Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1879-01-28
Extract from the Biennial Message oil
Gov. II. NJ. Mathews.
WEST vIRGINIA'S LIABILITY FOR A
PORTION OF THE ANTE-WAR DEBT
OF VIRGINIA.


WEST vIRGINIA'S LIABILITY FOR A
PORTION OF THE ANTE-WAR DEBT
OF VIRGINIA.
Public attention has frequently been
directed to the debt of Virginia, and to
the question whether it would be fair
and equitable for this State to assume
any portion of that debt. In the dis
cussions of this question which have
taken place, certain important facts
connected with the subject seem to have
been altogether overlooked.
The convention which assembled in
Wheeling, in June, 1861, to re organize
the government, and for other purposes,
and which must now be considered the
first legal convention of Virginia held
sincs the convention of 1851, on the 29th
day of August, passed an ordinance
providing for the formation of new
State out Of q portion of the territory of
Virginia. The ninth section of this
ordinance provides that the new State
shall take upon itself a just prop portion
of the public debt the Commonwealth
of Virginia, prior to the first day of jan
uary, 1861, to be aseertained by charging
to it all State expenditures within the
limits thereof, and Just proportion of
the ordinary expenses of State govern
ment since any part of the State debt
was contracted; and deducting there
from the moneys paid into the treasury
of the commonwealth from the counties
included within said new State during
the same period.
The first Constitution OF this State
contained a provision declaring that
IAN equitable proportion OF the public
debt of the Commonwealth of Virginia,
shall be assumed BY this State; and the
Legislature shall ascertain the same as
soon as may be practicable, and provide
for the liquidation thereof by sinking
fund sufficient to pay the accruing in
terest, and redeem the principal within
thirty-fonr years."
Under joint resolution adopted by the
Legislature on the 18th and Gath days
of February, 1871, the Governor ap-
pointed commissioners Ito treat with
the authorities of Virginia on the sub
ject of the proposed adjustment of the
public debt of that State, prior to the
first day of January, 1861" These
commissioners proceeded to Richmond,
made known their mission to the Gov
ernor of Virginia and proposed to treat
with commissioners he might appoint,
and their proposition was declined, upon
the ground that the Governor of Vir-
ginia did not feel authorized to appoint
commissioners. They. however, pro-
ceeded, as stated in their report, to as
certain upon fair, just and equitable
principles, what proportion of said pub
lie debt of Virginia should, in their
opinions, be paid by West Virginia" T"
They adopted as "the principle, if not
the only basis of the adjustment of the
debt, the benefit conferred" on the two
States by the proceeds of the bonds
which represented the debt, and mot
territory and population" and they
arrived at the conclusion that the bal
ance due to Virginia was 1858, 25O.33.
The Senate Finance Committee, in
their report of the 23rd of December,
1878, state that the true rule of settlement
is that preacried by Virginia herself in
the ninth section of the ordinance OF
August 20, 1861, which I have already
quoted, and that upon settlement ac-
cording to this rule balance will be
ascertained in favor of West Virginia OF
$525, 900. This sum is the excess of the
payments into the Treasury of Virginia
by the counties now composing this
State since the frst Virginia bonds were
issued, over the public expenditures
within the limits of this State, and our
proportion of the current expenses dur
ing the same time.
The Act of the Legislature of Virginia,
Of March 30th, 1871, known as 1.-The
Funding Rill," proposed 10 the creditors
of Virginia holding bonds issued prior
to the first day of January, 1861, that
they should first surrender these bonds
and receive in lieu thereof for each bond,
or for the aggregate of these bonds. two
obligations of Virginia-one, a bond for
two-thirds of the amount of the bond
surrendered; the other, certificate Of
Indebtedness for the remaining third,
signed by the Treasurer and Second
Auditor of Virginia, payment of which
was to be provided fer in accordance
with such settlement as should thereaf-
ter be had between the States of Vir-
glnia and West Virginia. In response
to this proposal, many bonds were sur
rendered and new bonds received there
for. West Virginia was in no way par.
ty to this arrangement. If it were true
as has frequently been asserted. that the
original bonds, issued before the crea-
ton of this State, are to be regarded a:
the Joint and several obligations Of botf
States, yet when the creditors have vol
UNFAIRLY surrendered these bonds ant
accepted the obligations of Virginia on
ly, have they not released West Virgins
from any legal obligation to them?
| It has been represented that the GER
tlhcates are statements merely o
amounts due from West Virginia, ane
that they do not bind Virginia. This ii
grave error. They are, as is showr
on their face, the promises of Virginia
1t Is not probable that Virginia will
urge settlement. Whenever an ad
Justment Of liabilities is had, Virgini,
can DC called upon, under the terms o