Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-12-03
Isn't Il Mistaken?

The FefrsbuTg In0s1-dppeot oi yeo'ci-~
day says:
uAuditor Rufin descends TO n bubble
wholly unworthy Of himself and the great
ouestion be Is dealing with when he alleges
that the bondboldcrs have made mo propo-
sItion, In the legal or business sense OF the
term The bondbolders have signihed,
By solemn resolution, In open and regular
meeting, willingness 10 settle the debt on
EQUITABLE and honorable terms wholly with
IN the ability OF the State TO meet"
Does our Petersburg contemporary know
how many bondbolders were represented
IN the meeting OF the " Council OF Foreign
Bondboldefs - TO which 1t refers? Doesit
know how many millions OF dollars were
represented at that meetingf IL does not,
nor does anybody else in Virginia, so far
ms We know. In his last pamphlet the
Second Auditor says that 1t is stated that
the English bondbolders own half the Wiz.
GINA bonds. What authority can these
men have TO make an offer for all the bond
boIderss But VIC need not argue that point,
seeing that we have indisputable testimony
that nobody In Virginia Is authorized to
sneak for even one bali Of the bondholders.
In recent letter to us, Mr.. ROYAL said:
al have no authority TO state anything
further than the creditors themselves have
said. which is That they will settle with
the State on the basis OF the present reve-
nue. after maintaining the public schools
and the expenses OF the State govern.
ment."
Mr.. RoYAIL, therefore, has made no
imposition in behalf OF the bondholders,
or, rather he coniesses that he has "no au-
thority to state anything further than the
creditors themselves have said " What
they ssid-that is, what enc half Of the
creditors said-was said In public meeting,
and not OF course TO Mr.. Royal.
How as to Mr.. COOPER, who is also sup
posed to represent In some way the
bondholderss Here is his own testimony.
He wrote to us last week as follows:
"Tbree days ago received letter from
amember OF the Virginia Committee OF the
Council OF Foreign Bondholders OF Lon
don, who Is thoroughly conversant with
the debt question In all its details and bear
ings, In which, addressing himself to the
very suggestion you make he uses the fol-
lowing language: 1t Is not OF the slight
tst Use ItI tut bbuuuOtutts W ioi
apy compromise until the State has formally
abandoned the RiddIeberger settlement. We
have made the first advance in disclosing
our willingness 10 consent to a compromise
based upon a principle which we have de-
fined and we must secure the adoption OF
this principle as basis for settlement by
the state before we consent TO discuss de.
tails"
That would seem TO settle the question
for, notwithstanding the resolution OF the
Council Of Foreign Bondholders affirming
their willingness to "settle with the State
on the basis OF the present revenue"
member OF the Virginia Committee OF that
Council, declares emphatically and une-
quivocally that "it is not OF the slightest
use for the bondholders TO formulate any
compromise until the State has formally
abandoned the RIDDIEBERGER settlement"
II no compromise has ever been formu-
lated. how can II have been proposed!
o II does seem to US, therefore, that the
Second Auditor did not resort to bubble
when he said that the bondholdcrs mad
made no proposition "in the teqGt or bust.
ness sense Of Ge term" The words in
itaiics qualify the statement TO such an ex-
tent rs to make II literally true; for as we
said las, week, we say now that the whole
matter Is contained In certain resolutions
adopted In England by u Council OF
Foreign Bondholders; that these bond.
holders submitted no proposition whatever
that a businessman could condescend to
consider; that they did not even propose
rate OF interest, nor offer to deduct so much
rs one dollar from the principal OF thirty
odd milliors Of dollars. In aword, instead
Of submitting business proposition 10
businessmen In business way, the bond
holders have submitted proposition which
business men could hardly regard as any
thing better thsn reflection upon their in.
telhgcuee aud good Judgment.
Let the IEdex. Appeal ask h'elf what
proposition would be before the Leglsla-
iure 10 that body were convened In extrn
session. II must confess that there would
lie none. The Legislature would have no
oder TO accept or reject. II would be coin'
PEELED 10 take the first steps. II would
have 10 appoint a commission 10 90 10
England and lean the terms Of the bond.
holders represented by the ce;.sS;' Vi
Torcigu BoraholGsrs. But first OF all, Il
would have TO abandon the KIDeLksEaGrF
bin "formaily that Is 70 say, We sup
pose. by passing rsolution absndonius
that bill, aud hunbly asking our ere
dsors 20 signify upon what term
they would gfaclously consent TO max
a new settlement Of the debt OF TIL
henorfd old Commonwealth. OF cours
the indsz-Appcoi has right TO Its owr
opinion on this subject. We do not mea
10 deny that proposition. But we una.
beg leave to ssy that II Is not as courtcou
o. n II won't TO he when Il charges thos
who look al the matter as the Second Aud
icr does with descending 10 q quibble.
\ We are all honestly eadesyoring 10 do whs
Il best for the Commonwealth mean {
include, Of course, our Petersburg contcu
u porary, which, however, we must add,
too much inclined TO regard those who dii
Get with Il on tins subject as "demS