Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-02-24
WILL TEST THE LAW.
FEDERAL COURT TO PAS. tPo>
THE DFIIvarENT-LAND ACT.
IN VIOLATION OF The CONSTITUTION.
Doe Process Of Law Not Observed in
Deriving Landowners Of Pro-
perty-A suit for Damages for MALI
cfou- Prosecution.


the delinquent land law.
The style n the suit is the Norfolk
Mari and Phosphate Company vs. Thomas
Boone Henley. c. J. Hill trustee. and
I Thomas b Henley.
The bin is very lengthy. II sets forth
that the complaining company owned
/ three tracts u land in West Point Magis-
terial District. King william county. It
/ Is recited that in December, VS.. b. {.
Garrett. Clerk Of the King William Court,
made deed FOR these lands TO Thomas
Boone Henley. the same having been sold
under the law for HE5i. back taxes due
the state.
so DUE PROCESS OF LAW
u is claimed that such conveyance IS
| in contraventi0n 0f section ], Article XIV.
of the Constitution of the United states.
which prohibits any state from deprying
"any person Of life. liberty. OF property
without due process 81 law That Sec
ton of the law which says that parties
purchasing land sold ln this manner r.
! rrive "a ure which is subject to boz de-
tented only by proof that the taxes 'r
l.vI,. for which such real estate was
sold. were not properly charganle mere
on." or that they have been pai1' mis-
| ia alleged % be deprivation OF property
ON tho mart OF The state ana nef o'ieei7
without due process ~ la". ii D. fi7l
claimed foo the Bill that that provision OF
the Jaw which admits OF the punil' ail'n
Of notice in % Newspaper instead OF re-
orfr,ro rareonal service upon the owner
~ land is also violation 'i the Sec
dion and article of the Federal Constitu-
ti0n above quoted.
II IS claimed further that many Of the
provisions n the State law were not COM
piled with. II g. stated in The b'H thal
notice Was not given of the time ana
place " the SALE and that 300 sworn ie-
bort of the sale was mace to the court
as required.
n g. also charged that Thomas Boone
Henley tho N-year-Oid son of Thomas
b. Henley. purchased the land Win
money given him by his father The lHi-
ter 10 is claimed. had in bis possession
sufficient money representing rentals cole
llefcd from tenants ou the property Dog
himself a. agent OF the company to pas
aI, taxes. aud that be- was ordered by ihe
company tD DO 500. 10 is argued mat
HnIcys payment Of the delinquent taxes
must rcureeeut their payment for the COM
rany whose agent Doe was.
IL is further stated that ou The day on
which Henley had his deed recorded De-
also bad recorded deed of trust Co g. D.
Hil. trustee. 90 secure the payment OF
three negotiable notes. aggregatng flla0
held hy the Security Bank. of Richmond
The bin states that young Henley has
Instituted ana oiectient suit in the Circuit
Court of King William against the CONF
uauy. and an injunction is prayed pre-
venting him from prosecuting the suit
and also am injunction restraining Hiu
from attempting t0 execute the deed oi
trust. Process Of subpoena is asked
against Thomas Boone Henley. O.. j. HIu
and Thomas %. Henley. Co compel them
Co. appear and answer compliments bill
suit for Malicious Prosecution.
4 case which has excited "a great deal
of interest throughout the country. in-
yolvng. 4a 30 docs. criminal charges
against prominent oflce-h0lder and
politician was argued and submitted lu
the United states Circuit Court OK NJ
poals yesterday
The style Of The case is T. IS stanton
and others. plainuns Boz erroL vs. j. ~.
Goshorn. defendant in error. The case
comes from the United States circuit
Court of West Virginia 10 hae excited
great interest boz tha, State. as it in
wolves some of The best-kuoWu men 300
the State. Mes-rs Malcolm Jackson and
George Price. of Charleston. appeared for
the plaluun n error and j vs.. kennedy
of Charleston for the defendant iu cr-
fOr
AN OLD POLITICAL IErD.
The suit is the elimination OF pouH-
cal foud extending over e decade. and
bitter beyond the usual bitterness of tha
partisunry of politics. j ~. G1.horn
Was for twelve years the CLERK of Kama
wh4 county. He was for much longer
period ID power boo State aud county pole
Tics bee was politician whose shfrWd-
moss was probably unequall,d in state
whose leaders are unsurpassed for adspf-
ness boz an the arts OF political Warttre.
D. Vs. stanton. at one time Mayor 0f
Charleston. Vas for many years Mr
Gush0ru's most bitter and uurc'cutng
opponent Staunt0u is 90 Republican De
had powerful friends n took years tl
break tine power OF Go-horn. bat he
finally about three ye1r- ago. succeeded
iu defeating him for The office ol Clerk
/ &C kauawha county.
49, GushoW'- rule was at au end flr-
ever THE breach between him and Mr
stanton and his friends widened. Final
/ N. in November. lNl b. was chaI-ed
! that Mr Go-horu stole from do. co4rt-
house. boo Charleston. certain vouchers
for the purpose of making DO appear that
| Potter slmdn. "a former sheriff OF Kama
! Wha had been fuuduieufiy paid money
| hy toe county commissioners G0-horu
! was indicted and acquitted Ills counsel
I claimed that Cd trap Was laid Tor him hy
] stanton Slnan. and StauntDn's depI-
/ tics-John A. Jarrett and Robert A. Cole
! man.
Upon the termination Of the trial Cos
| h0tu who bad removed t0 Buffalo n
] y. instituted suit for dsuas against
! tne plaintiffs Dob error for th. sum OF
| 100000. charging malicious prosecution
The case was tried in the Federal Cir
cult Court at Charleston and excited the
/ greatest interest The jury awarded Cos
! horn 5000 damages. The case comes up
on appet.
Mr Peter Slman is in the city He is
/ accompanied by MT Samuel Wilson. 0t
D charleston
other Cnses Argued.
Judees Con Morris and Wood presided
! at the session of the court yesterday
| The following other cases were argued
/ and submitted.
no mt-lnchmaree steamship Company
/ Limited appellant rs. Norwegian steam
/ ship "Astni' appellee. Appeal from
/ District Court for Eastern District ~
/ NiTelula. 40 Norfolk. Dismissed OBJ mo-
/ uon ~ counsel Tor appellant. Floyd
| hughes Tor appellant and Robert NJ.
| Hughes Tor appellee
No. 2ss-AleX Inder McConum. appellant.
| vs. British steamship Anaeces. appellee.
! Appeal from the District Court FOR The
! Eastern District ~ North Carolina. af
! Wilmington. Argued by lreleA Aeare-
/ Tor appellant and George kolniree for
/ appellee. and submitted
fTna naNf .4-f on The argument IuY -ar