The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-03-02

Colonel RUM opposcd to . salt by virginia
for Its settlement.
RrcHxoxp. VA. Mar. /, 1922.

0Oktlu DAleb iois
Sir.-I see by THE TINES of Saturday. 2tn
hltimo. that you approve the oM intro
duced into the Senate on Friday, the 26th, to
affect the settlement Of the assumed debt oil
West Virginia. T.. on the contrary. thihA IL
extremely ill-advised. and 1 beg leave 10 re-
cord the reasons for this opinion IN your
paper that they may be PreServea essri
reference. a. the subject Will surely be presseN
In future Legislatures by the spectators VIZ
hole these certificates. and the lawyers WIZ
will he interested in the fees. lila
Whatever may be thought OF the oolt~ -
ton imposed by the declaration on tHs L".o
OF those certificates that payment Oh '
will be provided for IN acc0rosno0 ~ ~
such settlement AS shall DO had WIN M
VIRGINIA II was n mistake VI 10
Eenate Committee of Finance, a.
some years ago by Messrs. perry e.
Cormick and Meredith. 20 suppose, a. 80
them. you do, that this omlno .hen which
self owns some S3.0UO.OOO OF tnenn, 49,
90 nnder = nroper settlement. become &
Tbs sinking fund held old securities OF the
State which were required to be 1nueu Inopi
act OF March 3, 1871, one-tnilu % a.
West Virginia's proportion, announced 10
- o9c 40 20. but as this was clearly the prop
ertv of West Virginia no certlncates were
ever issued therefor. because never ueMahueu
by her. euod
The literary fund was required also 10 tund
their securities, under acts OF aiarch ., loh'
snd Febrnarv IA. 1882: and West Virginia cer-
t,ica.es were issued for One-third thereof.
Amounting u s71g. 02Z. but this amount IS
evidently West Yirginlas share OF the literary
fund and is in 10 sense an asset OF the State
Of Virginia.
ing ante-bellum securities, in which the State
al Vest Virginia has an interest 70 the as
sumed extent Of one-third, Just the amounto OF
these certificates. which. upon u settlement.
will 90 to the credit of West Virginia. Not q
dollar Of them belongs TO this State.
As to the bonds surrendered under the
act of 1871 to the extent of SIS. 900, 900 held
unfunded by Virginia as a trustee" OF which
you and they speak. There are no such
bonds. All of the bonds held by the
general public and surrendered under said
act have been funded. cancelled aDd hied
away. Not a dollar of them is held unfunded
by Virginia as a trustee.
But were the case different, why should we
pass the bill which was introduced on Friday,
February 18th, to effect this settlement! That
bill provides for the appointment OF q com
mission TO settle the accounts between me
two States. and directs If West Virginia shall
fail to conclude such settlement OF the certlh-
Gates AS may be in accordance With. the re-
citals in the preamble e. the bill. then the
said commissioners shall sue the State or west
Virginia in the Supreme Court of the United
States and force a settlement IN that way:
But as the purpose Of this proceeding Is to
force the payment OF these certificates for
the benefit of the present holders, the bill
further provides that the holders OF not less
than IS, 900. 900 of the certificates shall for
mally acuuit the State of Virginia Of all re-
sponsibility in relation to said certlhcates,
and shallfully indemnify the said State against
any responsibility arising out OF the balance
of said certificates. estimated To be about
$500. 600, exclusive of the holdings OF the State,
estimated to be about 3 1000, OOO-
And shall further receive such guarantee
from the holders OF said certificates as may be
ample to indemnify this State against any
loss arising from such proceedings Clearly
then the purpose il TO lend the name OF tins
State TO the Spectators who hold the certlfi-
Gates Of West Virginia TO the extent OF about
IS. 500, 900; for which they have probably paid
not more than ten cents IN the dollar.
Now as West Virginia denies this obliga-
tion, denies the right OF Virginia 10 impose IL
on her and refuses to recognize these certlt-
Gates, l ask why the State of Virginia should
drag the State of West Virginia into court In
the interest OF the spectators VINO hold
these certificates What merit Is there
IN them that should enlist the active
eympathies of this State on their side! Are
we to be told that no harm can come of IL be-
cause we are to be UNIDENTIFIED? j ask
who is to indemnify US, and of what securities
Is the indemnity TO consist Is 1t IN the writ
ten guarantee of Wall-street operators Z What
will that be WORTH The resolution out of
which the recent debt legislation has been
evolved provided distinctly that the prOpOsers
of a settlement should put up $1,000, 900 In
cash as a guarantee; and they never put up a
dollar.
Suppose we require a guarantee of SO, $780,
600 IN gold or United States bonds, the only
eafe guarantee. will we get it
Suppose we demand One-half that sum-.
~Htl thau NM mn that Nnf "A dollar at N. and
% this guarantee will be a pure paper pledge
Of the sort that all Wall-street kites are made
OF.
II IS said We will not really need any guar
hntee. That is not certain by any means.
With the neck of the State in the slipknot
OF the Supreme Court of the United States,
who can tell how soon that august tribunal
will begin 10 haul upon the rope and choke
Us until we fall OF course. when we invoke
the power of this court We must abide ITS
docrees. and it may decide that Virginia her
self owes the whole debt; as 1t NAV decide
upon the opinion of some OF the best lawyers
Virginia ever had. In December, 1865, a
Legislature elected by white people met,
and among other things considered the
debt of the State, and on February 70, 1866,
reported a bill TO provide for funding the
interest on the public debt, which passed
unanimously on March "a ana passed the
Senate unanimously the same day under a
suspension of the rules. The same thing was
repeated in the next session OF ~ls66-67; and
with. in the main, the same lawyers; includ-
ing Baldwin and Marshall.
At this latter session the following Joint
resolution was introduced December nth,
and passed without a division:
Whereas the public credit of the State Of
Virginia and the credit of our citizens has
been injured and Is now being injured by the
apprehension that this General Assembly will
repudiate the debt Of the State and authorize
the reputation of the debts of her citizens;
and whereas we deem 1t important 10 remove
this apprehension from the minds Of all per
sons, and SO to remov II at once; ana whereas
II the disposition existed on the part Of the
General Assembly to pass any repudiating
act the constitutions of both the State and
! ederal Government positively prohibit the
passage Of any such law. and IN order TO pre-
vent any further injury TO our credit. there
fore
Il Resolved. That this General Assembly
will pass no such acts of Reputation.
-. That such legislation would be no less
destructive Of our future prosperity than of
our credit, our integrity and our honor"
Acts 1866 81. chapter 80. page 499.
This was declared to be law IN the Supreme
Court Of the State IN the case of Common
wealth against Higginbotham (25 Grattan,
627), which says:
the present State of Virginia is bound to
the creditors of the State for debts due be-
fore the division OF tho State for the whole of