Bristol news. [volume] (Bristol, Va. & Tenn.) 1867-189?, 1878-03-05

owed. 1t could not without absolute
qualification. Its trainers and the
people who adopted it saw no virtue
in an ed IcatiOu for their posterity, OF
the means of getting whlch Iney
would ever be ashamed. They iooked
upOn the debt as of too high Il dlShlty
thus to he treated. because 1t was ali
obligation then in being ana rec"g-
nized as having both legal anu moral
force, and in that very Instrument,
which the bill calls the fundRG1eutal
law snd of such binding power they
acknowledge or provide TOR me pay
Ineut of the then and now existing
debt in six separate clauses. Ihat the
whole of All instrument must be taken
together to arrive at the intention. ls
q canon of construction We learn IN
the hurn-b1uks. To save the makers
and endOrsers. think they ought to
have the benefit OF that canon. But
the friends of the bill say that the
amount of tax is specified, within GER
tain limits, which shall be laid for
the support of free schools, and which
is building on the Legislature. SO
much the worse for their argument
For the Constitution does not limit
the amount which shall be laid for
the payment of the debt. and which
il at least none the less obligatory.
| cannot. therefore, see how h g
preamble saves The bill, either upon
the grounds OF necessity for the pre-
sprvati IN of the Stats sovereignty
and existence, or the obligation o. the
organic law. 1t is fiat denial of the
latter in it's refusal to carry out its
provisions for the payment of the
debt.
Nor can see how the fifth clause
brings any relief. In my view. L am
not aware of any power in the Legs
lature to take away, or fOrce the
creditors to compromise their legal
rights :" and if 1t had, would 1t be
any solace. after having used it 70
say it was not meant? Nor is it any
more soIace. after having in this very
act taken away those rights, to tell
them it is only done with purpose
to secure an adjustment of the debt. a"
Is there any better tine than now 20
carry out that purpose?
This bill does not help to that end.
| am sorry to say. l see no peace
in it. 1t is a proclamation of war
against those to whom weare IN debt.
1t is an array OF the will of the Leg
islature against the rights OF the
creditors. Under the Constitution
of the State we have sworn to support
there is tribunal to decide that ls>
sue. Beyond the State there is
another Constitution TO obey, which,
is the supreme law, our Oaths, equal
Iy bind US. Under its provisions
there is tribunal to which there is
appeal. These have both spoken
Why seek them again, even though
sure Of eifectiing reversal when We
car try to "secure an adjustment"
which will bring peace, without loss
Of time or credit!
Is it beneath the dignity of TIE
State to look upon it as plain buSi>
ucss matter? The creation of the
debt was so Why not its payment or
adjustment? 1t is not by seemingly
indirect or doubtful ways that things
that are good and great are done. l
am very sure you do not mean suC h
ways, though the world might thiuk
you did, and that by some subtle
alchemy you intended to dissolve
that golden chain which however or
wherever we may 90 must always
beund aud bind both States and men.
+. w. NJ. HOLIDAY.