The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1884-04-24

In 1871 the. Legislature Of West Vir-
ginia created commission, of which Hon,
Jonathan Bennett, formerly Auditor OF Vir-
ginia, was Chairman, to proceed to Rich
mond to meet a like commission from the
State Of Virginia, for the purpose OF ad-
justing the original debt of Virginia be-
tween the two States. The Legislature
of Virginia did not appoint commission
to meet that delegated by the Legislature
of West Virginia, and consequently there
was no ascertainment or steps taken TO
ascertain the equitable portion OF the DEBT
properly assignable to the respective
States. The West Commissioners, how
ever, had formulated an estimate OF the
liability of that State for the debt OF W.
ginia. upon the basis of the revenues paid
into the Treasury of Virginia by the peo-
pie and territory constituting West Viz
ginia ard the amount appropriated by the
Legislature of Virginia and expended IN
said territory This amount, as well as
we now remember, was about $780, OC or
81 ,OO0,0 900. The settlement OF the VIZ
ginia Legislature. under the act al 1871,
which assigned to West Virginia $l5,OOO.-
600. represented by certificates to be is
sued by the State of Virginia, was utterly
repudiated, not only by the commission,
but by the people of West Virginia.
Recently Hon. Charles J. Faulkner,
| of West Virginia, was interviewed.on this
question, and gave his views of the subject
and the manner of disposing OF it. His
idea is that West Virginia owes about
| 81, 100000. He regards it as essential to
both States that some solution of the diff
ficulty be reached. To that end he sug-
gests that West Virginia issue three per
cent. bonds for 81 100000 which shall be
SO regulated that not one dollar of that
amount can be delivered except by absorb
ing fifteen dollars Of the deferred certifi-
Gates. The preamble to carefully repel
all idea that West Virginia is in any way
| responsible for the deferred certificates, but
the proposition to come purely from de-
sire to close this long-delayed and vexa-
tious question.
Mr.. Faulkner proceeds to state the eff
feet of his proposition on the State OF
/ West Virginia ''The payment of $50, 900
a year to discharge the interest, and one
per cent. to discharge the.principal in "a
wears, would be all that would be required
say $4,000 per annum. and it will be
perfectly feasible and practicable to raise
| this sum, without imposing cent OF addi-
tional taxation upon real or personal
property, or any of the present sources of
revenue, and by adopting system of in
direct taxation that would not affect the
community at large, but only those who
/ received some special benefit from the
government. and would cheerfully pay the
| tax in consideration of that special benefit
! SO received. am perfectly satisfied that
new sources of taxation may be suggested
that would operate SO justly and mildly
upon those whom it would affect, that only
a small portion of the people of the State
would be aware that we had assumed any
burden whatever additional TO our ordinary
annual State expenses.
AS to the purpose had in view in the ab-
sorption Of the certificates, as matter OF
Justice to Virginia, he says: "Itrelieves her
of that contingent liability without i'm
posing any additional burden upon us. 1t
removes from her any possible motive to
lend her name to those who would annoy
us by suit in the Supreme Court. All she
need care for is the extinguishment OF that
contingent liability, and if we can accom-
plish it without burden to ourselves, we
satisfy her as effectually, if not more eff
fectually, than the release promised her
i by the syndicate of certificate holders"
He assumes that the certificate holders
would not willingly accept this PROPOSE
tion-that ''they will struggle desperately
against it; but they are utterly powerless.
They cannot sue Virginia: they cannot
sue West Virginia. Unaided by Virginia
they have no remedy whatever and after
brief and unavailing struggle they will
accept our proposition and the whole mat
/ ter will be closed. On our part we are
perfectly safe. Our bonds will remain in
1.-THE Auditors Office without charge OF in
terest to the State until the certificates are
presented for redemption On the terms we
prescribe for them. Let me illustrate it's
operation by my own case: I hold $4,000
of these certificates that would entitle
me to a West Virginia bond of 1888.
With that as creditor would be con-
tent But that no imputation should be
castu me that I am suggesting this
plan for my own benefit, Ipropose to trans
fer my bond to the State and make it a
contribution to the Permanent School
Fund. Other citizens Of the State may dc
the same"
If Mr.. Faulkner can pursuade his State
| to 60 as far as even he proposes, it will be
about as much as the holders of the certi-
| ficates for the one-third of the original
debt of Virginia need expect. Virginia
will never pay dollar of that part of the
debt, nor should she lend her name to
institute State suit against West Vir-
ginia. The people have passed upon that
question so often and in such an emphatic
manner that it is no longer open to dis
cussion. Whether West Virginia will act
on Mr.. Faulkner's suggestion, will be for
the future to develop. The Riddleberger
bill is the settlement Virginia offers. She
will not disturb that. To do so would be
to open again the whole question, and to
fund under it, would dispose effectually of
the whole matter of her responsibility for
the West Virginia certificates, for it pro-
vides that in funding in the three per cent.
bonds, Virginia is relieved from the one
third of the debt assigned to West Vir-
ginia. el
Collector of Internal Revenue Duvall,
of West Virginia, applied to the Depart
ment for an additional Deputy Collector.
At first the Commissioner was disposed to
grant the request, but after examining
into the matter, he found that the two
Deputies III service were sufficient for the
work to be done. The Collector addressed
a letter to the President rendering his