The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1877-02-02
which 0, Jury would deem insufficient for q
criminal conviction" fsa .5sB s1
CONCLUSIONS.

These are but extracts from the opinion.
Many interesting points nre but touched
upon slightly, and some non-essentiai to the
understanding Of the case not at all. +.
Judge Staples held that it is clear that
criminal conviction was not intended to be
required before disqualification that It was
competent for the people to prescribe the
qualifications for Office. - :.
In relation to forms OF procedure the
Judge said: "My opinion, therefore, Is,
whether the proceedings be to, try the title
OF an incumbent or to adiudicate the claims
OF an applicant for an Office, it is legal and
proper to establish the disability imposed by
the Constitution in cases Of duelling by any
competent and satisfactory evidence.
."The Judgment of the Circuit Court for
the reasons stated must be affirmed"
Mr.. Royal has had his disabilities re-
moved by the Legislature.
In regard to the point raised by the At
torney- General that the writ Of quo; i5ar-
rdnto is no longer in use in Virginia, the
Court deemed it unnecessary to express an
opinion, the parties in the case having con-
sented to the arrangement by which it was
brought up. -
NATIONAL AND STATE TAXATION.
In the case of The Commonwealth us.
Andrews, Ordway & Co., the Judgment OF
the Ciruit Court was approved. The facts
OF the case, briefly stated, are that An
drews, 0rdway & Co. permitted the United
States Government to erect upon their lands
certain buildings for the purpose OF obtain
ing granite from the quarries near Rich
mond, to be used in the construction Of the
public buildings at Washington. The
houses so erected en- the lands OF the firm
were built exclusively by the United States
with public funds belonging to that Gov
ernment, and Messrs. Andrews, Ord
way & Co. having no interest in them,
and obtaining and exercising no control
over them. The commissioner OF the
revenue for Chesterfield county, in as
sessing Andrews, Ordway & Co.'s taxes,
upon their real estate, charged them with
the value of these buildings. Andrews,
Ordway & Co. applied to the County Court
for redress against this assessment, upon the
ground that the buildings in question, being
the property of the United States Govern
ment, used for public purposes. were not
liable to taxation by the State OF Virginia.
The County Court refused to make the cor
rection. They then appealed to the Circuit
Court, which reversed the decision OF the
County Court, ordering the taxes which had
been paid to be refunded.
From the decision of the Circuit Court an
appeal was taken by the Commonwealth to
the Court OF Appeals, and that court affirm
ed the decision OF the Circuit Court.
Judge Christian, delivering tue opinion
of majority OF the judges, entered into
an elaborate and interesting review OF all
the authorities bearing upon the ques-
ton, and an examination of the principles
controlling the subject of taxation, as be-
tween the State and Federal governments,
He showed long train Of authorities,
and upon welLsettled principles that the
means, instrumentalit1es, and property OF
the United States Government necessary to
the operation of that Government were not
the subjects OF taxation by the State gov
ernment, and that the property and the agen-
cies Of the State government were equally
exempt from taxation on the part Of the
Federal Government.
He maintained, upon authority, that the
buildings in question being the property
OF one owner, while the land upon which
they were situated belonged to another,
were to be considered as personal estate,
and not realty; and upon the facts appear.
ing upon the record these buildings were
bona fde used by the United States Govern
ment for public national purposes. In this
opininion Judges Staples and Burks con
Cured. Judges Moncure and Anderson
dissented, and each presented his OWL
views, Judge Anderson delivering writ
ten opinion.