Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-11-24
Who opposes the Debt settlements

VINO OppOSeS Lho OODb OOIIAOAhOhS'
So far as we know there is no opposition
to the scheme lately agreed upon for the
settlement of the debt Of this State.
We are vet to hear the first voice,
weak or strong, raised against 1t. We know
of no one who proposes to place himself in
antagonism to it.
This is wonderful. A few weeks ago
there we're scarcely half dozen men In
Virginia who thought it was probable
that any plan could be devised by human
ingenuity which would adjust the contro-
versy, aud prove acceptable both to the
State and to the creditors. Now. We have
before us plan which seems so just and
equitable and 30 clearly in accord with our
well-known position that no one has
altered O word against it.
II ia true that some of the bondholders
are disposed TO regard 1t as entirely too
favorable to the State, and as requiring
them TO surrender much for little, but we
tell them that they are mistaken. Viz
rinia has done as we'll for them as she could,
and better than she would have done had
there been another years delay. 1t is best
for the debtor. best for the creditor, and
hest for everybody who has any interest
in or sympathy with this Commonwealth.
There are some details yet to be arranged,
and no doubt there will be more or less
discussion over them, bat we know Of no
good reason for fearing that anything will
occur to disturb the public confidence
that "the debt is settled" as the Cover
nor sententiously said in his telegram to
Norfolk.
"The funding bill" Of 1871 was fought
bitterly from the momentthat it was IN
troduced to the time when it received the
approval Of the Governor; nor, indeed,
did its enemies cease their warfare then.
They successfully appealed to the people,
and il was repealed as far as repeating le-
glslation could be effective.
There was likewise great hostility to the
"McC U1LocH bill" The Legislature passed
il. but the people decided aeainstit. Both
of these measures were ushered into ex-
istence in the midst of opposition which
never ceased until there was nothing left
to fight.
The RDDLEBKRaER bill was enacted into
law against the protests and in spite of the
votes of the majority of Democrats, but 1t
was endorsed by the people, and over and
over again has been accepted in our party
platforms, and now II affords the basis for
our new settlement. without doubt the
bondholders have realized that II was q
great mistake on their part not to have
funded their holdings under the RIDDLE
BERGER bill as soon as 1t became q law.
Whether the 0LooTT settlement should
be submitted TO tAe voters for their ap-
proyal OF disapproval will be subject
which the General Assembly may very
properly consider. We know OF some
bondholders who have freely said upon
the street that ii should be done, and at q
special election where this one question
can be voted upon separate and apart from
all political matters or the claims of sny
candidates for Office.
AS we proceed with the settlement le-
cislAtion we shall be able TO determine bet
ter whether there is o public demand for
such disposition OF the matter-whether
IL will give greater assurance Of inality
and whether IL can be 90 done as that the
vote will be strictly on tho merits Of the
settlement unmixed with estraneous ques-
tione.
But 90 far we know OF no one, we have
heard Of no one. who means TO fight the
settlement.