the same paragraph it is intimated
that, after the reduction of this amount by two spe-
cal sums, one of SllOO00 and the other OF $l45OO0,
any further reduction will have to be made by the
assets of Selden, Withers L. Co. The impression
that would most naturally be produced upon the mind
of the casual reader, by this paragraph, would be
that the State had lost $970,50S 0S, through Seden,
Withers & Co., part of which might be- saved by
the assets O! that concern, Now we presume, the
finance committee had the report Of the Board OF
Public Works before them, and that they also, had
unrestraned access to the books and papers Of the
Board and therefore, we are surprised a this state
ment. Ii we have correctly read the report of tho
Board of Public Works, S2DO,OOO of this deficit
termed by the committee "loss'-cousists Of bonds
on deposit in the Bank of the Republic, in New
York. agreeab!y to the provisions of Il contract with
John Thompson, and which are subject to the con-
troll of the Board This transaction occurred several
months after the agency Of Selden, Withers Il Co..
had been revoked and, therefore, certainly this
amount should not have been represented by the
committee as depending for its safety upon the suii''
cheney Of the assets of Selden, Wthers d Co.
Again, the Board represent truly, as we presume
that the recovery of the actual balance due by Sell
den Withers 81 Co., does not depend entirely upon
the assets Of that concern but that whatever def
cheney there may he from that source, will be more
than supplied from the private fortunes OF the ndlvi
dual partners, and indeed, that large security has
already been given by Mr.. Withers, one OF that firm
So that a reasonable calculation OF chances would
lead one to the conclusion, that the whule of this
.loss of S970,5OS QS, will ultimately be realized by
the State,
This instance we think will show that little emore
investigation by the committee would have enabled
them to have made their report clearer IN It's state
ments more satisfactory to those for whom was IN
tended and more just to the Board Of Public Works
The committee do not spare the Board in respect to
the issue of drafts payable with interest. We do not
dean it necessary to enter into any defence OF this
act The Board have reported the facts to the ioase
of Delegates accompanied by statenent OF the rea-
,ons which influenced their conduct. Iher motlves'
none will deny, were good. They did what they
doon,e3 heat for the interests of the Commonwealth
md the needy creditors Of tho Commonwealth. 1t
NAV he that, if we had been of the Board, wc
should have voted against paying interest. How
eyer. we shall not single out the Board OF Public
Works as objects of censure for this act, when We are
aware that all the resolutions they could adopt on ts
subject, in twelve. .monh would be worse than lille,
unless they met the Of two other officers
of government The Board mGy egree TO pay inter-
est but no warrant fer that interest can be issued
whoTt tue assent Of the Second Auditor; and the
second Auditor may issue his warrant, and still it
cannot be paid without the assent of the Treasurer
80 'nat the isgalty Of the act if it must be put upon
that attaches strongly to those two officers
as to the Board of Public Works. But we are un-
willing thus to state the case. There is no absolute
necessity Tor H. The transaction was u,otuced by an
unfortunate combnatiOE Of circumstances NIL no;rtino
TO the de!rimeEt OF State credit, and we doubt not
that each and all Of those officers were honestly en-
deavorng to devise and execute the best pnus for tho
reef of that credit, as far possible Bssdss tho
State has not lost, and, we presume, will rot lose
dollar by the whole transacticI while, on tho other
hand. an incs!cuablo amount Of distress has been
avoided which, otherwise, would have been nevita.
kle Therefore tits repugnant to our feelings to hold
up those officers to censure as having acted, IN
case, "without authority Of law, ard in another in
express violation of positive law" The chnrSe may
be literally true and yet circumstances may, and in
this oase, we think, do make the censure UNJUST II
not unkind.
Every act of the Board seems to have been SUBJ
jeced to the rigid scrutiny of the committee. Even
the exchange of Sa0OU0 Of coupon bonds for similar
amount of drafts, Issued by them to the Manassa Gap
Rail Road Company, is visited with reprobation.-
These bonds, we understand, were delivered to the
Bank Of Monticello for the purpose of bankins, with