The weekly register. [volume] (Point Pleasant, Va. [W. Va.]) 1862-1909, 1863-02-26

iH'''S 'Ih'l'".S' '"V'V 'vu''
would be constitutional expounders, and
sSown their quibbes,and aitenuated, far.
fetched renderings Of The Constitution,
the shcerest sophistry, and having pune
Nured the free niger bubble, till a few
niger babies only remained, we propose
considering another objection, viz;
"IIl never vote to take my neighbors
money oul of his pocket" That has an
honest appearance, and at first blush,
seems very proper yer, it really, is rcry
dccGpt;re. 1t implicitly assumes, that
voting for West Virginia, is taking un
justly, our neighbos money. 1t is evi J..
IDENTIFY cimod at the emancipation clause
in our amended Constitution. In one
sense, most legislative acts involve eta.
king money from our neighbors peck,
eis"-coercing the payment Of taxes to
meet general appropriations, aud the
necessary expenses of government; but,
bs that is not the sense here intended,
We need not discuss Il u view Of it.
If, as we are confident, is no. the case,
there is a person within the limits Of
West Virginia, who owns many slaves,
but no real estate. then, indeed, BY de.
prcciating the value Of his slaves, it Ger.
iainly would bear with peculiar hard,
ship upon him, and-lf he has no kin to
rcap the equivalent advantages, result.
ant from his personal loss-arouses our
sympathy; but, as tho case supposed is
clearly an exceptional ore, (f not sheer
y imaginary we can't be asked to
Iegislute solely 10 NEE! such possible
contingencies-aS the interest of one,
must be subordinated to the interest Of
the masses. II, indeed, such was not
the case, then all laws must be repealed
all government cease as utterly i'm
practicable. Thus much, for the theory,
how as to the practice?
Slave. holders are real estate owners.
We candilly admit, the market value Of
the slaves will be sensibly diminisl ed BY
the operation Of the Constitution of
West Virginia; yet, we can demonstrate
the loss is only apparent, while the gain
would be Subslan,ial-real. A, owns
thirty 1.-Two slaves, { just the number of
the largest STAKEHOLDER, and the most
Jealous new State man in this part of the
State) estimated value $500 each, 50,
600, his land 1000 acres, averaging $50
per acre S30,O00-total $4,000; he
votes for the new State, it's adopted, bis
slaves dePreciOte fifty per ccnt,-$4, 500,
but, his land Increases in rGlae fty per
cent, (at the least, and is then worth
$4j. 0OO,--adi diminished value Of slaves
Il, S00--and wo have-S49, 800, in.
stead Of $50, 6o0for botl, savcs'md land
---jiiIercDce-sl0,e oO-in favor Of The
chRagc proposed III COnsthutious,--for i,
we are reduced TO a choice of the Goa.
sttUtion Of 81 or, of 90. We have
PurpOsely made low estimate OF the
enhanced value OF real estate, and high
estimate Of the loss OF slave properly, as
it answers all the purposes in view; and
yet, we find instead Of shareholders sus.
tanning loss, the contrary is certain Ia
result from our permanent separation
and the consequent establishment OF gu,
New State-Wesl Virginia. Again, The
above gain Of $40, 200 il in the case o
A, who owns 80 slaves and 900 acre!
of improved land but B, owns 80 slaves
300 acres Of improved, and 5000 acres
of unimproved land. Consider ho@
much is uOjuSlly, arbitrarily taken from
tho pocket Of B. Present value Of
slaves, $4,000, improved land, $4,000
mimproved land $4,000, total value
s21Oooi adopt the new Constitution
rnd the case stands thus value of slayci
$1,000 of improved land $l3,5OO, IN
improved land $50, 600, TOTAL 5000 dc
duct present value Of the three Items
s97,OOo--Ond we have S2i 900, gained
10y charging our old, for the new, Con,