The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1885-02-19
The sibilitv.

The gravity OF Lne decision rendered
last week by Judges Hughes and Bond. as
it affects the interests Of the State, cannot !
well be exaggerated. If relief is not
granted in the Supreme Court of the
United States, then depleted State treas
ury will follow in less than six weeks. and
the old condition of affairs, the curtailing
of the school term, the gripping Of the
charitable institutions and all the ills that
result from inadequate revenues will be
precipitated upon us again. On Tuesday,
Attorney General Blair passed through the
city on his way to Washington to try to
secure an appeal from the decision re-
ferred to. The amount involved, being
less than ST, 900, does not bring the case
within the jurisdiction of the Supreme
Court upon its merits, but the ground
upon which it is hoped to get the matter
before the higher tribunal is that a con-
stitutional question is involved. The whole
trouble has been brought about by the inca-
pacity of the present legislature and dearly
will the people have to pay for the blum
ders Of that body If the Supreme Court
refuses to grant the appeal, then the doors
of the Treasury win be thrown open and |
the flood OF coupons which have been ac-
cumulating for years, will be poured in
without mercy, draining the last cent of |
the public fund, and intercepting the rev. /
enue in the hands of the collectors before |
it reaches the treasury. BY the decision |
of the United States Supreme Court. in |
the case of Antoni VS.. Wright, the in |
volatility of the contract made by the
| funding bill of '70-'71 was sustained and
the coupons declared receivable for all
debts, dues and demands against the State.
Under the operations of this law Virginiasl
was reduced to the condition Of pauper. 1
Every interest dependent upon public sup
port was paralyzed, and the State credit
reduced so low that even sum sufficient
| to meet the current expenses of the gov
eminent could not be borrowed from the
banks. When the Readjuster party came
into power they Immediately set aboutto
remedy this condition Of affairs. On the
14th of JAM, 1882, what is known as Cou-
pom Killer No. was passed. This law.
based upon the proven fact THAT spurious
| State bonds were in circulation. required
the holders of coupons to prove their gem
uineness before a jury, and gave the right
on the part of the State to appeal to the
higher courts. AS consequence holders
were slow to present coupons, when such
presentation involved long litigation to
establish their genuineness. Under the
operation of this law only 81 5000 of a
possible $6,O00,000 were received into the
treasury, and as result 81 100000 had
been accumulated in cash, wht n the DEM
ocratic party came into power. Not only
this. but the constitutionality t Coupon
Killer No. had been sustained by the
Supreme Court Of Appeals in he case OF
Antoni VS.. Greenhow, in Which it was
held that whilst the State could not i'm
pair the obligation of q contract by re-
fusing TO receive genuine coupons, yet it
had the right to protect itself by all legal
methods against imposition by fraudulent
coupons, and that the remedy prescribed
and valid. The present legislature came
into power and without knowing what it
was about, passed what is known as the
Wickham act which provided that all
licenses must be paid in gold, silver, green
backs or national bank notes. This was
directly in the face of the decision in An
toni VS., Wright. and practically repealed
Coupon Killer No. /, which provided that
coupons could be received after their gem
uineness had been established in the man
ner prescribed. And thus it is that the
present uncomfortable condition of State
finances has been brought about. Had the
Wickham act never been passed the hold
ers of coupons would have had no remedy
save the expensive and harasSing one
granted them under Coupon-Killer No.
, l, but Just as soon as the legislature
attempted to set aside the decision OF the
Supreme Court and go bow shot beyond
anything the Readjusters had ever tried,
then the creditors came forward and
under the Antoni vs. Wright decision es-
Established their claims. 1t is folly to under
take to assail Judges Hughes and Bond,
and charge that the former has not OBJ
|
On the one hand was the opinion of the
Supreme Court declaring that the act OF
1871 was contract and that the coupons
issued under it should be received for all
, dues and demands due the State. On the
other. was an act of the legislature pro-
vding that such coupons should not be
received for demands due the State. The
Federal Court had to decide, and it could
not do other than follow the plain man
date of the higher tribunal. The trouble
is not traceable to Judge Hughes or the
Federal Court, but to a legislature that
lacked the capacity to deal intelligentiy
with the interests Of the STATE. The re-
sponsibility rests there and there alone.
Had the Democrats left the debt question
as they found it, the difficulty would never
!, have arisen.