Year: 1877

II any IOglcal lutcTcuCc iuay uC NY rived from human action, we may justly conclude that the proposition for settlement was rejected; not because no settlement of any kind was desired, but because the specific settlement proposed was not deemed eligible; and that the propositions to repudiate were voted down because it was hoped in some general settle ment all the outstanding bonds might be gotten in without any ad- ditional outlay, and that thus the Staee might escape the odium of re pudiation, which is sometime reck- lessly incurred, but which is never disregarded except by those who have themselves incurred it. If the action of the Legislature in rejecting the proposed settlement, and reject ion the proposals to repudiate, did not mean this, then it must be granted that its action was wholly unaccountable.

 The legislature might have pres scribed some plan of settlement, or 1t might have abolised the Board of-Fi nance, if it had been so disposed. It did neither. It continued the Board of Finance with it's former powers. No definite action was taken by the Legislature, as body, to accelerate the movements of the Board; but 1t was stated by many members of that body, as a matter of great urgency, that something definite in character should be accomplished by the Board before another meeting of the General Assembly. There isn reas- on to suppose that the Legislature m tended to make of the Board of Fi- nance a circumlocution office, always pretending to be settling the public debt, but always studiously avoiding any such settlement. We have sup posed all the way through these transactions that language and con duct were used for the purpose of expressing ideas, and not for the purpose of conceallng them. We think that we might safely go fur ther and say, that when the legisla- ture adjourned, it was with an infor- nal but distinct understanding that the Board would, before the next meeting of the legislature, take some definite step toward procuring U settlement of the debt. But no method of obtaining such an end was prescribed, and no means were provided for it's accomplish ment. No appropriation was made to pay any expense of the Board, and consequently the Board has had no means with which to buy even q postage stamp or sheet of paper. This circumstance is mentioned not for the purpose of complaining of any omission of the Legislature, as any such complaint would probably be unjust to a body that had many other things to look after, and would certainly be useless; but it is refer rcd to in order to show that if the legal powers of the Board were quite as large as could be desired, it was otherwise very much limited in it's sphere of action. As the Governor could not we'll leave the State fre- quently, or for any considerable pe- riod, and the services of the other members of the Board were gratul- tous, we do not suppose that it was contemplated that the Board should make advertisements, or employ agents, or that any member of it should travel about for the purpose of communing with bond holders. Yet it was obviously necessary that some communication should be had with them, or else nothing could be done.

 While matters were in this pos turc Messrs. John D. Adams and J.. F.. Redficld made proposal for the settlement of the State debt. After some modification at the instance of the Board, it was assented to in the form in which it has been published, the Boad Indorsing on the written proposition a statement that they would recommend it to the next Legislature.

 We shall cndeavor to set forth what we understand ny this propo- sition, and what we believe it is understood to mean by the makers of it.

 |. In the first place we would say, then, that Mcssrs. Adams and Red liedl are not agents of the State in any sense Their acts in no man.