Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1907-03-23

He said that even assuming the DR.
Jeckyl and Mr.. HYDE performance
whereby the Virginia of today was
made the West Virginia of tomorrow
were legal and constitutional, that still
West Virginia was subject to the juris-
diction of the court in a suit for an
adjustemnt of the accounts of the two
states.
Anderson Next
Attorney General Anderson went in
to the history of the case briefly, de,
claring that the Indebtedness would
never have been incurrd except for the
territory now constituting the state
of West Virginia. He said that the
most equitable way of settling the in
debtedness would have been for each
state to have taxed its assessable
property such per cent. until the
debt was paid. or else the debt should
have been divided according to the
property of the states as of June 1863.
He characterized the Wheeling con-
vention as revolutionary to which
Justice Harlan commented that there
were revolutionary proceedings all
around about that time.
He said that West Virginia owed
Virginia several million dollars fer
bank stock and other properties turn
ed over to her in 1863 He then show.
ed that this proceeding was one pro-
ceeding and that every matter set
forth therein had to be taken togeth-
err in the adjustment of the suit, and
that it could not be wiped out on the
plea of multifariousness. Here he
neatly turned trick on Judge Hogg,
who had made the point, by reading
from law book written by the Judge
in which he laid down what he said
was the universal rule of the court.
and to which the objection could not
be sustained
He said that this suit was not at
all prejudicial to West Virginia. and
that the fact that the suit would alb
ton under the bonds made it as i'm
portant as if they were actually paid.
He called attention to the fact that tn
West Virginia constitution now al
force had repudiated the obligation
the people of West Virginia had under.
taken to pay her share of the old debt.
Ex-Secretary Carlisle.
Ex-Secretary Carlisle said the com.
pact between Virginia and West vir-
ginia was valid and had been recog-
nized by every branch of the federal
government He argued that the court
had no right to interfere with the au-
tonomy of a state if it attempted to
dictate to legislature that it should
provide for the payment of certain
money.
At this point Justice Harlan remark
ed that the state of Virginia seemed
to be simply holding the bonds in trust |
Mr.. Carlisle declared that they had
been cancelled, while Conrad main /
tdlneu tndt tley were nut MI Var
Isle said that the Virginia commits
sion was still bound by the act of 1894.
which Attorney General Anderson de-
MED
Chief Justice Fuller here asked if
the West Virginia legislature had ev-
er made an effort to settle, to which
it was replied that it disclaimed owing
any part Of the indebtedness. He
held the compact between the restored
state of Virginia and West Virginia
was binding.
Justice Holmes remarked that II
might be that compact might not be
binding. TO this Mr.. Carlisle replied
that If it was not, then West Virginia
is not in the Union.
Judge Holmes inquired If it We're
not true that the legislature Of West