The Sunday telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1914-1927, 1915-07-11
Reflection of 4PIumed knight''
May Point to Just Set
tlement.

IlemeIlI.
els West Virginia to be penalized
more than $12s900,0e0 because the
founders of the commonwealth held
to the union in the days of disrup-
That is the question asked by West
virginians who.etake the view, in the
discussion following the United States
supreme court judgment In the Vir-
gtnia debt case, that the portion of
the debt adjudfcated to West Virginia
SHOULD be taken over by the national
government. They base their views
on statements contained in the
Twenty Years of Congress- of James
G. Blaine. the planned knight of; Re-
publfcanism," looked upon as one OF
the ablest men who ever sat in the
capitol halls.
The views expressed by Blaine are
not new to West Virginians. for they
have been urged at various times in
this state. They were first brought
to public attention by former Cover
nor "A. B. White, of Parkersburg. and
later we're taken up in Con gress by
former Congressman John M. Ham
ilton. who represented this district.
Since the judgment of the supreme
court was announced, they have again
come to public attention. and it Is
thought certain that a movement will
coalesce around the principles laid
down by their author.
in order that West Virginians may
understand clearly the principles ad-
vocated by Blaine. there is extracted
from his writing the part that bears
specifically upon the question. This
part is%contained In chapter 2i of the
first volume of Twenty Years of
Congress''
In this chapter are detailed the
border state policy OF President Lin
coin; the adoption of the secession
ordinance by the Virginia convention,
and the prompt action of the people
in the western part. of the state. call
ed "a. remarkable illustration of the
trained and disciplined ability of
Americans for the duties of self gov
ernment"; the declaration by this con-
vention that it was the government of
the entire state of Virginia, and the
acknowledgment by the national
Congress that it was the government
of Virginia, and the general belief
that only nominally and by construc-
ton could it be regarded in that light;
the final formation of new state and
the debate in Congress that preceded
the admission of West Virginia to the
union.
But the cause of the union was
aided by the addition of another loyal
commonwealth" writes Blaine. land
substantial Justice was done to the
people of the new state who by their
loyalty had earned the right to be
freed from the domination which had
fretted them and from the association
which was uncongenial to them
Continuing. he writes:
Blow Heavy to Virginia.
tn hn nld tot 0f Virginia the
blow was a heavy one. In the years
following the war 1t added seriously
to her financial embarrassment, and
it has in many ways obstructed her
prosperity. AS punitive measure for
the cha steninga of Virginia it cannot
be defended. Assuredly there was no
ground for distressing Virginia by
penal enactment that did not apply
equally to every state of the Confed-
eracy Common justice revolts at the
selection of one man for punishment
from eleven who have all been guilty
of the same offense. If punishment
had been designed there was equai
reason for stripping Texas of its vast
domain and for withdrawing the
numerous land grants which had been
generously made by the national gov
erment to many OF the states in re-
bellfon. But Texas was allowed to
forfeiture of an acre and Congress
so far from withdrawing the land
grants by which other southern states
were to be enriched took pains to re-
new them in the years succeeding the
war The autonomy OF Virginia alone
fell the penalty which If due to any
was due to all.
"Another consideration is of great
weight An innocent third party was
p 1ar. n
held In great party by loyal citizens
OF the north and by subjects of for
eign countries The burden was al
ready as heavy as she could bear in
her entirety and dismemberment so
crippled her that she could not meet
her obligations. The United States
might we'll have relieved Virginia and
have done. justice to. her creditors by
making some allowance for the divis-
ION of her territory. Regarding her
only as entitled to the rights of a
public enemy so long as she warred
l1non the union. we may confidently
maintain that she is entitled at least
TO as lust and magnanimous treat
ment as the national government eX-
tends to a foreign foe. In our war
with Mexico it became our interest
to acquire a large part OF the terri
tory owned by that republic We had
conquered her armies and were IN
nossession of her capital She was
helpless In our hands. But the high
sense of justice which has always dis
tfnguished the United States in It's
.a,,bIic policies would not permit the
.despoflment of Mexico. We negotiated
therefore for the territory needed and
paid for it larger price than would
have been given by any other nation
IN the world. The American govern
ment went still further. Many of our
4 Lar ga in at