Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1900-03-16
COURT OF APPEALS.

" court in the case of Il. G. Wadley,
convicted of embezzlement, and sen.
tencsd to the pebi entiary for one year.
Several years ago the Wytheville
Insurance Company was orgaoized,
chic fly through the efforts of Il.
g. Wadley, aud for time did pros
porous business. Wadley gradually sc-
auired additional stock in the company
until be became the sole owner. As
president of the company he exchanged
the assets ii the company for other
a.s.ts, and, in the meantime, heavy
loss occurred by rets)n of large
number of destructive fires and found
the company without available assets
slich could be realized upon. A
creditors suit was Instituted in the fed.
eral court and the company placed in
the hands of a receiver, and a commi :
soner was appointed to take an &C
count. An Indictment was then found
against him solely on his own tes.i-
mouy given before the commissi oDer.
The federal court enioined the State
court from using the books OF the COM
pany as evidence in the criminal case,
and Mr.. Wadley was at ons time re-
leased on a witt Of habeas corpus, sued
out before Judge SimontOn. The su-
p,eme court of the United States, how
ever, reversed the lower courts aod
" sdley 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-
ciGes some interesting points, among
them, that if property is converted, un.
der bona fde claim of right, the cor-
version is not embezzlement, and that
:he County Court erred in refu'iug 10
Instruct the jury that il the prisoner
ec;ed under an honest belief that be
had claim of right to convert the al
SETS OF the company, he was not guilty.
I. also decides that the sutticiency OF
ths proof before grand jury cannot be
ipquired iutO to iDvalidate an indic,-
IN ut, on the ground that it is the poll
CIV of the law, that the proceedings be-
fore grand juries should be secret.
The question of fraudulent convey
auces is treated most Interestingly In
the opinion of Judge Rely, affirming
the decree of the Chancery Court, OF
Richmond, 10 the case OF Fischer against
Lee and others. The court says the
| evidence showed that certain pianos
we're obtained by K. B. Lee from Fischer
| under In SO pretensts.
"In was proved" said the opinion,
THAT nearly all the pianos 10 question
we're Immediately, upon their arrival 10
| r chmond, pledged to Crawford q Cc
Young Jones for loans aud money,
many of them being removed directly
from the depot to storage warehouses
! for that purpose"
It's held that "there was an abso-
| lutte sal by Fischer to Lee, aud the de.
livery of possession before creation o1
| be pledges. There was no reservation
| Of title by Fischer. nor creation OF any
lien for unpaid purchase money"
10 the case of Oeters vs. the Supreme
Lodge. Knights of Honor, from the Law
and Equity Curt of the city OF Rich
mopd, Junge Keith delivered an opiI-
ion sffirming the judgment Of thai
court Yesterday 10 the Supreme Court
| The opinion shows that certain let
,ers from officers of the defendant were
introduced in evidence by the plaintiff,
which could not have been introduced
hv the defendant. These rendered tt
show that Martin Osters bad been sus
pended from the order, and without
discussing their probative force, th'
plaintiff is not entitled to recover, since
| Martin Osters was not q member OF tn'
order a. the time of his death.
10 the case of Morgan We. the Com
monwealth, from the County Court o
| Mathews county. Judge bucnansl
oagses upon the many objections to tn
ct cf March 3, 1898. in his opinion, DC
, iverei yesterday in the Court OF Ap
Deals. The act provided for the pay
ment of license tax by persons takinl
fish in the waters of the Common
wealth. The only objection haviut
weigh, ia that the act does not state th'
OF ! sct to which the tax imposed snal
be applied, and is, therefore, IN viola
ton of Section 16, Article X, OF to-
constitution.
In the opinion Judge Buchanan ex
dresses his own opinion that this rep
dsrs the act invalid Judge Cardwei
concurrine), but says that the msJoril.
of the court are OF the opinion that tn
obiec, for which the tax Is imposed
sufficiently stated.
However, the evidence fails to shoV
that the accused took any fish after tn
ac, nader which he was indicted wen
into effect, and for this reason ID