The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1865-08-10
The Counties OF berkeley aud JeGer-


hands in relation to Berkeley and JEFF
ferson counties. old Virginia claims
them, and West Virginia also claims
them. It is more than likely the dis
pute will go before Congress at the next
session, II not beforethe Supreme Court.
We propose briefly to state the nature
of the difficulty. Berkeley and Jetter-
SON we're not included in the forty-eight
counties named by the act of Congress
admitting West Virginia into the Union.
That act however referred to the act of
the 18th of May, 1862, passed by the
Legislature of Virginia, which coded
forty-eight counties, Internationally,
and three counties berkeley, jefferson
and FredericlSl conditionally, to the
New State. The condition of the ces-
sion of those three counties was that
they should, at an election to be held
.'for the purpose" ratffy the Constitu-
ton of West Virginia. This two of
them, Berkeley and Jefferson, did, on
the 18th of May, 1868, and Gov. Peir-
point so certified under the seal of Yir-
ginin to the then Senators and Repre-
HeIILuLlNtS Vi ' II klIllAA AL NOAlI5ANSs5s ~
far as the consent of the Old and the
New State to the admission of the two
counties was needed, they had it to the
fullest degree. On the 3lst of January,
1863, the Virginia Legislature passed
an express net allowing Berkeley coun-
ty to take vote on the question on the
2sth of May following, which she did,
at which, as we have stated, the
people voted to come in, by u large
majority. The same Legislature passed
n similar enabling net for the county of
Jefferson on the 4th of February, 1863,
and she, in like manner, on the 2Sth
of May following voted to come i'll.
The Legislature of West Virginia, on
the 5th of August, 1863, passed an net
to receive the former county, and on
the 4th of November following SINH
lar act to receive the latter county.
About the consent, therefore, of the two
States there can be no question. The
whole difficulty turns upon the word
ing Of the act of Congress admitting
West Virginia. That act reads as fol-
lows:
=
West Virginid'' into tile Union, and
J0r other purposes: .. y-.s4.ga
WHEREAS, The people inhabiting
that portion of Virginia known as
West Virginia did, by II convention as
in tho city of Wheeling on the
18th of November, 1881, frame fOrthem-
selves ii constitution with Il view of be-
n separate and independent
State; and whereas, Mt Il general cleo
finpn hold ipt ftn fl,oI
aforesaid on the third day of
May last, the sHid constitution was APP
proved and adopted by the qualified
voters of the proposed Stale; and
whereas, the Legislature of Virginia,
by an net passed on the 18th of May,
ton of n new State within the jurisdic-
tiOu of the said State of Virginia, to be-
known by the name of West Virginia,
and to embrace the following named
viz:
Hancock, Brooke, Ohio, Marshall,
Wetzel, Marion, MonOngHlia, Preston,
Taylor, Tyler, Peasants, Richie, Dod-
X oanc, Calhoun, Gilmer, Barbour,
Tucker, Lewis, Braxton, Upsher, Ran
dolph, Mason, Putnam, SanawhH, Clay,
Nicholas, Cabell, Wayne, Boone, Logan,
Wyoming, Mercer, Mcdowell, Webster,
PocahOntas, Fayette, Raleigh, Green
>
Hampshire, and Morgan.
And lrhercdS both the convention and
the legislature aforesaid have reported
that the new State should be admitted
into the Union, and the constitution
aforesaid being republican in form,
Congress doth hereby consent that the
said forty-eiGht counties may be formed
into n separate and independent State.
8 8
The reading of the above shows, what
we have stated, IL lack of formal con-
sent on tho part of Congress to the ad,
mission of Berkeley and Jefferson coun-
ties. It is held, however, that a faii
inEerential consent exists from the ref.
erencc made in the act of admission tC
the act of cession, which act of cessiOu
named the counties of berkeley and JEFF
ferson, although coupling n condition
which condition, however, was fully com
piled with. 1t Is hold also thatthe consent
of Congress is not necessary to the nd,
dition of n county, or connties;to State
from n State adjoining. This latter is
the view held by Hon. Reyerdy John
son, Senator Van Wrinkle, and Mr.
Lamb of this city. We quote simply
the verbal and informal, opinions of thI
two former. On the other hind, Mr.
Dawes, of Massachusetts, Chairman Of
the Committee on Elections, in Con.
gress, has expressed a decidedly opposite
opinion, as reported in the Congression.
al Globe, sessions of lsG3-4, page s47, in
the Virginia election case of Mckenzie
as. Kitchen. In that case Mr.. Dawes
in the course of his speech, said "tllat
it had been tho established law of the
country, as pronounced by the Supreme
Court, that no two States could change
their boundary lines without the CON
sent of Congress, and hence it required
the consent of the State of West vir-
ginto, of the State of Virginia, and OF
Congress, to change the boundary line
between those States. Congress has
admitted West Virginia into the Union
with fixed boundary line Thai JCss