Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1861-07-09
VIRGINIA STATE CONVENTION.
SECOND SESSION.
ug,-EyyV D~Ar-;CONTyyCED.)
Rrruno,p, Tuesday, June 25th, 1861

follows: TO insert in the hrst line, between the
and interest. the words, payment OF the.
In the sixth line after the word shall, Insert
the words, "be suspended during the existing
war; In the seventh line, to erase the words,
g not 70 be pa;d," so that rs amended the ordl'
nance will read
BE il ordained, That the payment OF the
interest ,non the bonds of the State, now the
of the Government OF the United
States. or held BY it in trust, or which are no"
the nroncrtv Of q citizen or corporation OF said
aorern mont or .of any State adhcring there.
70 or wh;cl we're owned By said government,
c;t;zors ar ccrporations, on the 23d day OF
Nav l.st shall he suspended during the exist
inc war. and for the purpose Of ascertainlng
the bonds which IRE OF were SO o%neo' Tue au,
dit,r ond Commissioner Of the Sinking Fund
shall cause snch interrogat"rIes rs 1ney may
nrescrihc to he answered under oath. Inc
interest on said bonds, except those held as
aforesaid. md the sterling bonds payable IN
London. shall he paid at the treasury anu not
elsewhere. in currency"
Mr. TRrpwAY.--l have only to say that we
n;cht mon well settled principles Of lntcrna
,;onaI law. refuse to pay the debt ut all; but
&C thcrc are bona G.ls holders OF these bonds
in thc State, I shall prefer to have our obliga.
t;ons 60 far maintained that they may be paid
IN the expiration Of the war. In regard to
novmrnt Of on. cent Of interest, either IN
Richmond or elsewhere to the holders OF Iir
einia bonds. | am utterly and irrcconc'aoiy
onnosed until peace is declared.
Mr. G,RSyTr.-In rising to address the Con
~vcntion 7 must confess I feel a deep interest in
this question for it affects the interest and
honor Of Virginia.
N, proposi:ion can be clearer than that, ac'
cnrdinr to the law of nations, no State has s
r;rbt to conf scate or suspend the payment O
n debt due from itself TO the citizens OF a pow
cr with which it is Mt war, during the war
have listened attcntively to the arguments
m the other side. and especially that OF my
friend from Pittsvlvania, hut have iaitd L
discover that he has brought a single authors
ty which has supported his position.
The testimony he has cited all relates to the
suspension Of debts due by the citizens OF ON
powe to the citizens of another; but the Ques
ton of the debt Of the power itself has no
been touched. II the decisions which thu
gentleman r.cm ~Pi,tsylTania quoted Iron
Judge Story, who. by the way, was IN tho mi
nority on the bench when it was rendered ane
was overrnled, he alludcs to the case OF tht
Sllesian loan, which occurred more thar o cen
turv aco-a case c,abora.cly discussed between
the British and Prussian Governments, that !ul
a long time settled the principle; ind | have
vet to find q single instance IN which one pow
er has refused to pay the debts it owed 10 TIT
power With which it was az war. Take Vat
tel, or Wheaton, or Almost my others OF the
principal writer's on international law. AMI you
will find that my statement is fully horne out
me trouble the Convention with one OIL
two extracts. I quote from Wildnan on In
tcrnational law.
He says:
'.BT The usage Of nations. whether derive
from civil or from international law, certain
persons and property in the offending STATE
are exempt from rcpvisals. The persons o.
women. children and ccclcsiasticS are exempt
and the persons and property Of ambassadors
and students; and &C mer chants and all prisons
whose residence is merely transitnry. tn
same exemption attaches to property which is
under the protection Of the public faith. When
Great Britain issued rcpriSals against Spain
no debts due here to Spaninrds were touched,
and TO Spanish effects here were seized. 1t
will not be easy 10 find al instance where
prince has thcn:ht fit 10 make reprisalS upon
a debt due from himself to private men,"
observe tina: this covers not merely the
case Of confscation and suspension, but it covers
the very point which the gentleman has been
arcuinc-tne case Of reprisals, which are fire.
auentiy Just, and never more 50 than in the
present instance. But you must make these
upon something besides those debts
which you owe, and upon which the only Sc
curity is yorr honor and good faith pledged,
according 10 the laws Of nations.
He continues "There is Il confidence that
his vii, not he done. \ private man lends
money to a Prince upon the faith Of an IN
OF honor, because 4 Prince cannot
he compelled, like other men, in an adverse
way. BY q court Of justice. So scrupulously
did England, France and Spain adhere to this
public faith, that even during the war they
no inquiry to be made, whether any
pav.s or the public debt was dine to the enemy,
it is certain many English had money
in the French funds, anu MANY French had
money in TIE English funds The author then
u refer to the case Of the Slleslnn
loan, which occurred in 1852, but which | will
read. :,
quote also from PoIston on International
Law. lie says: ,
CA nation, in 3 state Of var, is considered
authorized, on general principles, to seize the
persons and conlisca:e the property Of the en-
subjects being within its territory. This
a priEc pie which modern usage hns practI.
cally modified to a considerable extent. Gro
tons, himself, considers that, as far as re-
spects debts due to private persons, the
right Of demanding is only suspended b the
var. vatteI, while admitting tho general
principle, qualities it by the exception of in
movable property held ny the enerDy's subjects
with the biilegcrcnt State, and which cannot
bo sophisticated without a breach Of faith
Debts and other things, in action, he holds
liable to seizure. H., at The same time,
that, "at present, the advantage AMI
safety of have induced all the SOW.
creigns Of Europe to relax from his rleor.-
The State does not touch even the sums which
it wes to tie enemy everywhere, in case Of
war, the funds confided to the public are cx'
empt from seizure and conGScation." In the
Of express convention, by which this
matter is sometimes regulated, the modern
1ule, according toDr. Wheaton, Is, that neither
the property Of TIE enemy. within the be)lige'
rent State, nor the debts due to his subjects,
are coniiscatcd on TIC breaking cut Of war"
Thus it will be seen that DR.. Wheaton goes
even further than do in this argument but
we have = case in point later even than this.
During the Crimean war in 1853, a debt
due from England to Russia, known as the
Russian. Dutch loan. And the question was
brought up in Parliament by Lord Dudley
Stuart, who moved that during the war the
payment Of interest on that debt should be
suspended. In an elaborate argument or the
subject, he set forth is objections, upon the
ground that this was n treaty debt, and that
Russia, having violated other stipulaiions OF
the treaty, it was consequently void. But in
the close Of his speech he advanced similar
views to those which We have heard Here
He said 'it would be a great saving Of money"
YES, that was one Of the arguments pro.
duced in the English parliament He con-
tinueS
However, be did not bring this subject for:
ward from motives CT economy alone; he did
not say that the adoption Of his motion would
.1,o uroot c,r;pr of money h1t at least