Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1911-04-22
THAT VIRGINIA DEBT CASE.
l(nmmnnIcated.l

not criticise you for making the publ
cation, cannot refrain from calling
attention to some glazing nisstate-
ments, evidently intended to deceive
the people.
Reference Is made TO a gathering of
certain prominent republicans at
Charleston, about which time it Is
claimed there was an advance In the
selling price Of so-called West Vir-
einia Certificates There Is evident
" an attempt to couple the two events
in order to substantiate the irrespo1-
sible charge that certain republicans
are owners OF or interested in those
certificates. BE that as II may, If the
writer Of the dispatch has information
that such is the fact, he should cease
dealing in insinuations a7d give the
people the facts.
In the decision OF the Supreme
Court, II is stated that the State of
Virginia held practically all OF the GER
tiflcates. Ownership Is not disclosed.
It is fair To presume the records at
Richmond would disclose the owner
ship. 1t is also equally fair to pre-
certain the names of the owners. Why
not do so instead of dealing in insin-
nations?
There Is criticism of the manage
ment OF the case. without attempting
to disclose in what particular. This
is a direct thrust at the leading coun.
sci for West Virginia, Hon. John G.
Carlisle and Hon. John G. Spooner.
Mr.. Carlisle Is now dead and unable TO
defend himself. He was high-mind-
ed man an able attorney and a demo
crat Mr. Spooner is considered the
foremost authority on the Constitu-
ton in the whole country. No apollo
gy Is demanded for him. He Is re-
publican. 1T is unfair and unjust to
impute improper conduct against eth
er. AS chief counsel, they had com
plete charge of the case. Other attor-
neys simply assisted, being familiar
with local conditions and facts. | am
personally cogniZalt of the fact that
vigorous efforts were made to obtain
all possible information from every
possible source.
The suit was brought by Virginia il
compliance with an agreement made
with the holders OF bonds of that
State, by which she agreed to assist in
the collection of the so-called West
Virginia Certificates" The Supreme
Court states that Virginia had the
legal right TO institute the suit. Vir-
gipia claimed West Virginia should
pay one-third of the debt incurred
prior to June 90. 1863. West Virginia
claimed she owed nothing. The court
refused to accept either contention,
taking a middle ground and Splitting
the difference" Virginia's contention
was based on area, West Virginia eem
prising one-third of the original area.
West Virginia insisted upon settle
ment on the basis OF revenues paid
prior to separation. The Court adopt
ed the valuation OF property at the
time of the separation, excluding the
value OF the slaves.
1t is claimed in the dispatch that
tho existing Constitution of West Vir-
ginia does not recognize the exist
ence OF the debt. In this particular,
the writer is in error, as Section 4,
Article 10, binds the State 'to redeem
a previous liability" A liability Is
acknowledged and the State is pledg-
ed to redeem it. West Virginians
have been charged with many crimes
and misdemeanors. but they have not
been guilty OF reputation of just
debt and never will be.
limitations are made that the crea-
tors OF the State should not have &C
cepted liability fer any portion OF the
debt They could not help them
selves. Congress required them to do
so, and being honest men they would
have scorned an ignoble act. Like
wise, the Constitutional Convention OF
1872 declined to repudiate, as the writ
er would have us believe.
Should the judgment of the Court
stand, West Virginia is infinitely bet
ter off than she would have been had
not a separation occurred. The best
Virginia could do as to her share of
the debt was to agree to pay sum in
excess of twenty-five millions. On that
basis West Virginia would have been
compelled to pay at least eleven mil
lions. Knowing something OF the de-
vious' methods employed by Virginia
prior to 1860 and since; it is a safe
prediction that West Virginia would
have paid at least half of the debt.
Products, east and west being differ
ent. it would have been an easy mat
ter to have imposed the burden on the
western counties.
West Virginia never has repddiated
a debt and she never will. If ordered
by the Supreme Court to pay, she will
dc so. 1t ill-becomes anyone to in
dulge in insinuations and mtsrepresen-
tations. Republicans well knew, when
the suit was instituted, should judg-