The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-04-16

edy Tor any person having "A CldiHh against
county and afford ample protection TO
claimant. county, and taxpayer. No ue-
cision Is made upon the provision that the
Commonwealth Attorney shall require
10 appeal of any claim deemed Improper
OF unjust, at the instance Of SIX tax
peyers. In the light OF a statutory subsu-
tute for the jurisdiction heretofore exer-
cised by courts Of chancery at the suit
OF taxpayers feeling aggrieyed. because
such decision Is unnecessary.
g. The right 10 the possession Of county
property Is In the Board OF Supervisors,
which may proceed al law az other
suitors do. or take possession Of, n that
may be done without q breach of the
peace OF other violation Of law The
board cannot give lien on public build
ings, nor does the contractor or the
material man or the artisans acquire
lien Of any kind upon them. Those who
contract with the board do so not upon
the expectation Of securing themselves by
lien but solely upon the faith and
credit OF the county. There was. there
fore. no equity jurisdiction for the ap-
polntment OF % receiver to take charge
or the buildings alleged to be going 10 de-
cay.
BILL or EXCEPTIONS.
Morris vs.. Dean. etc reversed. Opinion
by Judge Harrison.
Unlawful detainer tried in County Court
and all matters q law and fact submitNd
to tho court as taken by regular bill OF
exceptions empodying the evidence to rne
Circuit Court and thence here.
Held: The contention that the case
should be dismissed because no exception
was taken 10 the Judgment of the Cir
cult Court IS not tcaable. There was no
necessity for such bill. That court re-
viewed the judgment Of the County Court
on writ Of error. and could look al
nothing except the record brought up IL
the Circuit Court erred the error appears
by the record of that court without any
bin Of exceptions.
The plaintiffs below wholly failed 10
show that they were entitled tc the pos
session Of the land, and therefore. the
County Court did not err i'm giving judg-
ment for the defendant. The right Of
possession was the only matter in Issue
and therefore the declaration by the Coun-
~ Court that the defendant held the fee
simple title can not prejudice the rights
OF the parties I'm any proceeding involving
the title TO the land.
The Circuit Court erred in reversing the
judgment of the County Court and In
court VIII enter such judgment as the Cir.
cult Court ought to have entered.
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
Walker etc. vs.. Tyler reversed. Opin-
ion by Judge Harrison:
Appellee alleges that I'm 1855 Walker de
termined 20 build house on his own lot
and proposed 10 her that n she would
contribute to the expense of building s1e
should have an interest therein proper
toned 10 her contribution. This alleged
agreement was not reduced to writing
Walker died i'm 1893. and appellee brought
suit TO settle his estate and enforce pay
ment of her contribution towards build
ing the house Commissioner reported
that she was entitled 10 500 and interest.
and that her claim was not barred be
cause no right of action accrued to her
until Walkers death and failure 10 fulfill
his promise.
Held. No such agreement IS shown 10
have been made. Nor can the contention
that right of action did not accrue until
Walkers death. because appellee was
under a mistake as 20 her relations 10
the property. or because there was faTl-
ure OF consideration Doe sustained. 80 co1-
tract is shown 10 have existed between
the parties. nor is 80 shown That appellee
The record clearly shows that She cXpend-
ed her money on the building without taxi
ing any evidence thereof. with some vague
idea that she was 90 have an interest IN
the property. The mandate of the law.
which cannot be suspended nor enlarged
has barred her right of recovery
II there had been such an agreement
which could be maintained under the
pleadngs i'm this case. 81 would avail
nothing I'm the face Of the plea Of The
statute OF frauds there being no writing
10 evidence her right.
INDEFINITE REQUESTS VOID.
Flfeld. &C. VS.. Van Wvcks Ex'c'r.. &c.
Reversed. Opinion by JUDGE Buchanan
This is will case. The residuarv
clause gives etc. ITO Rev. S S. Seward
OF New York and Rev j. c. Ager, OF
Brooklyn. or tho survivor OF them, or 10
vhomsocver they may select in case ~
:hcir death in trust for the benefit or
the New Jerusalem church (Swedenhor-
gean) as they shall deem best"
The trustees filed their bin 10 have the
will construed. and the validity of Ire
residuary clause determined. The trus
tees named I'm that clause answered. and
stated that The New Jerusalem churcn
was the general name by which among
themselves. that body Of Christians VINO
accept the teachings OF Emanuel Sweior-
borg were known during the life Of .he
tostatriX. that the legal and representa-
tive general agency 90 receive property
real and personal 10y gift devise. etc.
for educational and religious purposes
was the general convention Of
the New Jerusalem church in the United
states Of America "a corporation char
tered I'm Illinois. that this was the LEGAL
and representative agency Of the church
in the United states during the life Of toe
testatriX. that she was a member OF that
church. and took great interest 100 and
contributed largely TO spreading IT'S doc
trinos. and that they believed that the
bequest was intended 10 be I'm trust for
the benefit of "Thc General Convention
or etc"
The corporation became a party nv pc
tition and the court below docreed I'm It's
favor and appeal
The right Of appeal is denied on several
grounds. first. that appellants would
have no interest IN the residuarv clause
even If held to be invalid, hut that Il
would pass as personal estate 90 testa-
trix's husband The executors were au-
thorizod 10 sell the real estate and con-
vert IT into money If necessary 10 carry
out the will.
Held. Where testator directs mis- rc4i
estate 20 be sold and the mixed fund
arising from proceeds OF personally and
reality 10 be applied. TO specified pun
poses. II any part Of the disposition fail.
whether because void or by lapse. then
the proceeds of the reality retain tie
quality Of real estate for the benefit Of
the heir. though in fact sold. and me
money, when paid 10 the heir has IN his
hands the character Of money and no
1,rr.or tho character Of real estate Z mis-