The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-01-15
SUPREME COURT CASES.
THE SUIT or WALLACE AGAINST
IHE CITY DECIDED
InFavor OF the Defsndant-Couveysu OF
Land-Insufiicient Evidcnce-Eegister
of Land Onice-Other Cases.

Nallace vs.. lily OF hichnoiu. Op'hi'"
by Judge Cardwel'. a judgment of writ
Of error 70 the Circuit Court Of the city
OF Richmond.
In 1865 the City Council passed a reso-
mtion that upon the evacuation Of the
city all liquor should be destroyed, and
that q committee of twenty-five should
be- appointed for each ward TO destroy
the liquor ana to give receipts Tor the
liquor destroyed. and that the city would
pay for the liquor destroyed. Wallace
liquor was destroyed by one OF the COM
mitteos, but he failed to get any receipt.
In 1871 Wallace sued the city for $4,000.
tho alleged value of his liquor. The court
below held that a receipt for the liquor
destroyed was essential, and refused TO
allow other evidence that the liquor was
destroyed according TO the resolution Of
the Council. and for that. as well as upon
other grounds, the case was decided
against the plaintiff
The case IS an extremely important
one, as affecting the rights of the citizens
and the liability of the city, and was
deliberately argued in the Court of APP.
peals by John Howard for Wallace and
by G. Y. Meredith for the city. The
Court Of Appeals held:
J. A receipt was not necessary, citing
/ Greenleaf section sos. Parsons on Con-
tracts. 5th edition, $50. Bishop on Con-
tracts. section 1.6.
.. As contract. the resolution was
ultra wires and tho city, not having the
power 10 pass Il. was not liable. citing
and overruling Jones vs.. city OF Rich
mond. Is Graft, y. 5il.
3. The general welfare" clause I'm tho
oh 81 Ita of OF
power. nor did the right OF eminent do
main embrace it; nor would the right OF
eminent domain be exercised ia that
manner.
{. The police power can be aided boy
the right OF eminent domain only where
the statute prescribes H.
D. ANY fair. reasonable doubt con-
corning the existence of power Is resolved
by the courts against the corporation.
and the power is denied" Dillon on Mu-
nicipal Corporations. 55S9, cited and APP
proved.
CONVEYANCE OF LAND.
Piedmont Bank. etc. ". Hatcher. q
ais. Opinion by Judge Buchanan. Bill dis
missed by lower court and decision affirm
cd on appeal
The object of the suit was TO set aside
a conveyance Of certain lands upon the
~
and defraud the creditors OF the gran
tor and to subject the lands to the pay
mont of certain negotiable notes held by
the complainants. the appellants in this
court
The answer Of one Of the makers. sup
ported by affidavit under section 1919 of
Code, denies that the payee endorsed the
notes as alleged I'm the bill. nO proof was
taken ON this issue, and the bill was
on this ground properly dismissed. The
hin WAS properly dismissed on an addi-
tional ground. The defendants avorred
that the notes were procured by fraud.
They We're given in payment of the right
10 sell patent churn power" in certain
sections but the sellers OF the right were
"a set OF swindors. and they and their
decOy agents eventually let the county
Of Orange TO avoid a criminal persecution.
where brand In the sale or purchase of
property is in Issue, evidence of other
frauds OF Ike character. committed By
the same parties. at or near the same
time is admissible. Its admissability is
placed upon the grounds that where
transactions of similar character. eXecut.
ed by the same parties, and closely con-
nected in point of time. the inference is
reasonable that they proceed from the
same motive Large latitude Is always
given 10 the admission of evidence whore
the issue is fraud" Trugden's case. 81
Graft, SG2. S7}-4; Lancaster VS.. Chanln Z
Wall, l32. Butler ". Wallace l3 do i5G;
New York Mutual Life Insurance Com
pany vs.. Armstrong. ~ l.. s.. 59l.
The presumption that "a note was pro-
nOunced bOna-hde is overcome. where the
maker or any one originally bound alleges
fraud I'm its making. and the burden of
proof is shifted. and the holder must show
that he acquired it bona-fide for value
in the usual course of business while cur
rent ana under circumstances which
create no presumption that he knew OF
the facts which impeach It's validity.
Daniel on Neg. section SIS. Vather VS..
Zane. Graft. 2i6: Wilson W. Lazier, II
do ~: DuessOn vs.. Alsop. p do. 2iS-9
No proof was offered by complainants
20 overcome this and defendants evil
dence tend TO show that they knew OF
the fraud
other interesting and important ques-
tiOns We're raised by the pleading and
argued by counsel, but not being neces-
sary 20 "a decision Of the case, tho court
deemed IL best not TO express an opinion
thereon.
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE
Garner ". Commonwealth. Writ Of
error 10 the County Court OF Prince VIII
liam. Reversed opinion by Judge
Keith. president
Garner was indicted. tried. found guilty
and sentenced 20 a term of three years IL
the penitcnuary for burning ln the night
time mill house. The evidence show
ed that the mill had been burned By az
iuccndiary; that the next morning pris-
oner's tracks We're discovered leading
from the burnt mill In the direction e
the pris Onfrs house. that there was b.!
fee ing between owner Of the mill and
the prisoner. but prisoners uncOatradict-
ed account Or his actions on the night OF
the fIe must be accepted as true. TherQ
is no evidence whatever 10 connect the
prisoner with the crime charged and u
new trial is awarded on account Of ver-
dice beirg contrary TO the law and evil
CCnce.
REGISTER OF LAND OFFICE.
Gaines admir-. vs. Marye. AUDITOR.
Opinion by Judge John W. Riley APP
pllcaton for writ Of mandamus. Writ
denied.
Section i3 OF the Code provides that
the Register OF the Land Oftce. who shau
also 20 be Superintendent Of Public
Buildings. and also OF weights and meas
ures. shall annually receive the sum of
$3.50 IN compensation for all his services
Section 1893 of the Code DrOyi les that
the Register of the Land Office shall be
Superintendent of Weights and Meas
ures. and as such shall receive IN annual
compensation OF 500.
These sections present case Of appar-
emit II not real repugnancy and II IS the
duty Of the court TO reconcile them, "
II be possible TO do so. and 50 10 -ons-rue
them as 10 give effect 10 each. II the