West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1883-04-28


Rs,erring to the legal aspect OF the
Vrg oia debt question, the Wheeling
Register says:
Sometime since, the Hon. VIM. G
Brown, of Preston, expressed the
opinion that it was competent for
West Virginia or Virginia to Gle
bill in the United States Supreme
Court Tor statement of accounts
between the States, He held ths,
the ere iitors or landholders being
interested may have some equitable
remedy IA tha, court, and particu-
lariy the foreign creditors lie sta
ted 1T as principle of law that if
one nauou or lts oitz 'ns owe an hon
est aud uud,sputed debt TO neigh.
boring nation or TO it's citizens aud
iails aud refuses to pay, suon default
ing people or nation lay themselves
liable, under the law Of nations to
an sttachmeut or civil proceSa OF
mark and reprsal' issued by the in
jured nation, by which the goods and
chatteis and credtsoi the defaulting
governments; or people can be Lawful
ly attached on the high seas or with
in the jurisdiction OF the government
or people to whIca such credit is
| due.
Mr.. Brown referred TO the second
section OF the third article ofths con
sutution az giving the Supreme Court
jurisdiction to settle controversies
between States. This sectlou says
that the judicial power ehsll extend
to controversies between
two or more States
But whether or not that section
nas not been materially restricted or
nu;iIhed by the llth amend inert, may
De a question. The llth amendment
says; The judicial power Of the
! Uulted States shall not be construed
To extend to any suit In law or equi-
ty, commenced or prosecuted sgalns:
any one OF he Uaued States by cit
izsns Of another State, or by citizens
or eubj cts Of any ljreigu STATE.
Il ls well estab ished, and in every
day practice IN the Umlel States
] Courls, hat citiz ms OF one State may
cue cltiz,ns of another State; that,
tor example, ciizsns OF West Vr-
giuia might sue cltiz.ns OF Virginia,
and enforce payment OF their debts
butit would bs avery different mat
ter for cii.z .ns Of West Virginia to
sue the State Of Virginia or for the
ci,iz.ns Of Virginia to sue the State
Of West Virginia. The Suprems
Court might determine the liability
Of each state for the debt, bat the
question OF enforcing the decree o.
that Court against the government
OF either State would ,iss some very
complex questions.
There il probably lees prospect OF
tie debt question being Adjusted
through The medium Of The Supreme
Court than there is through The plan
suggssted by Mr. Blaine some time
since, by which portion Of the debt
was TO be thrown upon Uncle Sam,
as p part OF the burdens OF the war.
10 the Interviews to which we refer
red ABOVE, ex-Sebatcr Wiley gave
expression to view Of he matter
which 'ppeaTed to give Blaine's prop
oslton some legal sanction lie said
that u wss a principle Of interns-
tiona law when one power absorbs
another, that the absorbing power
took all the liabilities OF the power
absorbed; and-ii it could be main
TONED that the United States cot
Out a part Of The territory Of Virginia
! ana absorbed ~ iOtO the U0ion Of
States, as a means o apgrnenting the
Federal power aud preserving the
Federal Union ss against the States
10 rebellion 1T might with some plau.
sibllity be malntsined that he Fed
ersi government took with this ter
ritory ell the liabilities Of what ls
now called West Virginia 10 the
original State government from which
IL was severed.
II we are to call IN the aid Of the
courts in the adjustment Of the DIFF
isTences between two States, legal
skrmish along tbiS line might be
more productive than a pitched BAT.
tie between the Vrgiuiss.
-----------
roo LOE0 DETERRED.
The Presidepts trio 10 Florida was