The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1899-09-24
BRIDGE MUST BE
ASWIDEASSTREET
Interesting Decisions of the Supreme
Court of Appeals.
THE DEPARTURE OF A DEBTER
The Codicil to a VIII COnstrued-A BE.
quest To a Church Il Invalid But
the Codicil Stated That the
Money Was to Pay a DEBT

sTAuNTON. VA, Sept. 23.-special-
one Of the most important cases handea
down In the Supreme Court OF Appeals
of virginia Thursday was the cry oil
Charlottesville against the Southern Rail
way Company. This is a suit by the Guy
of Charlottesville against the Southern
Railway Company TO compel said rai-
way company to keep up and mtrtain o.
bridge on Main street, in the city OF Char-
Louisville. spanning the line Of sad I'n-
way company.
The Main street Of the city of 'har-
lottesyile is sixty feet in width ana inc
bridge constructed by the railway COM
ro,v over fits tracks at the Intersection ol
go t~acke with the said Main street. i
onlv about forty feet I'm width, 20 hiil""'
indeed as TO admit OF a sidewalk on citl
ono side of this street as 30 passes over ihe
,auv,av line. The court he'd Do th47 case
that IL is not only the duty Of the .oH"o!
comnanv I'm crossing the streets OF "a 'i'S
Ia comulv with an the laws thtn do ll''e
as 20 such crossings, but 10 keep ul' 'i's
inc az au times thereafter in aIch ctIdl-
tion as the law directs. IL was pfDNtd
tbat Main street at the point 90 "ll'n
this bridge was erected, was inu-h '7."
and Tie travel over said bridge vas Pul'e
large The court decided thar tne oilisa
should Doe made and kept at me ulh'IH
width Of sixty feet. that being me "''l"
of said street ON either side oi inc Orc
said bridge.
Cheatham's Administrator against AIS
trOp's Administrator
Tie question of most Interest DO ID
case was whether an execution dtn.}f 10y
the mere act of The parties trom the STATE
after the Judgment had been rendered
AGAINST him suspended the running OF ne
statute Of limitations upon proceedings Ipi
the enforcement of the judgment.
in Ficklin's Executor against Carrli g.
ton. 81 Graft. 2l9. il was laid Down uiat
the debtors removal from the state optr-
ates propria yigore TO obstruct the prose
cution of the plaintiffs right. In wilson
against Ko0ntz. Z Cranch, 9z. cons.rulns
the same statute. it was held hat renoy-
al Of the defendant must have actually
INSTRUCTED the plaintiff. The Court Of APP
peals I'm the case of Brown agd.a5t Tut
Ter. 81 Va, 62l. cast doubt upon tickIins
Executor against Darlington, and sce'fed
inclined TO follow the doctrine I'D Gown
by the Supreme Court of the United states
in Wilson against koOntz, but tie court
i'm the case under consideration approved
the doctrine i'm Fickliu's EXec1-)r 49, ISL
Darlington as correct dOctrne-th1I ~
20 say that the mere departure %: the
debtor from the state without netoe. cen
sttuted an obstruction 10 me proseeu-
ton of the plaintiffs right. which sus-
pended the operation of the statute of lin-
itations.
Perkins. for etc.. against Siegfrleds Ad-
miuistrat0r-1his suit involves the con-
etruction OF a c0dicii to the VIII of Fred
reika a. Siegfried, an unmarried woman.
The claus. of the codicil in dispute reads
AS follows. "T herein mention a debt of
5000 owe the Presbyterian church of
Charlottesville. Va, and / wish it duly
paid. without interest. ont OF my estate
60 that church after my sister, Mrs. NJ.
u. B~lankenburg's death. by Captain w.
O. Fry, whom I nave appointed to settle
ND my estate. The reason ] did not men
ton this debt I'm my last Will IS because
hoDed TO pay 10 during my natural NE,
and as / now feel doubtful Of this ability,
write this instrument in consequence.
The court holds I'm constituting this c0llci
that although as a general proposition OF
law that q beQuest 10 a church as such
IS invalid. yet that it is perfectly proper
for a testStor TO provide by his or her
will for the payment of a debt TO q
church.
In This case there is nothing in the
record to show that this was not n debt
owing by Fredreika A. Siegfried % the
PRESBYTERIAN church Of Charlottesville.
The court having no other evidence on
this point than the codicil TO the viii I'm
which 10 is plainly stated that 10 IS q debt
owing 10 said church.