The advocate. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1901-1913, 1911-11-09

----z---..-------------------------
FULLY calls the attention of this court
to thej fact that the Virginia Debt
commission was created by joint.
resolution passed by the Virginia AS
sembly in 1894 and approved March
= OF that year, and suggests that this
commission is not authorized to ,insti-
tute the proceeding which it is now
seeking to prosecute as such matter
was not within the purview Of the
Joint resolution Of 1894 or the act of
1900; that is, such a proceeding was
not contemplated at the time this
commission was created and empow-
cred to act he joiat resolution was
simply one providing that the COM
mission be e..
authorized and directed to nego-
tate with the State Of West Vir-
ginla an adjustment Of the pro-
portion Of the public debt Of the
original State Of Virginia, proper
to be borne by West Virginia
From this it will be preceived that
the resolution did not contemplate
the bringing Of any suit, but only
amicablc negotiations to be conducted
by this commission ca the part of
virginia with West Virginia to as
certain what proportion Of the public
debt should be borne by West Virginia,
The act Of 1900 authorized the
commission,
by and with the advice and ap-
prevail OF the Attorney General Of
Virginia to take such action and
Institute such proceedings on be-
half Of the State as may in the
Judgment Of said commission, and
I the Attorney General, DO -needful
ana proper to protect the inter
csts Of the State, and bring about
and carry into effect Il settlement
as aforesaid. All tho expenses in
| VOWED in connection With any OF
| the matters aforesaid shall be
borne Dy tho certificate holders.
as provided in the joint resolution
aforesaid, and the State shall not
be subjected to any expense on
| that account
| "1'he settlement referred to above
was to be made with West Virginia
with respect to the certificates issued
for that part Of the debt not assumed
by Virginia. and only upon the basis
that
said commission shall in no EVENT
! enter into any negotiations here,
under except upon the basis that
| Virginia is bound only for two.
| thirds Of the debt Of the original
State, which sac has already pro.
vided for as her equitable propor.
ton thereof
In pursuance Of this authority tho
commission sent to the legislature OF
west Virginia that assembled in 1905
its representatives, and sought to Oh,
tain settlement Of the matter ~
controversy upon said basis. After
this attempted negotiation on the par
OF the commission through its repre-,
sentatives, the Debt Commission re.
ported the results thereof to the Gen
eral Assembly of Virginia on January
8, 1906. Afterwards. with. the ap
bR}'f,,i1lls Of the, Attorney General OF
virginia, and the consent or the Ger
tlticate holders, a suit was instituted
in the name of Virginia to ascertain
the proportion of the debt to be borne
! by West Virginia. After the various
steps taken in the case and the cause
submitted to the court for final de.
! termination of the matters In contro.
Versy, the court ascertained and fixed
the proportion Of the public debt tc
be borne by West Virginia at the sum
! specified in its decree, leaving the
, matter Of interest undetermined, but
upon different basis than that upon
which the commission was empow-
cred to act.
This act of the court presented a
new phase Of the case and not ono
contemplated by either Of the parties
at any time before the institution OF
this suit or during it's progress, and
not contemplated Oy the commission
or~the legislature Of -Virginia-whcn
| the commission was created and EN-
| powered to act. If this matter were
brought to the attention Of the legs
lature of Virginia in the present light
or the situation, being now fully adj
Vlsed as to the effect of the opinion Of
the court with reference to the in
terests Of Virginia, the General AS
Sembly Of that State would probably
not insist upon further contendinc
with West Virginia for interest, and
would be satisfied with West Viz
&1nlaS aSSumpSit Of such amount
nllglt-he-- agreed -bctWeen
the two States acting in joint con-
fcrnhcc through Il disintercsted COM
mission composed wholly Of the citi-
zcnS Of the two States.
I'm view Of these considerations it
IS respectfully submitted that the mo-
tlon OF the complainant ought not to
prevail, and that no further action
should DO taken by this court until
the legislature Of West Virginia has
mad al opportunity in regular session
to consider thiS rocfJ alone, +bx> l;,,u,.