Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-03-06
CENTS PER COPY.
speaker Caroweii Heard Fvem.
House. OF DELxeArrs, I
March o, 1888.

House. OF DELEaArHS,
March 8, 1883.
10 tie Editor of The Dispatch:
The correspondence between Hon. X.
II. Tyler, member Of the House OF Dele.
gates. and Colonel +. q. Rufiin, Second
Auditor, published in your sundays
issue. makes il necessary that l ask the
opportunity to put myself right, though
am aware tbst II is hazardous to at
tempt reply TO anything that emanates
from the skilled pen OF tho Second An-
ditor. In Mr.. Tyler's letter am made
to say in support OF Mr.. Pollard's amend
ment to the appropriation bill discontin'
uing the purchase OF the States ooiiga-
tions by the Board of Sinking-Fund
Commissioners with the surplus in the
Treasury "that funds being used 70
purchase Riddlebergers drained the
Treasury until the State did not have
money left to pay the interest on the
new debt when IT fell due, as occurred
last summer" What | said did not, nor
do I think Mr.. Tyler's letter warrants
Colonel Ruffin in assuming that ] had
said there had been default in the pay
ment OF the interest on the Riddleberger
bonds last summer, and would be quite
sorry to have such an impression made.
1 only argued in support OF said amend
ment that it would better 10 keep
the surplus revenue in the Treasury
to meet casual deficits and as better as
surance to our creditors that the interest
ON the new bonds would be promptly
paid, believing as / do that whom this ls
well assured the whole OF our outstand-
ing obligations would be speedily funded,
and thus end the debt controversy. And
in answer to q suggestion that instead OF
having the n,oncy to meet tho interest
we would have the bonds held by the
| Sinking-Fund Commissioners, i ex-
pressed doubt as to whether these bonds
could be reissued or hypothecated TO
| raise the necessary money, and also ex-
pressed the belief that the creditors took
the same view, or would at least regard
the ready cash as far more reliable. lstill
have this doubt, Notwithstanding the COM
ments OF the Second Auditor. he correct
lv quotes from the State Constitution
the only authority upon which the State
NAV contract debt-viz. : "No debt
shall be contracted by this State except
10 meet casual deficits in the revenue, TO
redeem a previous liability" &c. article
TX, section y but notwithstanding this
a debt cannot be contracted unless au-
thorized by the act OF tho Legislature,
and the act must set forth for what the
debt is contracted and prescribe the
character OF the obligation OF the
State TO be issued, and further
more provide sinking fund to pay the
debt contracted An obligation of the
State, issued for one purpose Under the
Constitution and the act of A. sembly IN
pursuance thereof, surely cannot be used
for another: therefore, the bonds an-
thorized to be issued under the act Of
February H., 1882, "to redeem pre-
vious Inability" cannot be issued or re-
issued "to meet casual deficit in the
revenues" and if they cannot be re-
issued they cannot be bypothecated as
collateral security for loan. lt is true
that the act of March II. lS8i-section
4. page 539-cited by Colonel Rutfin, in
tends to authorize the resale OF the
bonds beld 10y the Sinking-Fund Com
I
curlty for temporary loans 10 the State,
but that clause of said act is not tree
from conflict with section 5 of Article
TX. OF the Constltution and moreover
, the Sinking Fund Commissioners are
mere agents of the State, and the money
they nut into said bonds was the State
: money, and it appears to me, at least
, that SO much Of the States debt as these
bonds represent is sextinguished. If IT'D,
80 clear that these bonds may be resolc
t or hypothecated as security for a loan &
| meet casual deficit III the revenues, snci
] as occurred or was about to occur OF
: the 1st Of July last year, why were
: not the necessary funds raised by a resale
= of some of these bonds they hal al
p yanced) or by depositing them for loal
5 rather than tide over the trouble by al
arrangement well known TO the SeconI
( Auditor) whereby the appropriations &
} the State institutions due quarterl.
5 were not drawn in bulk, as had beer
, usual, but drawn in two or more pay
, ments? / think the said arrangement
+ was the best, and would not have referred
10 it but Tor the Second Auditors un
r necessary comment on what | didn't sa,
= rather than upon what | did say. Surel.
he would not make the impression tia
! supposed that the purchase OF Riddle
bergers on the Goth of August, 1887
caused the deficit in the Treasury tha
was imminent on the lst day OF Jul.
: preceding, and which would have oc
Cured, rs he ought to have known a
: least, but for the arrangement abov
/. mentioned, for expressly stated on tn
3 floor OF the House that the shortage wa
o caused by the depressed condition o
the taxpayers, and the extension OF tn
time for the collection Of the revenue Il
consequence thereof granted by the leeis
Iation Of the extra session. Had Colont
Rufiin taken the trouble to inform him
self more fully as to what | said, hi
reply, or at least the publication thereoi
: would have been less needed il pos
, sible, although he seems 10 have plent
!, of time that he can devote to writing.
: r. II. CARpwELL.