The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1878-01-16


thirds voting therefor.
Personal.
Mr.. TALIAFERRo of Norfolk Wishea IL 10
be entered upon the journal tnat had ne
been in the House yesterday "nen the yoIe
on the bill reducing the pay OF Tue uienipeis
OF the General Assembly came up he would
have voted against recommitt'nS tue OIL.
HOUSE BILLS PASSED.
Toincorporate the town OF H1llsvllle, IN
the county Of Carroll.
To authorize the sale OF Town-Lot no. !,
in the town OF Gainesboro', FREDERICK
county, held in trust for the use OF the mem.
beers Of the Methodist Episcopal Church OF,
America.
JAMES-RIyER RAILROAD.
On motion of Mr. BoCoCK, the three bills
in relation 10 the Ja1nes-River railroad, the
canal company, and the Clifton-ForSe Rail
road Company were ordered to be printed.
MEHEER1N-R1vER FENcE-LAw.
House bill No. so, declaring the Meherrln
river q lawful fence in certain portions OF
Mecklenburg and Lunenburg counties, was
discussed by Messrs. Ross HAMILTON, hEY-
SER, and MCMILLAN.
MIR. HAMILTON said that at some places at
some seasons Of the year fish an lnch thlch
couldn't find enough water in the river 10
float him unless it rained very nard. ne
didn't want to make the river lawful
fence where il is fordable by animals or
where there are bridges.
The bill was recommitted.
LANDS INJURED BY TIE FLOOD.
House bill No. G. "to authorize a re-
assessment OF lands throughout the Com
monweaIth that have been injured by the
late frcshet'' came up on the calendar.
The bill provides "that the Judge OF the
county court OF any county or or the cor
poration court of any corporation in this
State. at any time within two months from
the passage OF this act, in term-time or va
cation, shall, upon the petition OF any per-
son residing within his county or corpora
ton, and who shall allege That his lands
have been materially injured by the late
freshct OF November, 1877, appoint three
intelligent, discreet, and disinterested iree-
holders, whose duty it shall be, within nj
teen DAYS after their appointment, to pro-
ceed uDon the lands mentioned in SAID Pc
ntion, and after having taken an oath
for the faithful discharge OF their duty, TO
be administered by justice, notary, or otncT
nerson authorized to administer oaths III
said county or corporation, they shall per-
sonally inspect and examine said LANDS, ana
II they shall be OF opinion that they nave
in fact been materially injured by the late
freshet, they shall proceed to reassess said
lands in accordance with their true cash
value. having regard to the prices fixed at
the last general assessment OF lands in their
said county or corporation, after which
they shall within ten days return their as.
sessment to the clerk OF their county or cor
poration court"
The other sections Of the bill provide fol
landholdcrs appealing to the court, and, IN
case the court approves the new assessment.
for changing the figures on the assessors
books, &C., &c.
Mr.. PULLIAM moved to amend the Dill ey
making it read that the reasSeSSment be MADE
upon the petition Of any person o1cn,ng red
estate within the county or corporation.
Mr.. PULLIAM clearly explained the pur-
pose OF his amendment.
Mr.. HANGER regretted to be compelled to
oppose the bill. He had opposed all the re-
assessments except those prescribed IN the
Constitution. In his opinion, under the
Constitution, the General Assembly had no
right to order this partial reissessment. But
for what he conceived to be his constitu-
tional duty he would gladly vote to afford
the relief asked for.
NECESSITY FOR THE REASSESSMENT.
Mr.. BoCoCK said that in his opinion the
General Assembly had the right to order
the reassessment. and there was now great
exigency for them to do it. The Constitu-
tion said that there shall be general re-
assessment OF lands once in five years; but
it does not prohibit other reassessments or
relief from being granted in cases like this.
MIR. BoCoCK argued the constitutional
point with some fulness, and then followed
it by statement OF the damages to lands in
certain sections of the State by the Novcm-
Der flood to show that there was not only
legal authority but necessity for this action.
Mr.. KYLE advocated the passage OF the
bill.
Many OF Mr.. EDMUNDS'S people had suf-
fered greatly from the floods. But the de-
triton from the highlands, impovcrishlng
them, was carried to the lowlaIds to enrich
them, and it was difficult to decide how to
euualiZe these things. Besides, claimed Mr..
EDMUSDs, the Commonwealth has her rights.
This law makes no adequate provision for
the protection OF them; no evidence IS re-
uuired to be taken for the Commonwealth
the Commonwealth Attorney is not required
to be present when the revaluation is made.
Mr.. BoCoCK said that the gentleman was
mistaken; that the usual provisions for the
protection OF the Commonwealth had been
made in this bill.
Mr.. EDMUNDs contended that the ma
chinery OF the Commonwealth did not come
into play unless the landholders appealed
from the decision of the three freeholders.
The man whose property was assessed too
low would OF course never appeal. Ii lie
did not, the Commonwealth would have no
remedy.
Mr.. EDMUSDs spoke Of the abuses that
would occur by entering into such an as
sessment, and Of the people who might
claim re;issessment from rises IN spring
branches, &C., and announced that he would
vote against the bill.
Mr.. MoFFETr supported the bill, and
smoke OF the destruction Of lands by tho
flood. and argued that the bill was consti.
tutional. He contended that the Legisla-
ture had no right to insist upon landhold'
crs paving taxes upon lands that had been
rendered for the time unproductive, If moi
wholly valueless for all time.
TIE INJURED LANDS.
Mr.. HENKEL thought no bill OF greater
importance had been before the Legislature
at This session. In his opinion constitution:
were not intended to cripple but to advance
the interests OF the people. he not onl!
claimed that the bill was worthy one, but
that it was constitutional and just to al
concerned.
Mr.. HANGER claimed that tine Constitu
tion having provided a special plan for re-
assessments all other methods were thereby
excluded.
General TALIAFERRo thought the bill con
stitutional, but feared that many evils
| wo,,,d ,urny ont OF il, However, il it was