The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1911-04-11
lPEBT CASE
West Virginia Bar Discusses Recent
Ruling Of Supreme Court
Of United States.
DECREE HAS NO
LEGAL EFFECT
And imposes No Moral Obligation
Upon the People Of West,
Virginia.

The April number OF the West vir-
Kinia Bar has the following extremely
Interesting article on tho Virginia
debt case. The article il so illumina-
tive and instructive that Il deserves
20 be repeated and read in every sec
ton Of the state. The Intelligencer
Is pleased 10 note that this able
legal authority agrees with Il that the
opinion OF the supreme court recently
rendered has no legal effect and i'm.
poses no moral obligation upon the
people OF West Virginia.
The Bar says:
We believe all lawyers will agree
that the action OF the L. s. supreme
court in the debt controversy between
Virginia and West Virginia Is the most
anomalous as TO it's procedure and re-
suit Of any in the history Of that court.
We believe ii is a proceeding with
out precedent in any court unless II
be The Hague court OF international
arbitration. to which It approaches
some resemblance.
Having decided 10 entertain a suit
In equity purporting to be instituted
by one state against another state
10 adiudicate n monetary claim. il
proceeds in the usual course TO reach
that result until the questions OF law
and fact have been fully heard. but
makes no decree.
Thereupon the court takes the atti-
tude Of n court OF arbitration and
deals with n from that standpoint.
but makes no award. but rather re-
fers Il back TO tho parties themselves
FOR arbitration with a covert threat
that II they don't arbitrate they may
have TO liiigate.
The questions Of law which were
urged against the plaintiffs conten-
t.on and which We're deemed so funda
mental by the commission Of able
lawyers representing the defense. that
they were unanimous in their judC-
nent and absolutely confident in their
expressed conviction. that the plain
Hff's claim could not prevail in any
court OF law. were curly brushed
aside. The conceded feet that the
plaintiff was without any interest in
the case; that under the constitution
she had no right there except as q
state making n bona flde claim I'm her
own right. vet had already cancelled
all rights and OBLIGATIONS OF her own
and by the very act OF lnstituting that
suit. whether she won or lost. had
cancelled all claim 20 any recovery
IN the suit. had in fact admitted that
under her agreement West Virginia
would thereafter owe her nothing. and
that anything that might be recovered
would go 10 her aseiguees. this funda-
mental fact. this imposture this abuse
~ a strict constitutional privilege.
was, also curtlv brushed aside By the
court: and although rendering no de.
cree. award. or Judgment. they seem
10 have reached fnalify-or hope
they have-whiie the position Of the
parties is loft about as IL was before
the suit was instituted
This anomalous result can be OK.
planned only by guessing az some
things-fOr tho opinion or disquisition
which the court handed down does
not vouchsafc any explanation.
We guess that n We had been be.
hind the scenes. in tho council cham
Der OF the court when this case was
being considered. we would have wit.
messed a divided court divided
court first on the matter ~ taking any
Jurisdiction OF fhc case We arc sure
that Chief Justice White entered "a Wig
orous protest against taking 'urfsdic.