Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1907-03-02
WEST VIRGINIA DEMURS
ner Objections to Virginia. Debt
Suit Set Forth. i
TO HOLD HEARING MARCH II
John c. Carlisle Presents Case Of West
Vrginia-Distinguished Counsel
Employed Ey Each state.


court Of the United States has allowed
the filing OF an amended demurrer in
the suit OF the commonwealth OF .vir-
ginia against the state of West yir.
ginia. whereby the former is seeking
to have the later state pay its share OF
the state debt OF Virginia contracted
prior to the formation Of West vtr-
ginia into a separate state.
The amended demurrer was filed on
behalf Of West Virginia by Hon. John
G. Carlisle, former secretary of the
treasury, who is one of the counsel en-.
gagged by that state. The court also
reassigned the case for argument on
March IL next. 1t was the original in
tention to have these arguments on
March 4, but postponement was agreed
upon. Virginia is represented by Ma.
jor Holmes Conrad and Attorney-Gen-
eral William A. Anderson. West
Virginia is represented by w. Molla-
han, George w. McClintic, G. w. May
and Charles E. Hogg, in addition to
Mr.. Carlisle. Virginia was granted
leave by the supreme court to file this
suit February &c, 1906. On October 8
last, when the process was returnable,
West Virginia was allowed to file de-
murrer.
West virginia's Demurrer.
The amended demurrer which the
supreme court permitted the attorneys
to file on behalf of West Virginia is as
follows:
"The defendant. the State of West
Virginia, by William M. o. Dawson,
governor, and Clarke w. May, attor-
ney-general. of said state, not. confess
ing or acknowledging to all or any OF
the matters and things in said com.
plainant's bill to be true in manner
and form as the same are set forth
ard alleged, or in any way or manner,
presents this amended demurred there
to, and for cause of demurrer shows :.
"First-That it appears by said bill
that there is a misjoinder of parties
plaintiff and misjoinder of causes OF
action. The said bill is brought by the
commonwealth OF Virginia to recover
debts alleged to be due to her in her
own right from the defendant for prop
erty and money alleged to have been
transferred and delivered to the de
PENDANT under certain acts of the legls-
lature passed in 1868, and also, as trus.
tee for the owners of certain certif-
Gates mentioned and described in said
bill, to have an accounting to ascertain
and declare the amount claimed to be
due from the defendant as her just
portion of the public debt of the plain
tiff prior to the LIST day Of January
1861
Jurisdiction Is Denied.
"Second-That this court has no jul
risdiction of either the parties or The
subject-matter of this action, because
| it appears by the said bill that the
matters therein set forth do not con
situte, within the meaning of the con
sitation of the United States, such g
controversy or such controversies be
tween Re commonwea.- II of Virgins
and the state of West Virginia as car
be heard and determined in this court
and this court has no power to render
or enforce any final judgment or de
cree thereon.
"Third-That it appears by said bill
that the plaintiff herein sues as trus
tee for the benefit of number of In
dividuals, who are alleged owners oil
certain certificates in the said bill sci
j forth and described
"Fourth-That the said bill does not
state facts sufficient to entitle the
commonwealth of Virginia to the re
lief prayed for, or to any relief, either
in her own right or as trustee for the
owners of the certificates therein SCI
forth and described.
Private Parties Interested.
"Fifth--That it does not appear by
said bill that the encouragement has
ever been authorized to institute anC
prosecute this suit in the name of the
commonwealth of Virginia in her owl
right, but only as trustee for the u.s.
and benefit of the owners of certain
certificates mentioned in the act o
March 6. 1900 which is referred to ant