The West Virginian. [volume] (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1914-1974, 1915-06-16
WASHINGTON NEWS
CONTINUED rom page lonr.l

e$sO.56S s61563 s...... szsI
Virginia rom restored
Deduct credits To- West
Virginia ]. 500. .. 1855 ,ss5157
West yirgtnia's share,
4 therefore: of !princlpal /. S4,215. 622.25]
1 I'M computing the interest the court
held that from January - S61 to-
July Il 1891. West Virginia should pay
43perg cent or IS ,143, 05e!1s from July
q. 1891. to July i, 1915. IT. should pay
at the rate of 8 per cent or So, 0s5,.
3248.04 making the total interests
charges, $St1 7s,307.22, which with the
principal. makes the grand total; s12,.
.393.929.50.
The question now arises whether
West Virginia win pay this verdict,
and II she will not, how will she be
made to pays? s$S
There is. however, a precedent for
compelling one sovereign state to pay
a sister state when the supreme courI
renders a verdict against 1t. This
precedent 4wassin the opinion OF the
court in holding that North Carolina
must pay the old school bonds which
had been presented to the state of
North Dakota. North Carolina srei
sisted this payment.
Major Holmes Conrad, represent
ing the holders OF the old debt certi-
sfcates, it developed today, has al
ready taken steps to. compel West Wiz.
ginia to pay. He has filed a motion
with the supreme court, asking for the
appointment of a receiver, who shall
go to West Virginia and compel pay
ment of the verdict, should the court
find one against the state. This mo-
ton was filed anticipating West Wiz.
glnia would lose and has never been
formally laid before the court by the
clerk.
The. debt controversy arose over the
separation of West Virginia from Vir-
ginia at the outbreak of the Civil Was.
After the war Virginia commended tho
new state should assume an equitable
share Of the former states debt exist
ing prior to West Virginias admission
to the Union. West Virginia cognized
this claim at that time and wrote
into its state constitution a provision
that it would assume an equitable
share" ofzthe Mother states Indebted
ness. The two states, after this, could
never agree upon the amount OF West
Virginia's share despite the appoint
ment OF commissions to- conduct ne
gottations with the hope OF reaching
such an agreement.
When the supreme court handed
down its opinion int the North Carolina
case, rendering Judgment against
that state, in favor Of North Dakota,
1t paved the way for Virginia to carry
the case into the courts. Before do
ing this, however, Virginia rea5usted
its debt after. a political campaign
which placed William Malone, leader
of the Reajuster Party, in control OF
the states political government and
in the United States Senate. AS
result of Mahone's victory, the Viz
'ginia state legislature shaved down
its old state debt two-thirds, for which
it issued new bonds, and told the bond I
holders they would have to look to
West Virginia for the other third
Virginia, in doing this, promised assist
ance in compelling West Virginia to
pay, and according carried the case
to the supreme court where 1t was
finally decided yesterday. s.
By the supreme courts istont yes
terdayE West Virginia Is isaddled with a
state debt Of nearly $13 100000; West
Virginia has not an outstanding ond
issue, it being prohibited from issuing I
bonds by its constitution except -to}
pay its share of the Virginia debt.
An unusual feature of the case Is
that the late Senator s. B. Elkins se-
cured the consent of the old bond
holders to accept 81, 900, 900 as a com, |
oromie. The West Virginia legislature
would not consider It. Now, the SUI
jpreme court holds It must pay $13,.
100000 when forty years ago It could