Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-03-16
Supreme Court..Renders Decision,
in the Wadley Case. 81
THE HISTORY OF The CASE
Former Sentence of II. G. wadley, Charged
With Embezziement, Reversed = The
Mandamus Proceedings In Valuation,
Commission Case VIII be Heard Next
week-nrr. W. A. Edwards Appointed.
Commissioner for Isle of wight County.
No Change In DR.. Brown. Condition..
Especial to vlrginian.Pilot.,

Especial to Vlrginan-PiIot)
Richmond. Va, March 15.-Thes
Wadley case, now celebrated all over
Virginia. was disposed OF to-day in the
Virginia Supreme Court In an opinion
handed down by Judge Harrison. re-
versing the judgment OF the County
Court of Wythe county. in which II. c.
Wadley was convicted of embezzlcmants
and sentenced to one year in the pe,,.- I
tertiary.
HISTORY OF THE CASE.
The history of the case is most nter-S
esflnG- and has excited -widesnrea.l
comment all over the State, particular
~ In the Southwest.
several years ago, the Wythevilie
insurance Company was organized.
chiefly through the efforts of Ii. q.
Wadley. and for q time did a prosper
Gus business. Wadley gradually ac-
CURED additional stock in the company
until ne became the sole owner thereof.
AS president OF the company, he eX-,
changed the assets of the company for
other assets. and in the meantime
neaVy losses occurred by reson Of e.
large number of destructive fires and
found tho company without available
assets, which could be renlized upon.
creditors suit was instituted I'm the
Federal court and the company placed
In the hands of a receiver and a COM
missioner was appointed to take ON
account. :.
Before the commissioner. WndIev
voluntarily gave q deposition, setting
out In detail all his transactions AMI
submitted the Books OF the company.
Kept mostly by himself, which showed
these transactions. Creditors of the
company then threatened him with
n For nv t..a,r rlr~
unless their debts should be paid by
MIN out of his private funds. This he
declined to do, on the ground that he :
mad acted in good faith and for what
he considered at the time to be for the
best interest Of the company. An in
dictment was then found against him,
eolely on his own testimony given he.
fore the commissioners
The Federal Court enjoined the State
Court from using the books OF the COM
pany as evidence in the criminal case.
and Mr.. Wadley was at one time re-
leased on a writ of habeas corpus, sued
out before Judge Simonton. The Su-
preme Court of the United States, how.
ever, reversed the lower courts and
Wadlcy voluntarily returned and gave;
himself up to the authorities OF Wythe
county, where his trial and conviction
was had,
In reversing the case, the court de-
cides some interesting points. among,
them. that IL property is converted un-.
der bona fldc claim of right, the con-
version Is not embeZZlement, and that
the County Court erred In refusing to
instruct the jury that ii the prisoner
acted under an honest belief, that he
had claim of right % coIivert the as;
sets of the company. he was not guilty.
1t also decides, that the sufilciency of,
the proof before a grand jury cannot
be inquired into to invalidate an In
dictment. on the ground that It Is the.
policy OF the law, that the proceedings
before grand 1uries should be secret and
with closed doors.
1t seems probabl from the courts de-
clsion that one more trial before the
County Court will finally end this case.
MANY OTHER CASES.
Quite number OF other cases were
also decided. y summary OF the pro-
ceedingS OF the court is as follows:
Nashon's eXecutrix VS.. Vashon ct ais.
Law and Equity Court Of the city OF
Richmond. Affirmed. ~
Home Building and Conveyance Com
pany VS.. London and ais Circuit
Court OF Roanoke city. Affirmed
Oeters vs.. Supreme Lodge. knights OF
Honor, Law and Equity Court OF the
city OF Richmond Affirmed. S
Judge John w. RELY:
Millhiser & Co. rs. Mckinley, RANGE
ley & Co. Circuit Court OF Patrick
county. Affirmed 9.s
Fischer VS.. Lee ct ais. chancery5
Court Of the city OF Richmond. Az.
iirmed. 9ElSS
Judge. r. II. CALDWELL:
Peyton's administrator VS.. Perkin-
son. etc. Circuit Court OF Nottoway3
county. Affirmed -
Carpenter s. Co. VS.. Virginia Caro-;
lima Chemical Company. Law and
Continued on pace &