The weekly register. [volume] (Point Pleasant, Va. [W. Va.]) 1862-1909, 1895-02-27

, }
gard me as in any wise wanting in
official courtesy to you or your as
sociates. None, certainly, is in.
tended
| have the honor to be,
Most respectfully yours,
ASA ROGERS.
With the reception of this note
the Commissioners closed their la
bors at Richmond, finding that a
further stay was not likely to add to
the scant information already CLEAN
ed by them from the public docu
ments.
1t is proper TO say in connection
with the Second Auditors commu-
nication that we, in delivering our
own communication to him, caused
it TO be verbally understood that we
were ready and willing to pay for
the services of an expert, competent
to obtain for us the Information re-
quested, and that we did not desire
or intend to trench upon the servi-
ces of any one with whose duties
the labor required might seriously
conflict.
After this termination of their
visit to Richmond, the Commission
crs agreed TO to meet again on the
18th of December following, nj
Parkersburg, there to prepare and
transmit to your E&cellency such
information as they had been able
to obtain, and such as they might
still further obtain, and along with
it such an expression of opinion as
is called for in the joint resolution
of February 24th.
Accordingly we met in Parkers-
burg at the date named and after
nearly two weeks of examination
and comparison of all the sources OF
information accessible to us, agreed
upon and drew up the facts and
statements hereinafter presented.
Previous to this meeting we had
just received copies of the Rich
mond papers of December 9TH, con
tainirg Governor Walkers message
to the General Assembly of Virginia
at its meeting on the 9th, in which
we observe that among other allu
sions to the debt question pending
between the two States, and after a
reference TO our correspondence
with him of August last and his
answer thereto, as already quoted,
he proceeds TO arraign the good faith
of the authorities of this State as
follows:
"Now, The authorities of West
Virginia entertained an earnest de
sire to make a speedy and final set
tlement OF this matter, why did
they not accept our tender ofarbi
traitor? mode of settlement CT
such controversies universally rec
ognized by both mutton aud indi
viduals as RICH and appropriate.
Suppose au equal number of Com
missioners appointed by each State,
and that they should meet and dis
agree upon any or all points involv
ed, who is tn decide between them?
And yet, beyond a doubt they
would radically disagree upon the
first or chief poiht TO be settled, viz:
the basis orFrincipIe upon which the
settlement shonli bc mace. But sup
/ pose that the Commissioners should
finally agree, does any one suppose
that their finding would be ratified
| by the legislatures of the two States,
disagreeing as tue people DO radi
cally upon the merits of the ques
ton at issue? OF course not "
Tnis quotation from Governor
Walkers message fairly exhibits
the spirit in which he has seemed 10
view not only our own efforts to
carry out the objects Of our appoint
ment bat likewise the sincerity and
good faith OF the legislature OF West
Virginia in providing for the up
po;ntment of such commission by
your EXcellency. And yet while
this is the case it is not be forgot
ten that Virginia herself initiated
this method of attempting to adjust
the debt question. And the Ian
guage of the Governor would seem
to be all the more gratuitous in such
a connection from the fact that in
his annual message of Dec. 9TH,
1870. he considered it worth while
to allude to the political change
that had taken place in this State
at the preceding October election,
and bespoke in so many words for
the "new administration" an "oppor
tunity of manifesting its intentions
and its appreciation of honesty and
fair dealing" And yet notwith-
standing this language by himself
thus voluntarily employed on our
behalf, and Notwithstanding also the
fact that one of the early acts of the
"now ADMINISTRATION was to re.
spond to the policy that Virginia
herself had initiated, and before it
was known in this State that she had
changed that policy, and while the
appointees under the response were
in Richmond seeking in vain from
the proper authority of Virginia for
such information as every debtor is
entitled in law 10 receive from his
creditor, saying nothing OF that
spirit of ''fair dealing" that was SO
conspicuously spoken on our behalf,
Governor Walker proceeds in his
late message TO asperse the good
faith OF the State of West Virginia
after the manner and in the words
that we have quoted
The authorities of West Virginia
have never assumed to themselves
any right of precedence in the mat
ter of a policy for kdiustipg the diff.