Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-02-12
The blair Btll-AgaiD.

To the Editor Of the Dispatch:
l hope You will pardon me for in
truding myself, especially after your OBJ
lection to entering into any controversy
upon this subject. My excuse must be
the communication of Thomas T.. Banks
dale, Esq, in which he asks of me some
explanation of certain statements that |
made in an article signed "Democrat "
that was published in the Dispatch Of
January 3lst.
Mr.. Barksdale's argument that be-
cause the Republican party violated the
Constitution III freeing the slaves, then
the Democratic party is justified in like
violation in passing the Blair bill, is, l
will own, a startling proposition and an
argument for the cOnstitution0iity of
the measure that l had not looked at.
No doubt he expects the people of the
Union, and especially the South, to act
on the rule that as the coat has been
stolen they should offer the cloak also.
But | should think that the people had
been stripped enough, and this cold
weather would warrant them In making
an effort to keep the cloak, though it be
tattered, and endeavor to get new coat.
do not think the Republicans were con-
stitutional in freeing the slaves as they
did, but fail TO see that because one
wrong has been done another would
make it right. The national Government
has nothing to do with the negro, neither
as a slave nor as freeman and because
faction unconstitutionally freed him
gives no authority that he should be edu-
Gated by means equally as unconstitu-
tional.
But the statement that "for every dol
lar that Virginia will receive under the
provisions OF this bill three dollars will
be paid by her to the national Treasury "
seems to have given Mr.. Banks
dale particular umbrage, and he
says that if this can be shown
he will renounce his convictions
as to the propriety OF the measure. L
am glad OF this, for if figures can de-
menstrats fact aud carry conviction |
think that the statement alluded to can
be proven, and Mr.. Barksdale can be
turned from following this Republican
"will-o' wisp."
The actual revenue for the year 1885
from all sources was in round numbers
about 1923, 100000; Sll2, 5000 was
derived from the internal revenue.
Take the amount received from the in
ternal revenue from the total receipts
and we have S2l1, 100000 The total
expenses OF the Government for the
year 1885 we're $3.50, 100000. From this
take the cost of collecting the internal
revenue. which was about "a, 600. 900,
and the Government would have deficit
of about S45, 00o,0O BY tins showing
it will be seen that it will be necessary
to retain the internal-revenue system to
rise money TO pay the appropriations
made by the Blair bill. Without some
measure of this kind TO take up the
yearly accommodating surplus the in
ternal-revenue system must be abolished.
Now let us see whether Virginia does not
pay through the internsl-revenue system
three dollars, or more, for every one she
will receive under the Blair bill.
The total appropriation for Virginia
under this bill is 50, 332, 1926. Now,
using the sum taken from Virginia in
1885 as a general average, 5000. 63s. ~,
we find that in the eight years in which
she will receive the Blair appropriations
che will pay 10 the United States Treasury
the enormous sum of S2i, 405, III. 10
over four times as much as she receives.
But even the father OF this bill of
" denominations, Senator Blair, does not
pretend that the States will receive as
much as they will be obliged to pay for
he declared on the floor Of the Senate, on
January 10th, that "every State in the
Union pays out on taxation aud gets q
part back under this BILL" How small
that part is he did not say, and q glance