Shenandoah herald. [volume] (Woodstock, Va.) 1865-1974, 1879-09-24

We bro urlFlhB on capltai-IOr Wno
would care to carry his capital for in.
vestmentto . pauper community! I
say again, that at the end Of ten years
from this time we will be able to paw
four per cent. on the debt with more
ease than three per cent. now, and I
don't believe that an increase Of tax.
alton will be necessary under this Dill
before or at the end Of ten Year,.
Second. Gentlemen object to the bill
because it capitalizes one.half OF the
outstanding overdue interest on the
peeler bonds and provides for this
interest to be funded in interest bearing
bonds. The peeler holders-the widow
and the orphan-itis claimed. have had
great injustice done them. How we
have sympathizsd with them! We have
become pathetic when we talked about
them. Not cent Of interest have they
received since 1874. And now. when
tardy and yet not full justice IL proposed
for them, We hear gentlemen talk Of
the great outrage that Virginia 10 about
to suffer on account Of the capitalize
ton Of this INTEREST,"
But let us SEQ hew this proposition
completes, in q business point Of view,
with the proposition OF tho Bocoek-
Fowler bill. That bill provided for the
issuance OF non-interest bearing certiH-
Gates for all of tho accrued aad uapaid
interest on the peeler bonds, redeem
able at the pleasure Of the General
Assembly. Now I take 1t fer granted
that the General Assembly would have
made some provision TO redeem these
certificates. know it would not have
been guilty of the aross iniustice to the
peeler holders OF not making tins pro-
vision. The amount OF his accrued
and unpaid interests over $4,000, 900.
submit, which would Do the better for
the state, to assume the whole ofit, As
provided by the Bocock-F Fowler bill,
and Issue men interest -besrin. certlh-
Gates. 10 be paid. presume. ia
reasonable tine--!or if not paid in
reasonable time the state would be
placed again in the attitude OF dsiaul-
ter-or to assume one.half OF It and
issue bonds, as pro rided BY the pending
proposition? 1t seems to me that the
response OF every intelligent business
man must be in favor Of the latter plan.
Third. Again, it is objected. that the
bonds provided for By the pending pro.
position are exempt from taxation. -
The objection hss force IN il, grant, |
but certainly we must offer s)mo in
ducements to the holders OF the out
standing bonds to surrender them and
accept in their stead, bonds bearing
interest as provided In the bill. This
General Assembly. BY vote APP |
preaching unanimity in both branches
oft. passed the Bocock-Fowler bill,
which provided for new bonds, "cx-
empt, both principal and interest, from
taxation by the state, or by any county
or corporation therein. which ahsll be
expressed on the face OF the bond. -
How does It csme that the sane gentle.
men who reported and voted for that
bill are now announcing a infamous
the proposition 10 ssuo bonds exempt
from taxation? would like to hear an
explanation. Who is inconsistent!
Fourth. Will the schools be destroyed
il the pending proposition becomes q
law9 Who says so on the hoor Of this
House, During the closing hours OF the
late session, by a unanimous vote Of
the House Of Delegates, = bill which
had already received the unanimous
vote of the Senate, Was passed, to pro-
tect the schools, and 10 now law. Was
that bill pretense-a mere sham
Why did not some member so state
when the proposition was pending II
received the unanimous sanction OF
your committee Of 6nsaco Will any
member rise in bis place nov and say
that The schools are not protected ? 1t
10 unnecessary to dwell on this objec-
ton. 1t amounts to absolutely nothing.
The schools will be protected in
future. even ifthe pending proposition
fails 70 become . law, If It docs be-
como q law, they will be protected
during tho time 1t will require to &C.
complish the refunding aud when the
refunding 10 accomplished, the the rev.
enues OF the state will be sufficient for
the supper. Of the government, 10 pay
interest On the public debt. and to pay
the schools the amount dedicated by the
Fifth. But why employ syndcatss OF
bankers aud brokers to refund the dsbts
In reply 10 this objection ! will state
that the people OF Virginia are specially
in having The public debt re-"
funded at lower rate oil interest. The
United States government made con-
tracts with syndicstes to refund its debt.
The experience Of other nations re-
the employment OF syndi-
Gates. Why should Virginia refuse to {
avail herssli Of THIS assistance when 1t
IAN be had without cost 10 the state
The recommendations OF these synJi-
Gates will exert great influence over the
holders of Virginia securities. They
nave familiarlzed themselves with the
condition Of the state and the public
sentiment OF Its people, and they can
1--WE information which will induce the
oondholders to accept tho terms pro-
posed by the bill. AS for making a
contract With them, all governments are
making contracts with
agents for specific purposes. As for
he jurisdiction Of the federal courts = to
enforce the contracts by the bill.
10 jurisdiction is given to the federal
courts by the bill and without
'uch jurisdiction being specially pror .
yided tor, the federal courts could
lol take 1t. Tbese syndicates cannot /
Tue the state in the federal courts or
anywhere else. 10 my opinion, il the .
,ill becomes law. But why this ape
,rehension about suits in the federal or
tate courts II the syndicstes refund 4.
he debt according to contract, certainly
hey will haze no ocoaaion 70 sue II .
hey fail to refund the debt according to l.,
they will have no right to sue. /
Sixth. But the bill provides for ecu II
IONS receivable 10 payment Of tsIes.- .
This objection 10 the most serious one q
hat has been suggested but when I a
ono to consider that for Q number Of
ears the coupons to be annually pro.
dod for on tho whole debt will be
etwsen two aud three hundred thous- 3
nd less than the coupons now on two
birds Of the dsht; that after the sxpi- !
alton Of those Years, for twenty years "a
D follow, the coupons on the whole Il
Il IL