Staunton spectator and vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1896-1916, 1900-04-06
Its ALL over NOV
'Tle Supreme Court Last Friday
Dsclared,' the Valuation Act
TO Be null AND Void.
The Opinion Was Unanimous And
Will Cause a Number Of States
men to Lose Their Iobs---The
Decision Given in Full,

The Supreme Court of Virginia o
last Friday morning delivered unar
imous order in the Commissioner O
valuation case. The order was deIiy
cred by Judge Keith.
| The case that was chosen for the tes
was that of Lambert VS.. Barley, O
Alexandria. In this case Mr.. Lam
bert. who Is assistant cashier of tht
Citizens National Bank of Alexandria
declined to answer certain questions
asked by Mr.. Barley, who had been
appointed Valuation Commissioner
for that city. Mr.. Lambert was, on a
warrant, arrested. and, on habeas cor
pus lroceedings was released on an
order from the Supreme Court, to
appear before that tribunal when
wanted.
There were three other cases EN-.
oraced in the test, one from Richmond; !;
one from Norfolk, and one from New.
port News. All phases of the question
were embodied in these cases.
This decision, as t. the constitu-
tionality of the law, of course, annuls
the legality of the various appoint
ments that have been made as to
commissioners.
1t will be remembered that the bill
was passed by both Houses of the
Legislature without recorded votes,
and with little consideration and when
the question as to the effect of the law
was pointed out, large number of leg
lslators presented to the Governor a
petition, asking that be veto the
measure. The Governor declined to do |
so, and the bill was signed.
Then the board created by the bill |
20 make the appointments begun it's
work. and about IS commissioners were
chosen. The board embraced the
Auditor, the Second Auditor and the
Treasurer.
Leading lawyers throughout the State
declared the law unconstitutional.
md steps were at once taken to test
t, with some of the most brilliant legal
lght on both sides. The result is now
,nown. The order of the Court is as
ollows:
Ihls day came again the parties by
ounsel. and the court being of opin-
On that the act of the General Assem-
ly, entitled IAN Act to provide for
be appointment of commissioners of .
and defining their duties, !" ,
pproved March 5, 1900, carries with 9
ian appropriation of public money,
nd that Section IL, Article 10 of the Z
onstitution of the State provides that (
pom the passage of every such act +
That the vote shall be determined by \
yes and noes. and the names of the
9rsons voting for and against the
me shall be entered on the journals
the respective houses, and major
y OF all the members elected to each s
ouse shall be necessary to give it the
rec OF law" and it appearing from
e record that the vote was not taken
I'd entered as provided by said Sec
on 10; and the court being Of opinion
lat 1t cannot separate SO much of the tt
t as appropriates money and hold it
be bad while maintaining the yali. 3
ty OF the rest of the law, but that v
It having been passed as required by
ctlon ii, Article 10, above quoted, j
at no part of the act has the force "
law.
And it appearing to the court that +
9 act aforesaid is null and void by tt
ason of it's repugnance to the Consti- o.
tion of this State, therefore it is con.
Tered by the court that the said w. B
Lambert is illegally detained in Gus v
dy and it is ordered that he be dis. tt
arged. N
udge Keith then directed that an 3
der be entered dismissing all other
titlons on the question of the validity
the law without cost. The court OF
IS unanimous. h'
Immediately after the reading of the p'
inion the crowd in the courtroom p
gan to leave and the court adjourn is
The entire session lasted only su
out fifteen minutes. P;