The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1885-05-21

above sum of 81, l92, 342.9S.
IOUal ueDt.- .S2I Q30 ,S77 Il
*Cancelled by Sinking fund Commissioner
in December, 1879.
DIVISION OF THE DEBT BETWEEN THE
NEW STATES OF VIRGINIA AND WEST
VIRGINIA.
In reaching this result, admitting the
correctness Of the items and of the methods
OF the account-and they have never beer
seriously disputed-there is a single fea
ture about which the Judgment of mer
may divide or vary. 1t is as to the appor
tiOnment of the debt of the old undivided
Commonwealth between the two States
subsequently formed.
Not forgetting that Virginia was never
| consulted and never did consent to the
partition. she and the creditors and all
the political parties into which her people
have been and are now divided have agreed
to and steadtastly adhered to the ratio
and the Judgment by them made and re-
peatedly reatfirmed-that two-thirds of
the debt of the former State was and is
the equitable share of Virginia-NEW
VIRGINIA, in fact.
1t is no answer to the assertion that
Virginia was neither consulted nor con-
sented to the partition of her territory
and the formation of West Virginia, to
say that the Alexandria Government rep
resented the old State, and by it the act
was recognized, since the Alexandria
Government was subsequently repu-
| dated by the Gov ernment of the United
States in the substitution therefor of Mil
itary District Number One.
Forbearing discussion Of the general
principles on which such ratio of division
rests, it may not be amiss to say that the
rule is that debt follows territory, and that
wherever any partition is made by agree
ment, ceSsion or concession, Indebtedness
is apportioned, and, where other consid-
erationS are not influential, those of terri
tory and population govern the ratio. This
| is Illustrated in the act of our National
Government in refunding to the State of
Massachusetts the advance made by her
in the revolutionary period. In that act
1t is provided and required that such pro-
portion OF the sum-principal and inter-
est-thus refunded shall be paid over to
the State of Maine as her territory bore
to the Whole-the unpartitioned State of
Massachusetts. The failure of the Con-
gress of the United States, when it in fact
partitioned the Mother OF Common
wealths, to provide for the just appor-
tionment of the debt of the undivided
State, should not debar the Virginia that
was left of the right to the equities of the
| case. The omission argues and implies
that the apportionment was left to be
adjusted on the basis of the principles we
have announced as well as established by
the unwritten law-the universal practice
of organized governments.
1t will not be held that the division of
any estate lifts or removes the mortgage
of the whole, much less that it frees one
part and saddles all of the common burden
upon the other. Nor does the immunity
asserted by the new State of West Vlr-
ginia, by neglect to provide for any share
of Uncommon debt of the former Common
wealth, equitably impose upon the re-
mainder of the diSmembered State any
moral obligation to pay all. If so much
of the old State of Virginia as remained in
the Federal lines during the civil war had
continued to be recognized by the Federal
Government as the State of Virginia las
for a time it waS), and if new State of
East Virginia had been formed, after the
war, from the Confederate portion and ad-
mitted in the Union, would any one have
contended that the State having the new
name would be any less bound for her just
share of the debt than the State having
the old name?
1t is not the case of a copartnerShip.
The act of creation and liability involved
none of the elements of voluntary assoei-
alton. 1t was the act of the sovereign,
which bound alike all the territory and en-
ergies of the sovereign estate.
| 1t should not be a charge to the discredit
of Virginia that, West Virginia refusing
to arbitrate the question, she has pre-
sumed to proceed to the payment of what
she honestly believes to be her just and
| equitable share of the debt Of the former
| State. Whatever the variance of opinion
I in respect to the ratio, the creditor and
all political parties in Virginia have been
agreed on the one adopted (two-thirds and
one-third) ever since 1S71-a period EN-
bracing eight years OF uninterrupted Dem
ocratic sway.
West Virginia has done nothing. But
the Republican party of Virginia, backed
| by people who earnestly desire that the
creditor of the original and undivided
State of Virginia shall receive his just
dues, mean, and have always intended,
with the power in their hands, by such
judicial process as the constitution of the
| United States provides, to compel the
State to do her duty in this respect.
THE RIDDLEBERGER FUNDING ACT OF
| 1882.
Returning to the account heretofore
stated as the basis of the Readjuster-Re-
publican party's settlement, it was on the
result thus ascertained that our party
formulated the law commonly called the
Riddleberger bill, which proposes to fund
Virginia's share of the debt of the former
| State into bonds of her own issue, bearing
| three percentum. Unlike the Democratic
party's Funding bill of 1871, there is no
compulsion in the Riddeberger bill, no
! reputation of that portion of the debt
which shall not accept the settlement pro-
posed in it.
| In respect to the rate of interest fixed
bv the terms of this bill objection may be
taken on the ground that the debt to be
refunded bore six per cent. Our answer
is that the aim and purpose was to pre-
scribe such rate-three per centum-aS
the certain resources of the State would
enable her to meet with promptness and
regularity. This would give hope and spirit
to the dropping energies OF her people, in
| spire the development OF her industrial
resources, enhance the growth and power
of the Commonwealth, and make her Sc
curities valuable.
After all the creditor was invited, and
not compelled, to accept the settlement
upon these terms.
An exact parallel to this is the case of
| the District of Columbia when Congress
changed the form of it's local government,
and then refunded its outstanding indebt-
edness at an equally severe reduction of
the rate of interest
That is to say, Congress, which has ex-
elusive jurisdiction over the District of
Columbia and cannot divest itself thereof,
caused debt bearing a high rate of inter
est, created by its agents, to be refunded
by another set of it's agents at a much
lower rate of interest, towit: 1865 per
cent.
1t was to enable the people to labor and
to live. and the State to keep house and
to send her children to school, that the
rate was fixed at three per centum. The
existing taxation was admitted by all
political parties, and by the creditor
Through his agents. as well, to be us high
as could be borne, and the yield safely
admitted of no larger rate of interest.
The great body of the people were rejoiced
at and agreed on this settlement, and i'll
their willing assent the creditor must at
last find his safest and surest-indeed, his
only-guarantee of payment. This Riddle
berger settlement had composed public
sentiment, so long and so largely vexed
and had happily dissipated the lurking and
growing sentiment for reputation which
agitation and misleading treatment of the
question had generated and fed.
The cooperative measures deriSively
H..