Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-05-16
able cash balance 1,6Os. 1873; gold
s74,021 ,4I0.
VIRGINIA WILL NOT
SUE WEST VIRGINIA.

portance is under discussion, to-wit:-
Whether the Virginia act of March 9Th,
1900, authorizes suit against West Vir-
ginia? So far as this question is in
volved, the material facts may be breif-
~ stated as follows:
The certificates are deposited in New
York under contract between holders
and committee. There is nothing in
this contract to countenance a sugges-
ton that the committee have power to
transfer the certificates, or delegate
their authority to any other person.
On the contrary, the contract shows
that holders intended to employ GER
tain men as a committee and to restrict
their powers. This committee were to
bring about the deposit of the certifi-
Gates and they were then to formulate
plan Of settlement and submit 1t to
holders for acceptance. No power vest
ed in the committee until holders had
accepted said plan OF settlement. The
contract provides:-
Subject to the restriction herein,
(to-wit: mo settlement shall be con-
cluded until the plan of settlement has
been accepted by holders,') the COM
nlittee may perform any act to accom-
plish a settlement, and this includes
power to make any arrangements with
either State to ensure the surrender OF
the certificates in exchange for such
amount as West Virginia may agree
to pay and her creditors agree to &C
cept, and also includes power to exc
cute, on behalf of depositing creditors,
any release which will exclude any de-
mand on Virginia beyond what she
may receive from West Virginia. y
When a plan of settlement has been
accepted by holders, the committee
shall offer it to either State to be car
ried into effect After plan
of settlement has become effective, (viz:
after agreed to by the legislature), the
committee shall surrender the certitl-
Gates to the State and receive the
amount called for by the PLAN
Holders did accept plan as fol-
lows
First-The committee may present a
memorial to the Virginia legislature.
Second-The committee may surren-
der to either State the deposited certlfl-
Gates and receive therefor their pro
rata of such an amount as may be
agreed on between the committee and
the representatives of Virginia or west
Virginia as the maximum amount
which West Virginia will assume.
1t is evident that holders, going into
this contract with committee and &C
cepting this plan of settlement, had no
thought of any State commission inter-
vening to manage this business, and
that holders did not authorize the COM
mittee to bind themselves to accept
any settlement which commissioners,
unknown to holders) might make.
But although the certificates were
under this contract between holders
and a committee, and although holders
had accepted this plan of settlement,
yet the Virginia legislature, ostens1bly
in profound ignorance of this contract
and plan of settlement, enactS a law
prohibiting action by the commission
ers unless the certificates are placed
or otherwise held subject to their con-
troll on a contract on the part OF hold
ers," and the law recites what shall be
the terms Of that contract Ihls VIZ
ginia law was doubtless based on an
understanding between the commits
sioners and the committee, that the
latter would transfer the certlhcates 10
the former But there is no suggestion
that this understanding was communl-
Gated to the legislature 1t is evident
that no understanding, between COM
mittee and commission, could create
new and different contract on the
part of holders No understanding be-
tween committee and commission could
give the former any powers, not given
by the contract between holders and
committee. The contract, above quot
ed, does not authorize the committee
to transfer the certificates; does not
authorize the committee to place or
hold them subject to the control OF
any person." 1t does not authorize the
committee to agree to a settlement
which a commission, (perhaps I'M
known TO holders), may make. But
this law prohibits the commission from
acting unless the certificates are SUB
| iect to their control ION a contract on
the part of holders" to accept any set
| tlement the commission makes. IL
will be noted, that the control by the
commission is made a condition prece-
dent to any action by them. The Vir-
ginia law is as follows
| The commission is authorized to re-
! ceive and take on deposit the certln-
Gates, or to have the same otherwise
placed or held on deposit subject to
their control upon an agreement On the
part of holders that, If the commission
| will secure a settlement with West Vlr-
| ginia. the holders will accept the
amount realized on such settlement
| from West Virginia, as a full settle
| ment of all their claims hereunder.
| If two-thirds of the certificates shall
| be so deposited or placed subject TO the
control of the commission upon the
! agreement aforesaid, then the commits
! sion shall be authorized to take such
action and institute such proceedings
| on behalf of the State as may, in their
Judgment, be needful and proper to
protect the interest of the State and
/ bring about and carry into effect set
! tlement as aforesaid.
Il is presumed that no one Will con-
/ tend that the commissioners have au-
| thority to act unless they can say that
the certificates have been deposited or
are held subject to their control as is
required by this law. 1t is evident that
nothing which the committee may at
| tempt will enable the commission to
| say this If suit should be brought,
the preliminary question would be,
whether Virginia had authorized the
use of her name as plaintiff. She GER
! tainly has not done so unless the GER
L - I ,,@A