Daily press. [volume] (Newport News, Va.) 1896-current, 1907-10-17
West Virginia FAas Reply 10 Moth
or State In The Debt Case.
MAKES NUMBER OF ADMISSIONS
Denied That the Old Dominion Ever
Made Many Improvements in What
is Now West virslnla-oencraI De.
fence of the State.


| opening of the October term of the
United States Supreme Court the state
or West Virginia entered it's answer
70 the bill of complaint filed more
than year ago by the Commonwealth
oil Virginia to compel West Virginia TO
assume her share of the antebellum
debt of Virginia.
Ehis answer, which is printed doc.
u'neht or thirty-two pages. was filed
IN open court by Acknowledgement
Clarke w. May, of West Virginia, and
MS associate counsel, including for.
mer Secretary of the Treasury John
u. Carlisle, pursuant TO an order is
sued by the Supreme Court just prior
10 the adjournment OF the last term
1t is probable that no ground for
exceptions will be found In the an
swer of West Virginia, and IL That
proves to he the case application will
be made for an order to refer the
whole matter to- master. The suit
of Virginia against West Virginia is
one of the most important. involving
the relations OF two sovereign states
mat has yet come before the Supreme
Court.
In its demurrer the State of West
Virginia denied that the jurisdiction
of the United States Supreme Court
could be extended to the case instItut.
ed by Virginia because, 1t was claim.
cd. the Supreme Cour' could not en-
force Judgment for money against
one of the sovereign States OF the I'm.
ION III any way or manner. 1t was also
contended that Virginia had no sunhlc
interest In the demands for money
made. These and other grounds up.
On which the demurrer was made
We're answered by the Virginia attor.
neys. and the court issued an order
requiring West Virginia to answer
the bill of complaint originally filed
by Virginia.
Wert Virainia's Admissions.
In her answer West Virginia ad.
mits that the money appropriated aud
me payment of the annually accruing
interest on the dole prior to 1861 and
TO the formation OF the sinking fund
for the ultimate redemption of the
debt was derived from taxes imposed
upon property subject to taxation
throughout the entire state, but AYERS
That the large amount thus derived.
to which the present State OF West
Virginia. then part of Virginia. CON
trbutcd her full share. was not kent
intact by Virginia after her ordinance
| of secession. but was used by her "In
| the administration of the socalled
| State government ut Richmond and
for many other purposes while she
claimed to be part of tho Confcder-
| ate States of America and that part
of the sinking fund so expended
should be accounted for" to West yir.
ginia and constitute credit to her
In the settlement OF her equitable pro.
portion of the debt.
|. West virginia likewise calls upon
Virginia TO show the aggregate amount
OF the sinking fund on Jan. l. 1861
and of what II consisted. with the In.
terest since accruing. and that she
he required 10, give credit to West
Virginia for the amount contributed
by her to the sinking fund before
1861. in case the supreme court orders
an accounting between the two States.
What Mother State Is Charged Witt.
1t is denied that Virginia was Undue.
ed to enter upon construction of her
general system Of Improvement In any
large measure for the purpose of de.
vclopng the resources of the State
hcw in West Virginia. and also 1t is
denied that 1t was with this view that
Virginia took upon herself the alleged
burden of her public debt 1t Is nj.
legged that Virginia appropriated to
her own use within the territory now
constituting Virginia about nine-tenths
| OF the money derived from the bond
sale, and that this large part of the
proceeds was ueed to the sole benefit
OF the people living in what is now
| virginia. while the territory constitnt
Ing West Virginia received only n
small share. 1t is also claimed that
| the money was spent under the direc.
ton of Virginia State officers elected
| by voters living within the present
limits of Virginia. 1t Is admitted that
| 1t may be true that a majority of the
representatives residing in that part
OF Virginia now comprising West Vir-
| einia voted for the appropriations for
| improvements. but that ii was with the
! expectation that an equitable portion
would be spent in their section OF the
State, which, it is averred. was not
done.
In further answer West Virginia
AYERS that Virginia. by her bill of
complaint and exhibits shows that she
has adjusted before the institution OF
N present suit to the entire satisfac-
ton of her people and her creditors
her alleged equitable propo ton of her
whole Iublic debt existing on Jan. T.
1861. which she claims is only two
thirds thereof, and that therefore this
rcaroi dent should be male liable for
the other one.third.'
West Virginia declares that Virginia
refunded all the evidences of indebted.
ness created prior to Jan. 1. 1861, ex-
cept about one per cent, and required
the same to bs surrendered to her
and cancelled. West Virginia AYERS
that Virginia did not refund twothirds
Of her public debt as alleged in the
hill o. nI.1