The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1880-11-19

nDsfDce OF fraud or Misrepresentation, th
e Transaction ia binding, although the conclu
sion at which The parties NAV have arrived
! Is not that which a court OF iU,tice woult
{ have arrived bad It's decision been sought
: The real consideration which each party
receive unfer compromise being Not The
saeri6ce OF the rights. but the settlement oI
, the dispute aud the abandonment Of the
claim.
IL was said by Lord MacclesfeId In Gafin
Us. CJnB, Pere, WINS. 127, where two tars
ties are contendfBg bttcre This court. and
one releases bis preteD,ions To the other,
fbere clp be no color TO set aside this cors
Tgomise, because The one That made it bad
a ylght for by this sinae reason there can be
no such tbiBg as comrrowssiDg a suit nor
room for any accommodation. Any release
supposes the party maaipx VI to have u
right but this can he no reason for its
being set aside, for thus any release might
be avoided. fSee aiso Moore U.s. FuZwater,
2 Raw i45ll Now let us apply tbe princi-
Piles TO the case before us.
Notwithstanding Inc several DECISIONS OF
this Court in the coupon cases the question
OF the public d'Lt and eE the constitution
aity of the funding bin Of Gs1f continue
TO be discussed in the Legislature, by the
press, and by the people 10 tbeiR primary
assemblages. The best state@maushfp OF the
State finds itsel, at fault IN deaiing with the
subject.
The legislative department Of the govern
meDt. charged under the Constitution with
the duty OF laying taxes and OF providing
the means OF di>eharginG the public dues,
has throughout maBfes ed unmistakable
hostility TO the provisions OF the fUndno
bill. II repealed the coupon feature OF that
bill nj an eal IL dhyr and 10 has session after
session passed other bills with view 10
other and more acceptable adjustments
OF the public debt. " in rhIs uEset-
tied and complicated condition OF pub
lie atlaiIs the State and her creditors
shall agree upon a settlement involving
rele1se OF q part OF their demands, in con-
sideratOn of a prompt payment OF the re-
sidue, can it be that the creditor, aftef re-
ceiving the payment, may repudiate the
settlement and claim the full amount OF the
original Indebtedness
II this be so, bow is any adjustments 0f
the public debt ever 10 be mad,'- even with
the consent OF the cfcditor1 Whlt becomes
| Of tbe supposed ~ lease OF the third under
the funding bill OF tsIt AZ West Nirgina's
share Of the States iDdebtednessf II " I'M
possible that tie validity OF a compromise
between sovereign State and her creditors
can depend upon such narrow and tt Clinical
grounds as the surrender OF on Old bond
and the execution and acceptance OF a new
one.
The etlic1ey OF a compromise rests upon
the broad ground that II is the settlement
Of controversy between the parties. and
il Is none the less binding because all the
right may be on one side, and she conclusion
to which The parties come is the very p
yersal Of that which court Of Justice
would reach il us decision were invoke d.
Ii is difficult TO perceive any substantial
distinction between the agreement under
the funding bill of 1874, to. surrender one
third OF the debt in consideration OF re-
ceiving two thirds, and an agreement to
surrender one third OF the coupons in con-
sideraion Of receiving one third Ia money.
1t Is on this ground, il no other, the
right of the State may be sustained.
II has been said, however, that the petit
toner bl,. no notice of the net 0i the 18Th
OF March, 1872, or it does not appear that
he had such notice.
This is mere suggestion of counsel, and
IL not averred in the petition. 1t is simply
incredible that the petitioner could have
proceeded under an act OF the Legislature
10 collect in money at the Treasury two
thirds OF bis coupons, and have them
stamped by the Auditor, in Ignorance Of
the act under which his right accrued and
the proceeding was had.
One OF the acts referred 10 the other, and
he was necessarily aware OF both, and il
might with rs much prOpriety be insisted
that party is ignorant Of the provision Of
Il deed under which he claimed title.
| All laws relating to the pubic revenue
are public laws, Of which all men are pre-
Sumcd TO have notice, especially those who
have contracts or dealings with the state
arising out OF such laws.
Il can scarcely be necessary to cite au-
thOriiy in support OF principle 30 Just in
itself aud 20 universal in lis application.
have SAID this much not only because
the question iS eIabOratCly discussed, in the
opinioa of the majority, but because the
ease Itself involves principles OF the grayest
character, and the decision now made may
hereafter be invoked TO defeat compromises
OF the debt and the settlement OF most
perpleXing question, made with the consent
and concurrence OF all. IL can certainly be
no hardship or injustice 10 leave the peti-
toner where his own deliberate contract
has placed hm-and there am for leaving
him.