Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-03-30
BELVA CAN'T ARGUE.
4 Notion In Her Behalf Denied by the
Supreme Court.
EIGHT OPINIONS YESTERDAY.
Right of Courts TO Appoint Special Magis-
trstcs ConstitutionaI-Fire Insurance
Cascs-Otbcr Decisions Reached.

Yesterday was big day In the SUI
premo Court OF Appeals Of Virginia. Mrs.
Belva Lockwood applied TO be permitted
TO practice before the court and was
denied, eight opinions were rendered, and
number OF motions were made.
Possibly the most interesting work OF
the day was the consideration Of the
motion made by Mr.. Alfred Il. Cohen In
behalf OF Mrs. Lockwood. The applicant
and Miss Kelly occupied seats in the
courtroom. and were the central objects
Of interest among the Richmond lawyers
NO ARGUMENT WHATEVER.
Mr.. Cohen made a simple motion with
out argument in behalf OF Mrs. Lock-
wood. stating that she had qualiiied to
practice law in the courts OF the District
Of Columbia, the Supreme Court of the
United States. the United States Court OF
Claims, the New York, Maryland, Mass
nchusetts and other State courts. and
asked that she be permitted TO qualify
"a a matter of comfy. dnder section
8l92 Of the code, which provides that any
person who has been duly qualified 10
practice in the courts of any Of the Ter
ritories Of the United States and the Dis
trict Of Columbia and any Of the states
shall be allowed 10 practice IN any Of the
courts Of the State.
The president called upon Judge Lacy
for his opinion This member Of the tri-
bunal favored the admission Of Mrs. Lick
wood. lie said the law here provided Il at
any person who had been duly qualified
to practice in the supreme Court Of the
United States the highest tribunal in the
land. was entitled TO qualify in this court
lie added that under the cection re-
ferrcd 90 by Mr.. Cohen. Mrs. Lockwood /
was certainly a person, according 10 his |
construction. and that subsection IS Of |
section Of the Code says that wherever |
the pronoun he" is used in the Code 1t |
might also be applied 10 the feminine gen
der
CODE AND LEGISLATURE.
Judge Fauntleroy was next called upon, |
and he was cmphatCally I'm favor Of the |
admission OF Mrs. Lockwood to the bar
Tie spoke of the recent fight in the Legis-
latuTc with regard to female attorneys |
saying that the fact the bill did not
pass the General Assembly did not preju-
dice the Court in this particular. II was
possible that the Legislature had con
sldcrcd legislation unnecessary on this
point. ana that in its mind women were
already eligible TO practice law in this
State.
Judge Hinton dssontcd from the views
Of Judges Lacy ana Fdunteroy on the
ground that from the foundation of Viz
gina down 20 the present women had not
been recognized at the bar of ths Com
monweal'h. IL thought the statutes only
provided for the admission Of male attor-
neys.
THE MOTION DEFEATED.
Judge Lewis. President Of the Court.
was Of the sam- opinion as Judge Hinton.
lie stated that section 3l92. followed by
subsequent sections used the word "he"
Ii NaN said that if an attorney practices
law without a license. he" shall be pun
ished iu "a certain way. Judge Levi,
said that although subsection l. OF SET
ton , Of the code provided that the
pronoun he might be applied
TO the feminine gender Yet he did not
think 10 applied to this case Tn. Presi-
dent then said that the Court would have
10 cous'rlIc the law as it was. though it
might he that the law in this respect
mght h- changed.
Judc" richardson. who is sick at the
home 81 Judge Lewis. was absent. loav-
inc the Court evenly li|del or this
question. which Was to defeat the motion
Of SIR. Cohen.
The latter gentleman is now preparing
a petition for "a Tehcaring Of this motion
before the Court when every member
can Doe present
Mr. Lockwood left the city on the
evening train for Washington She Will
return here in a few weeks 10 be- present
during the taking of testimony I'm the case
Of Lyme against Kelly heirs before a com
missioner Having been appointed COM
Mite" Of tn insane heir in this case
She can argue the matter before the
Court IN proper person, and Will in all
probability do SO.
Five Insurance Cases.
The Court decided yesterday the five
insurar &c cases which came up on writs
Of error from the Circuit Court Of t'uI-
pepper. The styles Of these cases were the
Virginia Fire and Marine Insurance Com
pany against Thomass survivor the
Aloroteck Insurance Company against
1homas's survivor, the Georgia Home In
surance Company against Thomas's sur
vivor, the Western Assurance COMPANY
Insurance Company against w. a.
Thomas. The amount involved in the
several controversies was about $1,000
and the questions decided were purely
technical ones. The Supreme Court af-
hrmed the action of the lower tribunal
and the companies will have to pay the
policies held.
The Right of the Court.
a very interesting case decided was
that of Bassett against Curtis Sheriff
from Elizabeth City county, which involved
the constitutionality of section 81 Of the
Code of Virginia. The case came w as
Of hob In
Bassett alleged that he was being
illegally detained I'm the jail OF Elizabeth
civ county. by virtue Of mitimus
issued by a man claiming to be Just ~
of the peace. named :. q. Houchins !
lit is IGNORANC