The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1879-07-17
The McCuIloch Bill.


The McCuiloch Bill.
LETTER FROM l. G. FOWLER TO MR.. r. v.
JONES, OF CRAIG.
BRISTOL, VA, June %, 1879.
Mr.. Paris p. Jones:
4 Dear Sir,-Your esteemed favor OF 18th
instant would have been answered sooner
but for unavoidable absence from my Office
Recognizing you as genuide and efficient
readJuster, and not doubling that your pur-
pose in writing is consultation with those
VINO for years have tried to aid each other in
bringing the great burden of our State debt
within the impaired ability Of our people TO
pay, / very cheerfully respond to your spe-
cific inquiries, which are as follows:
"First. Should we accept the brokers' bill:
Ii not, how and what relief or better solution
is offered by further opposition to it?
Second. Do you believe that an increase
OF taxes will be necessary to carry out its
provisions?
"fhird. What course would you advise re.
adjusters to take in the elections to take
place this fall?''
These questions strike at the root of the
whole matter-cover the situation complete
ly. 70 answer them properly would be to
tell what readjuster should now do. From
such an attempt [ have so far shrunk, feel
ing that, unless have something substan-
TALLY better to offer than the McCulloch bill.
had better remain silent. need not tell
you that our party is now divided. 1t diyid.
| ed in the Legislature last winter. Other
wise, this bill would not have passed. The
same body that passed the Barbour bill pass
ed the McCullooh bill. The same body that
agreed to pay the bondholders what we had
left decided that enough would be left to paw
the amounts required by this bill. need
not tell you that a similar division exists
among the rank and file of the readjusters
at home. Feeling kcenly the magnitude of
this rent in our ranks, have been embar-
rassed between the duty owe to the public
as journalist to indicate as best | could the
| line OF duty and a profound indisposition to
| array myself in seeming antagonism to some
OF my readjusting friends who are sure to
| differ with me. So have thus far remained
silent, hoping that current and rapidly-ap-
preaching developments might prevent an
| issue in our ranks. was deeply solicitous
| for the final glory Of our movement, and as
deeply anxious for that glory to attach to
each and every member of our party, with
out single exception. | have been panied
by the prospect that, by dividing now, one
or the other wing of it might place itself In
position where its fair share of the honor of
readjusting the debt would be denied by the
other or withheld by the general public. We
have battled for eight years, and have not
been, and am not now, willing that those
who antagonlzed us shall run away with the |
victory. You will see, then, that while
would not wantonly volunteer to inject my
opinions into the canvass, will not shrink |
from the duty to do so when called on for |
them. So I proceed, as well as can, to an
swer your questions seriGtim,
First. do not think we have now the OPP
portunity of ''oeceptsng'' the brokers' or
McCulloch bill. That opportunity has pass
&c by, unless the bondholders re fuse to fund
under it. You will remember endeavored |
to furnish to the people of Virginia in this
very canvass the opportunity to accept or
reject it. Before went to the last session I
told my friends here would attempt to have
submitted to vote Of the people any bill we
might adopt touching the debt settlement.
introduced that amendment to the bill, but
it was defeated in the House by 20 to Al.
When the next LEGISLATURE shall meet in
December next portion {and in my opinion
large portion) of the debt will have been
funded under it. II the bill could be repeal
ed then, it could only be repealed as to the
unfunded portion. The funded portion
would stand in spite of any repeal. That
much of it would haze to be accepted" by
US.
confess to you, in the poverty of my in
ventive faculties, l do not now know s'what
relief or better solution is offered by further
opposition to it, at this time.
We must remember that the EXTREMIST
proposition OF our party has been to nav three
per cent. on the whole debt, This bill gives
US our EXTREMIST demand for ten years, or
nearly so. Aside from the view that re-
newal of the agitation would be for point
ten years ahead OF US, we must consider as
to how, if we now repeal and 20 back to sac
per cent, we are going to get away again
from six per cent. There are ways to do it,
I admit, put they are very extreme ones, and
would require grip of popular purpose and
degree of popular indignation which could
never be excited under the old six-per-cent.
settlement, and would be still more difficult
to excite under the reduced rates OF this bill.
The hope OF it is so nearly impracticable that {
think we had as well abandon iC. In other
words, think this bill has weakened our
line of battle, though it does not give us all
we wished, nor all we ought to have had.
With all the industry and power 1 could
command 1 endeavored to prevent its pas
sage in its present shape, and it it were now
before me for its passage would do so again.
A majority of the Legislature have taken on
themselves the responsibility of acc ,pting its
bad features. Its good features were secur-
ed by US and we can afford to be responsible
for them. |,
TO repeal the bill and 90 back to six per
cent. without some practical plan by which
to get away from that position again, could
only be justified by those of our friends who
think this bill is worse than the old funding I
bill OF 1871, which Is an admission am not
willing to make. Such an assertion proves
too much. If after battling with the public
debt for eight years we, the readiusters,
have gotten it into worse fix than we found I
it, we had better quit the agitation. Ger
tainly think this is a poor plea to 90 before {
the country with. There are features in ]
this bill which I would again resist with all t
my might If it was now before nee, as did t
when it was before me last winter. But c
will not say to the people that our battle. in. q
stead OF lettering their situation, as we prom. '
ised, has rendered it "infnitely worse.'' Z
Such would be confession OF our incapacity {
to manage it, and our employers. the peo- S
pie, would be apt to relieve us of our agency. +
Second. As to an increase of taxation, l
think we are estopped from considering that Z
question during the ten-year period. For '
ten years the bill gives us what we asked. 6
Ii it could increase taxation during the ten C
years next to come our own terms would in. ?
crease it, and we would not be allowed to il
enter the complaint If we had the face to at Il
tempt it. do believe the bill will make Il
necessary temporary increase of taxation, c
but it will not last longer than any increase Il
our own terms would have necessitated in s.
side the ten-year period. In the lap between Il
.he new and the old bill there will be certain a
arrearages that may call for temporary in h
crease. The weld between the two systems "
will be likely to leave bulge or swell which o
we ought to get over pretty soon. The ii
per cent. period is little too far ahead of us
or any safe calculation, but even the per o
cent. period will be no heavier than the pres IL
INT coupon interest on the consol debt, which 4.
We are actually paying. The question will
hen depend on the condition OF the State at
hat time. With very moderate degree OF n
cooperation, any increase, then, ought to \
De unnecessary. The 5 per cent. period is
thirty years off. Most Of us now old enough tt
% vote in this campaign will then be dead, +
md our power or duty to look after the fu- W
ure is one in which the question Of limita-
ion enters, as it does as to most of our res. p
for the past, Moreover, if the I'll
,redit of the State should then be good. and ~