Bristol news. [volume] (Bristol, Va. & Tenn.) 1867-189?, 1881-01-18
AURORA BOREALIS,
Light in the North

Inc Ten COlUmu 'in0llllcSlO' OF MA
hone has awakened and aroused Il coma
tose North-that great people who have
heretofore learned all they were suppos-
ed to know Of Virginia from her solid
representation of Fuuders in the two
houses of Congress. We give elsewhere
the changed views of the Washington
Republican and the New York IriJuae.-
We now add the following from the
Philadelphia Press. These are three of
the leading Northern papers of three
great cities, and all is the result of the
mere election Of Readiuster to the
Senate, and that too in advance Of his
taking his seat,
The Verdict on Malone.
From tho Philadelphia Press.
General Mahonc's manifesto on the
Virginia debt question commands atten-
ton throughout the country. The gem
eraI tenor Of the comment is favorable to
the force and iuStncSs Of his position. .--
1t is conceded that he makes strong
case, and that, if his statement Of the
facts cannot be successfully contested,
he vindicates himself and turns the a-
bles Of Repatriation upon his Bourbon
opponents.
Down TO this point the Virginia con-
troversy has before the country at large
been matter Of epithets. General Ma
hone has been stigmatizcd rs Il rcpudia-
tor: the Bourbons have trumpetel them
selves as Debt-Payers; and the country,
without knowledge or inquiry, has sul-
fercd itself to be largely imposed upon.
Now this pretentiOn is to he brought to
the crucial test Of critical examination
and absolute proof. The time has gone
by for tllppant assertion and wanlon
calumny. 1t comes 10 the exact citation
Of record, to the attest Of history and TO
the demonstration Of deeds. General
Malone challenges The issue, and his
antagonists must unhOrse him on the
statement Of facts or be themselves over
thrown.
The question as to the self-stylcd
Bourbon Debt-Paycrs are simply these
Did or did they not, in relunding, scale
or repudiatc portion Of the dCbtY Did
or did they not promise to pay the debt
when they knew the revenues were en-
tirely inadequate to fulfill their pledges ?
Did or did they not distinctly aud re-
peatedly refuse to increase The tax, when
an increase of the tax was absolutely The
only way Of keeping their promises and
meeting the requirements? DO or do
they not stand to-day in favor Of n Re
adjustment Of the dcbtY-the precise po-
siliOn which in their opponents they de-
nOunCe as reputation. General Malone
SAYS they did aud DO Just these thiugs.-
This is question Of fact, 1t IL euscep-
tble Of direct and conclusive proof from
the records. lfGcncral Malone is right
in his statements, the Bourhon Debt
payers are branded rs guilty OF false pre-
lenses. II he is wrong, LET them bring
on the evidence and then he will stand
condemned.
TO keep on denouncing him as q rcpu-
dintorin the face Of this statement With
out answering it is simply puclile. II Is
10 confess that no answer can bn made.
All parties in Virginia agree that the
debt shall not be paid as 10 originally
stood. All parties agree tlHt itmu,t be
readiusted to the new order Of llngs.---
All parties agree that the State paws as
much in taxes rs it will bear. The diff
ference Is simply in This, that The Bour-
bons have pralcd about the public honor
and profcsscd to pay the debt when they
were absolutely refusing to provide the
means and doing nothing; while the
Malone party, on the other hand, pro-
pose TO ascertain and recognize all That
they believe to be the legitimate debt Of
the State, and then faithfully apply all
the surplus revenue. beyond the strict
requirement Of the Government aud the
schools, to its payment,
We may hold that Virginia ought to
pay more. We may think that no party
there comes mp 10 the true standard. .--
That Is question which stands by Itself.
But aS between the different parties,
General Malone shows that he has been
more honest, direct and square than
those who, with pharisaic outcry, have
claimed 10 have more honor than hc.-
And If this isn't $50, let us have the tam
gihle proof, Don't let us put the brand
of chief Repudiator upon the wrong
party.