The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1881-09-09

Xffft3fW Nat@o ffrfc
perts except tbai used exeiusiyeiy iof g
iixfcu.. charitable, and tdnes'lonsI puE'
,s,.fs 4 ! sare subject with ReSdiuster
az.,ofs. These orators dare not syow their
t,tea.,on ia lax the national bonds held g
VIRGINS; fof their Republican ailies would
be compelled 10 desert them II they were
10 make any such svowsL
Lei Us again quote from the Readius'er
ereed sbe resolution TO which we refer. u
resds as fellows:
uTblrd. We fegssert our adherence "
Tue eonstis utionsl Requirement. lon =
.fauAl and uuilorm taxation Oh pl0ps'tS,
exempiing non except mas speSsnSs ~ ~
tSs Con stitntlon and usea sAos ms.
sfsfgsous, charitable, ana euue"'""
poses.'V
mat speaks for itsrIf. II 1t means wn''
4 saws. then the ReSdiusters are pieogeu 20
shs tsxat,on Of on the United States bonds
beld in virginia, Just a. truly as they are
m. dyed to the taxation Of Virginia bonds
Their language covers both these kinds Of
bands; snd no man can gige any good rea-
SON why The one kind should be taxed and
me Other kind exempted from taxation.
The United states supreme Court has de-
clded that Virginia cannot tax the coupons
u from Der bonds; and would no doubt
II the question were presented 10 u, ue'
eide that the bonds themselves cannot
he taxed. The Supreme Court OF Appeals
OF Virginia viii not allow Virginia's oonos
10 be iaxed, aud the Supreme Court OF the
UlIted States viii pot allow UScLs SANS
bonds TO be taxed. But, applying the prin'
ciples Of reimbursement vigorously to na-
tiousl politics, as Dir. BLAIR has proposed 10
do. The Regdjusters can Just as consistently
work for the appointment Of none but ma
tIonsI Readjusters TO the bench OF the high
est court in the United States os for the
election of none but local ReSdiusters to The
bench Of The highest court In Virginia. The
bonds Of Virginia cannot be tsxed whilst
the present Supreme Court OF Virginia re-
minis. The bonds OF the United STATES
cannot be taxed whilst the present Supreme
Court OF the United States remains. Why
cut OF the heads Of the Judges OF the former
court and bow to the decree OF the latter
court?
The Hhi0 is the ablest OF the organs OF
the Resdjus,er party. When II siaogers,
the RfGdjrsier party Is in danger OF falling
under a load. Now, how does the Wing
treet this question OF taxing national bonds
We allow II TO speak for Itself. 1t refers
us in one place to what Major DANIEL said
IN a public speech in Lynchburg some years
ago. Major DANIELS remarks were true.
We see no Inconsistency between what he
SAYS snd~ybat we said. However low the
ptlce nj which United States bonds sold in
1863, or al any other time, that price would
have been reduced largely II the bonds had
been made taxable. This point needs no
elaboration. Major DANIELS declarations
are entirely consistent With cur statement
shat when the United States Government
sold us exempted bonds 1t received the
taxes upon them all In advance. We will
reproduce Major DANIELS declarations.
He said
"These bonds were bought at par in
Treasury notes, when they were al a dis
connt OF from 40 TO 90 per cent. below coin.
That Is 20 say, the buyer Of 2 81 900 United
States bond got II at from S40O to 5000 10
god value, and then drew interest on
$1,000 IN coin 81 G per cent"
Further, be said:
aThe bondholders OF the United States,
through these transactions, were aggran-
dyed In three ways: III BY getting the
enormous sun of $l,0l2, $50, 004 for nothing
ssye sbe risk they took npen the survival OF
The country I'd by getting interest in
coin upon an investment of deprecated pa.
per and 81 by obtaining exemption Of
ibis immense property from taxation-ior,
be II remembered, that United States bonds
are exempt from taxes. and that those best
abie TO bear them share not at all in the
burdens to be borne"
Now, we sgain ask the Wing wbetheribt
Rszdjusiers arc in favor OF taxing those
bonds thus bought at so low a figure, and
yielding interest regularly in goldf VII
you tax Virginla's comparatively v~siueles'
bonds, and exempt from all taxation, Fed
erai and State, "those best able to beai
taxes and who have not for nearly twent.
years shared and do not now "share at al
in The burdens to be borne"? VIII yol
tax The bonds held by the widows and or
pbans Of Virginia who have put their trus
Ia our old Commonwealth, and leave I'm
taxed those bloated 'bondholders" wbC
can afford to pay more than par for 4 PEI
cent. United States bonds
In another place. the Wig talks as fol
lows:
"The constitutional requi cement refer
red TO IL that OF the Constitution OF Vir
ginia, aud the property referred 10 Is th'
State bonds, as that property is the only
species which Funders seek to exempt II
Virginia in dehsnce OF that constitutions
requirement. II has no reference TO whaI
Il above and beyond our own Constitution
as United States bonds, which, By the orr
Qihol contract, were exempt from all taxa
llon-~as the Federal courts are o said L
Hold. There was no such exemption In on.
original contract, and The Funders now at
tempt to make It part OF q nep bargain il
the very teeth OF the Constitution
In whist sense are Federal bonds aboy'
snd beyond our own ConstitutIoni W,
were writing OF " Readiustment in Na,iona
politics.n You have the same right to agl
tate FOR the taxation Of national bonds tha
you have to sgitste for the taxation o
State bonds. You have as much right Z
denland a new FEEDERS; Supreme Cour
which win allow ycu to tax national bond
as 10 demand a new State Supreme Cour
which win allow you TO tax State bonds
We know well enough that your platform
was intended 10 hsye emo reference" L
uatiorsl bonds. What we want 10 kaowi is
srky Il has no such reference when It's Ian
...st, In efuaos national honda-tue