Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-08-06
The Platform and the Debt.
, he Editor OF he Digpafch :


In a late No. of the Inder-Appedt
the following occurs, in comment on
that plank in the Democratic platform
lately adopted which speaks of the
public debt:
1.-The court referred to here is the
Supreme Court Of the United States,
and thatcourt, which, as now organized,
has treated with singular moderation
all subjects which have come before it
involving questions of State right or of
local concern in the southern States,
is the final authority upon all constitu-
tional questions. The proposition made
to refuse obedience to the law as ex-
pounded by that court. and to induce
State officers to violate such law by
promising their protection, is practical
notification.
1.-The appeal to the people to pay
their taxes in money is we'll enough.
but the statement that the question Of
the debt has ceased to be one Of dollars
and cents, and has become one OF State
sovereignty, is a mere juggle of words.
Suppose the position taken by the
United States Court wrong and pur-
posely wrong-though we have no idea
that it is wrong at all-and still the
debt will remain forever justa question
Of dollars and cents, and the States
rights not be in danger.
" Such rabid ranting as this mars the
otherwise fair pages of the document.
1t is not the product Of the people who
made up the Convention, or of the peo-
pie Of the State, and does not express
their sentiments. Rather, it is an over
how-the single one in the regular pro-
ceedings Of the COnyention-of bitter
and really Bourbon spirit. 1t would
cause a smile in Virginia but for the
the use our northern Republican neigh
bors will make Of it."
| am sure that the editor Of the In
dcr-Appcal wrote the above unadyised-
ly. At least his utterance Il will not
say his opinioD differs from the Vir-
ginia Legislature of 1893, which unani-
mously
Resolved, That State cannot, I'M
der the Constitution Of the United
States, be made a defendant at the suit
of any individual or individuals, and
that the decision of the Supreme Court
that State may be placed in that stu
alton is incompatible with and danger
Gus to the sovereignty and independ-
ence Of the individual States, as the
same tends to a general consolidation of
these conlederated republics"
This resolution was in response to
an invitation from John Hancock, Of
Massachusetts, issued by unanimous
authority Of the Legislature Of that
State, to all the States to consider this
question, then become practical by a
suit brought in the Federal Court
against the State of Massachusetts, by
William Vassall.
The eud vi the whole business was
the adoption Of the eleventh amend
ment forbidding suits against a State
by citizens of another State, or by
citizens or subjects of any foreign
State. (Of course no suit can be
brought against State by its own citi-
zens, and / never heard of its being
contended to the contrary, except by
Judge Hughes, who is not authority
If the editor of the hder-Appedl
thinks the late decisions Of the Supreme
Court do not contradict this amend
ment, beg leave most respectfully to
refer him to tho dissenting opinion Of
Chief-Justice Waite and of Justices
Bradley, Miller, and Gray, pages "a,
IS, e, =, IS, 9, 40, 4, of The Virginia
Coupon Cases, lately published in the
Virginia Lao Journal, and to the late
DEGREES of Judges Bond and Hughes,
in which they order their clerk to take
possession of the revenues Of the State
of Virginia.
I think the hder-Appeal is not a
Democratic paper. I wish it was.
But am sure its editor means to be
fair, and will not lightly leave the faith
of the fathers.