Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/548

 522 OCTOBER TERM 1907. Argument for Complainant. 209 U. 8. Wheeling ordinance would have to be discarded, and an equi- table basis and scheme of settlement adopted. Complainant contends that, while the Wheeling ordinance upon its face, prescribes an absolutely arbitrary basis of settle- ment, the representatives of Virginia are satisfied that upon a fair, reasonable and just construction of the language of that ordinance, and of the subsequent supplemental enactments, the scheme of settlement therein defined will, when applied to the facts as stated in the bill, and aait is believed they can be established by proofs, result in fixing the proportion of the debt of Virginia which West Virginia should assume and pay, inclusive of interest, at a very large sum, though not so large a sum as it would be equitable for West Virnia to �pay. The debt, a portion of which she was to pay, was an interest- beang debt. It would be manifestly "just" and "equitable" that West Virginia should be required to pay interest as well as prlncipa]. Indeed, any settlement which does not require that State to pay interest during the long period of her de- fault and refusal to' pay anything, would be not only unjust, and inequitable, but iniquitous. West Virginia came into the Union upon the distinct con- dition expressed in her constitution, that she would assume an equitable proportion of the common dbt of the undivided State, as it ex'isted 'prior to Ja. nuary 1, 1861, and would pro- vide for the payment of the accruing interest .and the re- demption of the principal thereof. While it is believed that, upon the facts stated in the bill and accompanying exhibits, and upon the proofs hereafter to be adduced in support thereof, West Virginia will owe a very large sum, even under the arbitrary scheme of the Wheeling ordinance, we submit that we should not, in the present stat of the litigation, be tied down to the terms of that ordinance. Another palpable objection to the defendant's draft is, that it excludes from the account the value of the property, assets, and mony which West Virginia has eeeived from the Corn-

�