The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1881-10-20
sTAUNToN, VIRGINIA, OCTOBER 20, 1881.

STATEMENT OF THE PUBLIC DEBT OF vIR
GINA AS OF JAN. IST., 1881, DEDUCTINt
| WEST vIRGINIA's SHARE.
Debt january LIST, 1861 .............. 31,800,7i2
Interest to January 1st 1881, ........ SS,161855
1885,, 1858 8
Deoucs one-thtrd for West Virginia, 23,320,522 Z
46,641,045 s
Deduct int paid from Jan.
i. 6i, to Jan. /, 81, ....... 4711,243 80
Deduct Int l paid under
Deduct State int. in Public
Works sold for old bonds. 26s7, 179 50
| Deduct State int. in Public
WORKS sold for bonds Of
Deduct int paid in cash ''0N''00' %
Deduct int. paid in cou- ~
pons July l, '7l.......... 7,sOl,si7 90
ing fund. ................ 5,es4,720 SO
49, s2s, 1884, $40 n
1s,sss,l2s o.
| Deduct years. war int. on
4 of above principal. ..... 6,oss11s 8:
Leaves debt Jan. !, lssl. $147ssOos q
80 it will be seen that in no event, whether
war interest IS deducted or not, can we equi
ta6y owe more than twenty millions oil
dollars
But it is said that while this is equity, still
the Funding Bill of 1871 created an irrepealo-
Que contract between the State and her creditors
and that consequently we are bound by the
Ubiquitous term OF that monstrous law.
Though am no lawyer as I said before. yet
know it is q maxim OfhW
THATFRAUD vITIATEs ALL CONTRACTS
and it is an admitted fact that theFunding bill
of 1871 was passed be means of the most uIt-
blushing and shameless bribery.
T aud n
ton candidate for Governor, and who was q
member of the Legislature which passed the
Funding bill, but who was not at that Fun
der. and did not vote tor it, says that he is not
prepared to deny that the bill was passed by
fraud of the grossest kind.
Now, if this be so, land it is generally ad-
mitted by all sides) then, not only was this
capitalization Of interest, this interrogation Of
the States revenues before they reached the
treasury, and this placing of the State in the
attitude of a dishonest debtor who had to be
compelled to pay her debts, not only, l say,
was this unjust and not according to equity.
but 1t soas illegal as soe, and if brought properlv
before the courts, ought to be so declared.
say, then, that am fully convinced that
the debt ought TO be settled on the basis of the
Riddlebeiger bill, If not 6w its methods. In
other words, l do not pretend to be lawyer
enough to know whether the methods of set
Element prescribed by the Riddleberger bill
will be effective or not, but do think I know
enough Of equity and justice to know that the
amount fixed BY that bill is not less than the
amount which we justly owe. In no case can
we agree to pay more than twenty millions Of
dollars upon any equitable basis Of settlement
The next great question TO be considered is
THE MAINTENANCE AND PERFECTION OF OUR
PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM.
/ shall not attempt to discuss the benefits of
a well perfected school system, properly ad-
minlstered, for I confidently believe that the
schoolsiare strongly intrenched both in the
and am sure the only question which they
will ask is which party will do most for the
schools?
As the platforms of both parties declare dis
tinctly in favor of maintaining the schools, we
can only judge of which party is the best
friend Of the schools, by looking TO their re-
spective records upon this question.
, 1t is true that the Funder candidate for gov
ernor, Mai. Daniel, has been charged with
being
AN ENEMY TO THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS,
anu it is true that he did declare that he had
rather see eyery school house in Nrgsnaa burned
than to see the Massey school bill and the
Reputation measures" which he thought
would follow, become laws but Maj Daniel
has said that he has been misundersteed, and
that he is really and truly friend of the school
system, and am perfectly willing for him to
define his own position in this matter, but
do say that it seems to ME that Mai. Daniels
love for the measures and methods OF the
funding bill exceeded his attachment to the
schools
I And just at this point will call attention
to the fact that the Massey School Bill had the
same object in view, and proposed to accom-
plish that object by substantially the same
methods as cid the Barbour bill, q bill intro
duced into the Legislature and advocated by
the Hon. James Barbour who Is now Mai
Daniels associate upon the Funder ticket
II, then, Maj. Daniel really had such holy
horror Of the Barbour bill and the Massey
bill, which he and his party have time and
again denounced as reputation and worse
than highway robbery, how, say, can he con-
sistently allow himself to be associated pollti-
cally with one who advocated these base re-
pudiation measures" 80 base as to force such
an ardent friend of the free schools as Mai.
Daniel says he is, to declare in favor Of burn
ing them down rather than vote for the bills?
And now can Mr.. Barbour consistently vote
and act with party which he thinks has I'M
lawfully intercepted, IN behalf Of the Brokers,
the money ccnstitutionally due the schools,
and party which still contends that his meas
uAO III thO ACllC1 Vi VIC bCuCOlS WAS ulSuOu6SL
as well as unconstitutional
But these are matters which mention, not
for the purpose OF making . point against
either OF the gentlemen, personally, but for the
purpose of showing that the party Of which
these gentlemen are the accredited representa-
tives, cannot be said to have any fixed princI-
pies, either in regard to the State debt or the
public school. Now, do not assert that all
those who support the Funding ticket are enc
mics OF the schools but think can safely as
sert that all the opponents Of tho free school
system are supporting that tioket, while the Re
adjuster party is unat in favor of the free
schools.
The figures showing the difference between
the number OF schools and teachers, and the
amount OF money expended for their support
during the last year of Funder rule, and the
first year OF Readjuster rule, are 50 significant
that no comment is necessary, and herewith
append the official figures:
1910 ,ooo