Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1886-07-17
THE DULASY CASE.

As stated in Yesterdays GAZETTE the
case OF H. G. Dulany IS. the State Board o.
Indemnity and the Treasurer ofShenandoat
county, was concluded in Tie United States
Circuit Court in Richmond that day
Judges Bord and Hughes, the jury render
ing verdict OF 1852, the actual loss sustain
cd by Mr. Dulany in the levy aud sale Of
bis stock. After Inc evidence was con
clude,i and before argument was,beguu the
court submitted The following inst. ucliops
to the jury:
tho Jury find from the evidence that the
plaintiff in this action, being citizon OF Virgin
in was n;cbel Ia tho State in the sum 81 $50
fnr taxes duo upon the property owned hy him lin
shenandoah county, in that State and that IN
paymcnt thereof he rendered to koontZ the
treasurer OF the said county entitled to receive
tho same, coupons Of the bonds of tho State OF
Virginia receivable for public taxes, and that
said koontz treasurer, refused to receive the
sarlo in payment thereof. and that notwithstand-
ing such tender, the defendant, koontZ, levied
upon the property OF the plaintiff advertised and
sold the same ami So collected the tax; then the
said KUontZ WAS 4 trcSpasser and Is liable III
dsmagcs to tho said plaintiff for his trfSpass.
And if tho jury find from tho evidence III the
Cause that the other defendants TO this action or
either of them advised aud counsellcd the said
koontZ to commit the trcspass above described
by advising him not to receive the said coupons
hut TO make tho said levy, with promise of in
demn lGatiOn if he were mncted in damages Tor his
conducts, knowing the assistance Of counsel to do
fcud him. then the said defendants are jointly iia-
bic with koontz, the treasurer. for tho trespass
alleged and the jury msy find such Of the de-
frndants guilty not guilty as they may find
they did or did not so advise, counsel and abct
the aforementioned trcspass.
And the jury arc instructed that it is the law
Of the land that, upon tic tender of the tax-re-
ccivable coupons for tho pay mcnt OF taxes wheth-
or received or not, tho taxes paid and any
levy upon the property OF the tax payer alter such
tender is trcspass (any State law to the con-
trary Notwithstanding. for which damages are
recoverable :; and if the said levy is made with a
knowledge ut the time that it is Illegal, while
the taxpayer demonstrates that it is illegal and
claims the protection Of the law of the land. then
the jury may find that tho said levy was mali
ciuus and not confined to giving actual dana
ages, but may give punitive or exemplary DANA
yes, Us thcy may find tho facts to be
During the argument, and as Mr.. Royal
was proceeding to attack the argument ad.
vanced by the Attorney General, an exct.
ing colloquy occurred. Mr.. Royal was
likeniug the doctrine advanced by Attorney
General Ayers to that advocated by Dennis
heaTuoy anu CpicS, Lic SuiCsiSc huoi Suisp,
when the Attorney General arose and said !:
MIR. Royal, 1 cannot permit you to cast
such reflection as that, or cannot permit
without protest"
Mr.. Royal said II do not propose to say
anything disagreeable to you. but l do in
tend to attack the doctrine laid down by you
yesterday as being Identical in every respect
to the doctrine of Herr Most and of the Chi
cago anarchists, and do it with the most
profound respect"
Mr.. Royal then dwelt upon the remark
made by the Attorney General that "Mr.
Dulany was two-million five. hundred
thousand-dollar man." and held that the
conclusion to be drawn from the remarks of
the Attorney was that 70 rich man is not to
have the protection of the law"
The Acknowledgement again arose and
said Now, want to say that you miscon
strue that. l said that that man was worth
a great deal Of money, and that his credit
could not be affected. said that the Jury
was bound to give him actual damages"
The coloquy here ended, and Mr.. Royall
proceeded to argue the legal points.