Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1905-10-13
DEM0CRATSSAVED,ba
STATE MUCH MONEY.
Second Auditor Dew Prepares Val-
liable Statement, About Settle
mentOfYirginia Debt in 1902. -

=
Congressman Swanson, the Demo,
cratic nominee forGoyernor, is in re.
ceipt of an Interesting statement re.
garding the settlement of the STATE
debt, which was prepared by Second
Auditor Dew. = sigc6r.
~ Ihe communication shows how
we'll the Democrats managed things
by the Century Debt settlement in
1892 and what was the result of the
;Riddlebergers settlement in 1882 Th5
comparison is all to the good of the
Democrats. HefeSis The Statement
IN part@a''coe osr znca 1vay y78
Hon. CLAUDE A. SWANSON, 'e
Chatham, Va: hc@ -,@'.7s
MY DEAR SfR:AIn response 10
your request, l have made up the
subjoihed statement, which will Sab
stantially give you the comparative
advantages toethe State if the sMhole
debt had been funded into century
bonds under the act of February 20,
1892, over what the same debt would
have amounted to if funded under
the Riddleberger act of February IA,
1882.
You will perceive that there were
funded under the Riddleberger act
$l5, ,0l3,972.63 of old bonds surren-
dered, which yielded uuder the prog
ress of funding $9,2S9, ,O67.17, where
as, if the same bonds had been funded
under the terms of the century act
they would have yielded only $7,265,-
294 p, which would have saved to
the State the difference of $2,O23,-
772.90, also there would have been
saved ! per cent. of interest for ten
years, $92S, ,906, inasmuch as the new
Riddleberger bonds bore interest at 3
per cent. from date, whereas the GEN.
tury bonds only bore 2 per cent. for
ten years and 3 per cent. for ninety
years.
Total amount lost to State on the
actual amount funded in Riddle
berger bonds, $2,952, ,67S.9O.
In the second branch of the state
ment aforesaid. you will observe that
the sum of $27,2l5,36S &c was sur
rendered under the century act and
funded in new century bonds, Weld
ing $I8,05S,167. But if the same
bad been funded under the terms of
the Riddleberger act instead, they
would have yielded $23, ,OsS,4
The difference, therefore, saved
amounts to the sum of So, ,O30,253, to
which add l per cent. of interest for
ten years, $2,3OS,S42, making a total
saved, $7,339, ,095.
Statement showing the superior
advantage to the State of the century
debt settlement of 1892 over that
known as the Riddleberger of 1882:
Amount of Riddleberger
bonds Issued under act
of 1882 & q osO Oe7 -
in funoing $l5, ola. .972 6s of
old debt surrendered.
III the same amount
($l5,0l8,97 972 63) had been
funded under the century
act of 1892 the issue
would have been but 1906 294 81
and would thereby have
saved the State, 2O23. 77e 90
In interest bearing bonds,
$2,O23. .772.90. besi es the
per cent. interest saved
on the 80 .2S9,067 II for
ten years 92s .9O6 90
making a total saving to the
State in these two fea-
lures alone Of 2.952,6 2,61s 30
REcAPITULATfoN.
Amount lost to State by
funding in RiddIeberger,
instead of century bonds 1859 67S 90
Amount saved 10 State by
funding into century
bonds as compared with
same If funded into Rid
dieberger 1885, ,095 90
Total difference in favor
OF century over Riddle
berger settlement of the
State debt $1O,e9l ,773 90
From the two statements, there
fore, it is apparent that comparing
the two modes of settlement of the
State debt, viz, by the act of Febru-
airy IA, 1882, known as the Riddle
berger act, for which the Republican
party claims the credit, and the act
of February 20, 1892, known as the
century act, which was effected by
the Democratic party there was lost
to the State on the $9,2S9, ,O67.17 of
bonds actually funded in Riddleber-
ger bonds the sum of $2.952, ,67S. 80,
and saved on the SIS, ,05S, 167 funded
in century bonds the sum of $7,339,.
O95, making total difference in
favor of the century settlement of
$I0,291, 1880