Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-05-01
SANDS MUST CERTIFY
THE SUPREME couRT so peclDssiN IN
THE COLEMAN MANDAMuS CASE.
Registrars Hold on,ee Until Their Sue
eessors Qualify = Opinion Given In
Favor Of the rredenhcfm Trustee.

A registrar Of election, the Supreme
Court Of Appeals decides, cannot surren-
der his Office when be wishes 70 by the
simple act OF resigning.
Or 20 be more exact, he holds of1ce until DIS
successor h elected and qualities.
This Is the law OF Virginia as laid down by tnat
tribunal yesterday and its effect win be never 10
have such position vacan; exceps In case OF
death.
The particular case considered was that OF
George Coleman against w. II. Sands, registrar
Of Shoomakers precinct, Henrico. Coleman,
who Is a negro, applied several weeks ago 70 Mt
Sands TO be reslatered. Prior 20 that time MI.
Sands had Submitted his resignation 10 the hlec-
.ors! Board BY virtue Of whose sppo,n,nea,, ns ne
negro's name on the book, claiming that ne
having resigned had no authority 70 do 90.
IN TUE COUNTY COURT.
Coleman, by counsel, applied to Judge MiDr,
OF the Henrico County Court, for O mendamus 10
compel Mr.. Sands TO register him. This was re-
fused on the ground that tho petition was nos ae.
compsnisd, as required by law, by certificate
from the registrar setting forth his reasone Tor
refusal Application was then made py Cole.
man for such acertifcate, which Mr.. Sands would
not give, holding that as no was not registrar
IL was not competent for him TO do 60.
Tho Supreme Court was then petitioned 70
grant mandamus compelling Mr.. Sands TO fur-
Dish the certificate 10 Judge Minor as 10 why ne
refused TO register Coleman.
FIVE OPINIONS RENDERED.
There were two written and three oral opin-
ions In the case.
That OF Judge Lewis, which was the opinion Of
thecourt, held thatin Virginia registrar Ill q not
cease TO be such upon submitting his resignation,
bu, held over until his resignation was accepted
and his successor elected and qualified.
Judges Hinton and Fauntleroy assented TO
this, the latter explaining that resignation 10
be complete must be accepted.
Judge Lacy prepared the written dissenting
opinion holding that a man could not be CON-
PEELED TO hold once against his viii. This was
concurred In by Judge Richardson .
The mandamus was granted ordering Mr.
Sands 70 give Coleman the certificate.
The Trustee I'm Custody.
The Chancery Court Of Richmond was re-
versted In the case Of Fredenhelm against Rohr
and others, Judge Fauntleroy reading tho
unanimous opinion Of the Court.
On the 27th Of April 1889, NJ $. Fredenheim,
who conducted q millinery store st ll3 east
Broad street, made an assignment 70 II. kosen-
berg trustee, preferrng certain OF her creditors.
A few days later petition was fled by ROhr
and others claiming that the assignment had
been made for the purpose OF hiudering, delay
ing, and defrauding them, and asking that
receiver bo appointed. Argument being
duly heard, s. J.. Bloomoerg was appointed
receiver. The trustee refused to give up pos
session Of the stock, and on the order OF Judge
FitZhugh Sheriff Winston effected forcible en-
trance and put the receiver In possession. Sub
seduently the trustee was put In custody, and
an injunction wss obtained from tho Supreme
Court restraining him from dlsposing OF tho
goods. The stock was sold, however, and yester-
days decision was practically 30 decide who was
entitled 20 fees and commissions.
The opinion was 20 tho effcct that the two or
ders Of the Chanoery Court appointing the re-
ceiyer and directing the Sheriff 10 put him 10
charge were without warrant OF law, and there
fore mil and void.
The cause was remanded 10 the lower court fol
such further proceedings as are necessary.
other supreme-Court Cases.
Goddin against Bland. From the Circut Cour
| Of King William county. Reversed, Judge Lacl
delivering the opinion.
Garland against Garland. From the Circuit
Court OF Lynchburg. Reversed, Judge Hinton
delivering the opinion.