The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1881-02-03


attempt was made in The case TO restrain he
operation OF the guaranty combined in tue
provision 10 the person who received the
note in The course Of bis dealing with the
bank, blu. the court said: "Tbe guaranty Is
in no sense u personal one. IL attaches to
the note--is part OF II, as much so rs II writ
ten on the bsck OF ~; goes With the note
everywhere, aud invites every one who has
taxes 10 pay TO take H."
Yet Notwithstanding the language OF Inc
act of March 80, 1871, providing that the IN.
ierest coupons OF the new bonds should
abe receivable ut aud after maturity for all
taxes. debts, dues, and demands due the
State,v and this was 30 expressed upon their
face, the Legislature II Virginia, less than
one year afterwards ION the 1th OF March,
1871, passed an act declaring that thereafter
il should "not be lawful for the officers
charged with the collection OF taxes or other
demands OF the Stale" Then due OF which
should thereafter become due TO receive
in payment thereof anything else than gold
or silver coin, United States Treasury notes,
or notes OF the national banks OF the United
States" This act, as seen on its face, Is IN
direct conflict with the pledge OF the
STATE OF The previous year. and with the de-
cisions vi this court TO which we have re-
ferred. Its validity, as might have been
expected, was soon attacked in the courts as
impairing the obligation Of the contract
contained in the funding act, and came be-
fore the Supreme Court Of Appeals of the
State for consideration in AntOni rs.
Wright at its November term OF 1872. The
subject was there most deliberately ana
Iearnedly treated The cases above were
cited By the court; and the provision OF tDe
| - 4, mi n " A.
feclIy conclusive, 20 be a contract founded
upon valuable considerations and binding
upon the State. 1t was earnestly pressed
upon the court that it was not within
the Legitimate power OF the Leglsla-
lure TO make such contract; that
il would tend to embarrass the action OF
SUBSEQUENT Legislatures by depriying them
of the proper control Of the annual revenue,
and might, by absorbing the revenue, sub
sIantialy annul the taxing power and pnt
Stop 10 the wheels OF government. But lbc
court said among other answers TO TINS,
that no rightiul power OF the State was sur
rendered by the legislation, hut Simply
prOyi>ion made for the payment CT tie
debts Of the state; that the annual accru'
inc interest on the debt OF the state was
in all well-resuiltcd governments emcu
an essential part OF their annual expenses
and was always annually provided Tor.
the act only made provision for an an
nual appropriation Of a portion OF Tue rev.
crIle. derived from taxation, 10 the pay
mcnt OF existing debts; and such legi>ia-
lion could not lie deemed great stretch OF
power when the organic law OF the state
not only contemplaie> the punctual annual
Dlyment OF The interest OF her entire deDt,
but imperativelv required, on the cIeIti n
Of a debt, that sinking fund should be at
once established, TO lee applied solely Ia IT.
extinction. The organic law thus not mere
! ~ authorized bur required the Legislature
which created the dent 10 bind all future
Legislatures by the establishment 81 tund
| 10 be applied solely 10 the extinction OF the
debt. And a. to the objection that such
| legislation might, ana probably wonld,
result IN gripping the power and re-
sources OF the State IN time OF war or
other great calamity, the court SAID
! that legislation cannot well be adapted
in advance TO extraordinary and cXcep-
tional cases; thai such eases will occur at
all times with all nations, and must be pro-
yded for by the wisdom and prudence OF
the government for the time being. AT
such time, however," said the court, IN
words full OF wisdom, :" the honored name
broken faith, even in adversely, will, apart
from all other considerations, be worth
more to her in d0llars-incaculaDly more
than The comparatively insignificant amount
OF The interest on portion OF the pubic
debt enjoyed by breach OF contract" The
court thus expressed great truth, which
| all just men appreciate, that there l. no
wealth or power equal to that which ultl-
maley COMES to a State when in all her en-
ragements she keeps her faith unbroken.
These decISicns OF the Federal and state
courts dispose substantially OF the question
| presented IN the case at bar. TIE act OF
March, 1872. being held to be invalid, The
coupons were subsequently and until March,
| 1873, received for all taxes due the State TO
| their full amount. On the 18th OF that
month the Legislature passed an act pro-
yIding that from the interest payable out OF
the treasury on bonds OF the State, whether
| funded or upfundcd, there should be retan-
! ed a tax equal in amount 10 nifty cents on
| the one hundred dollars OF their market
value on the first day IN April OF each year,
and made II the duty OF every officer OF the
Commonwealth charged with the cot
| lection OF taxes TO deduct from the
matured coupons which might be ten
dered TO him in payment OF taxes, or other
| dues to the State, such tax n was
then or might thereafter be imposed on the
bond. The act, IN terms, applied TO all
bonds OF the State, whether held by her
own citizens or nOn-re> idents and citizeus
of other States or countries. In 1874 The
Legislature modified this provision so that
the tax on the bonds should not be retained
from the interest paid on them when they
were The property OF non.residenis OF the
| I. PM AMI ts,ra
omitted in the act Of 1876 providing for the
assessment VI taxes in the STATE, in which
the provision OF the act OF 1873 was insert
ed. Il /, the validity OF this provision, re-
curing the tax levied an HE bonds To be
deducted from the coupons held by other
plrllGs when rendered in payment OF their
taxes or other dues TO the State, which is
presented for our minati0n.
The power Of The State To impose tax
upon her own Obligations is a subjcc, upon
which there has been a difference OF opin-
| ion among jursts and statesmen. On the
one hand. II has been cOntended that such
a tax is IN conflict with aud contrary to the
obligation assumed; that the obligation TO
nav certain sum l. inconsistent with q
right, al the same time, 10 retain portion
of It ia the shape Of tax. and that TO i'm
pose such Il tax j., therefore, TO violate the
promise OF the GOyernment.-(See Hanil-
ton on the Public Credit. in hi, works, 3d
vol, PIP. Oh 10 5lS
On the otter HAND, it is urged that the
bonds Of every State are property IN the
hands Of it, creditors, aud, rs such, that
they should bear a due proportion OF the
public burdens. In the case OF Murray as.
Charleston (06 u. $, 4l5) there are many
pertinent aud Just observations on this sub
jrct which it is not material TO repeat, for the