Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1840-12-25
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF VIRGINIA.
HOUSE OF DELEGATES
lLnn.iuu Dc u lsln


HOUSE OF DELEGATES.
.Noadag, Dec. y, 1910
The SPEAKER took the Chair at II clock, and SUBJ
mitted a communication !.cm a. Watkins, enclosing 4
petition Of citizens OF the county of Nottoway, for
parate election in SAID county.
PETITIONS.
Mr. Sarrn Of Isle Of Wight, presented petition OF
citizens of Isle of Wight, asking also separate cleo
ton in that county
Mr. WADE presented petition of Thomas Ingles,
asking leave to erect toli-bridge across New River,
which ordered 10 be referred 10 the Committee Of
Roads and Internal Navigation.
Mr. DoEMAS from the Committee Of Finance, pre-
sentcd a report upon the petition Of Sam Parne!; also
bill.
Mr. WoRrHIScros, from the Committee OF Courts
Of Justice, presented report
BATH ELECTION CASE
The House was occupied with this case the whole
day, considering the report and resolutions of the
Committee Of Elections Eighteen dis
posed oi-onc Of these ordered TO stand for
further consdera,ion-he resolution of the committee
reversed, and in the remaining sixteen
rirmed.
Tie crowded state Of our columns, which would
prevent doing justice 10 either party, compcs to
omit a condensed report of III. debate. The
four following were the cases in which the debates
arose, and We give them with the decision of the
House
In relation 10 the vote of Alexander II Stlncton,
appeared by his deposition, that he voted for An
drew II. Byrd, and considered himself housekceper
and the head OF family for more than two next
PRECEDING the last election the county of Bath and
had been assessed with part Of the of the
Commonwealth for the year $50, and actually paid
the before he voted; that ne lived III house with
his mother, one Of his brothers and three s,stcrs-hs
mother having dover in the said house; that his
ther was the head Of the family; that lie supcrn-
tended the farm from The proceeds Of which the sup
plies of The family were laid in by him: that his father
died in the year l-o Intestae, leaving wife and five
children seized Of certain lands, in winch dover was
assigned his widow, the mother Of this deponcnt in
winch said lands the drponent had undivided intc-
rest: that in August, so the whole Of the said lands,
including the widow dover, sold under decree
Of Court, when the deponcnt became the purchaser Of
The reversionary interest in the dover land for the
Of thousand dollars upon credit Of one, two and
three years has had possession from the date Of the
purchase, but has paid par, Of the purchase money
the whole land, including the dover, sold for The sum
Of four thousand five hundred dollars No deed had
been made 10 any of the purchasers for the parts
of the land pure ased b. them respectively.
Rtsoircd, as he opinion his COMMITTEE, That the
vote Of the said Alexander II. Sitinston is legal.
Mr.. ScoTT moved To strike out the word legal and
the word 'lllegal Of the House post
poned
In relation to the vote Of WIN. Hamilton it appears,
By his own deposition, that he had not been house
keeper and head Of family in the cnuniy Bath for
twelve months xt preceding the last election said
~
county, having had wo patents, one of which was for
- and the other for 30 acres nf land, The latter lie he
I,r.cs he has had patent for about Ten fifteen years
The land lies Back creek, but he does not recol.
lect that he ii. The tract ut thirty seven
acres he had condltionally sold some time ago 10 his
brother Andrew but he has not u cucd to HIM deed
fnr H. Ills brother give ban fifty dollars for sa
land nearly The whole amount Of which has been pad,
and the depnncn is doubtu! whether any part remains
npad If any part remains unpaid, II does not exceed
h Of three or four dollars lie sold The SAID land
about two years ago, from which time his brother has
held possession oft, and shortly after the sale he ex
rcuted to his brother title bond. The deponent
states that the tract Of fifty acres was patented I" him
that he thinks the patent is al his place of residence
that he dnes know whether il is charged to him
m the commissioners land books, nor does he know
whether lie has paid tax upon il for The last four or
five years tina, he has sold IT, and the title is still
N him.
Gy reference TO the land books Of Bath fnr the years
20 and lcl0, it seen that only one tract ot thur
" seven of land was charged IN the name ct
William Hamilton, which is supposed 10 be the tract
sold his brother which has not been conveyed By deed
and therefore has not been transferred:
Rcsotred therefore, the opinion If this Committee,
That the vote of the said William Hamilton is illegal
Resolution amended, by declaring the vote to be legal
In relation TO the vote of Samuel Ednunds, it ap-
pears nv the deposition Of Samuel Corb that the SAID
Samuel Edmunds married daughter Of brother of
the deponen which said brother died some four five
wears ago ntesta:e leaving ten chdre and possessed
Of five hundred of land lying in the county of
Bath, which said land purchased BY his brother Of
him. tie dcponcnt, for which he gave the deponent two
hundred acres Of land lyng in the county of Pocahon-
tas, leaving balance due for the said FIVE hundred
acres of five hundred dollars abou! half of which
paid the balance remaining still unpaid;
that no deed for the said land had been executed by
the deponen to his brother, who had possession of the
whole of it at the time Of his death, and his widow and
the unmarried children now living upon part OF
il. Only nine Of the children now living. BY re-
ference the land hooks Of the county of Bath for
the years 1880 and 1870 it is that Samuel Corbtt
charged with two tracts of land each year,
tanning twenty-five the other seventy eight acres, as
and seventyve cents and the latter year sixty one
dollars
Resolred therefore, as The opinion Of this Committee,
That the vote of the said Samuel Edmunds is legal
Confirmed.
In relation TO the vote of Jacob Paintur it appears
to your committee by his deposition, that he had
been housekeeper and head of family in the county
of Bath for twelve months next preceding the election
in said county-that he was assessed with tax on
eghty-two Of land for the year 1889, and paid
the same last year-that the land upon which be had
paid the tax he had sold before the election and he
thinks he had conveyed it by deed in the year SsS-
Ry reference the land book of the county of Bath for
the year $780, appears that Jacob Paintur charged
with eightytwo acres Of land, assessed at twenty dol
lars and fifty cents.
The committee decided this to be illegal and the
House refused 10 reverse the decision.
At o'clock the House adjourned.
Tuesday, Dec. -, 1870.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at II o'clock.
MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR.
Ereeutiue Department.