The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-02-11
JURY MUST
CONDEMN IT
So Decides Judge Waddill as.
to Shafer Building.
GOVERNMENT SUSTAINED
Federal Authorities Wished This Method
to Be Adopted to Acquire New
Property for the Postoffice and
Other Purposes

Hon. Edmund ,Waddill. Jr,6 Judge. sit.
ting in the United States Circuit Court,
handed, down yesterday the decision Of
the court on tho propositions raised by
counsel for several Of the tenants OF the
shafer building. as to the procedure TO be
followed in these proceedings. &
There were three questions raised, the.
hrst two being entirely technical. and
were decided in favnr, OF the government:
and the third ono being ''as to whether
condemnation should be had by the ap-,
pofntment OF i've dislnterestedt fres-i
holders, as provided by the Virginia
statute. or tho impanelling OF Jury at
the bar of the court" AS before stated.
the first two points were technical md
not OF public interest; but as to the third
point, the Court in It's opinion says:
AS tc the third proposition. the statute
OF Virginia provides for the selection %
a commission. to consist OF FIVE disiutcr-:
tated freeholders any three OF whom
may act. who shall meet upon the pre1a-l
tses, first having taken an oath Tor the.
faithful discharge ol their duties, TOR the
purpose Of ascertaining Just compen-
satton for the land, totbe taken. Il VhG4
THE Federal statute. under which, the
present condemnation Is being han pro-.
Ndes that in the Circuit and District
Courts OF the United States In which
condemnation proceedings are inaugu-'
rated by the government, conformity
shall be had, as near as may be.
10 the practice. pleadings. forms and
modes ofprocedure existing In like cases
In the courts OF the State in WHIT the
condemnation is to be had. AS an crlst.
nal proposition. the courts inclination
would DO to appoint commission. III ac--
cordance with the method prescribed by;
tho State statute relating to condemna:..
ton. believing thatsnethod to be moYss,fi
conformity with the theory OF assessment
OF damages than the trial of such an is
sue by jury: but the Supreme Court OF
the United States has recently had under
review this entire subject. In the case OF
Chappel rs. the United States. 1so U. s.,
4se. 5l3 and 1t seems to have passed d.
reot1y on this question, and the fair In
depreciation of that decision Is. that mo-
lions OF this class are in effect actions
at law. and in which. for the determlna-
ton OF questions OF fact arising therein.
an ordinary Jury Is contemplated. as pro-
vded by the statutes OF the United
States.
I'm the light of this decision. tho Court
does not sec Its way, clear in a case like
the present one. In which the, government
is asking for. and part OF the defend
ants assent to. trial by, jury. to deny
this motion, and the request will accord-
inSlys be granted, and jury impanelled
at the bar of the court.
Richmond. Va. Feb. 10. 1s03.''
The following Is the list OF the special
jury directed to be summoned by the
court in the condemnatlo proceedings,
viz: TIC. Williams, t. William Pom
berton, Gus,avus M.llhiser. T. II. Elicit,
Henry NJ Cannon. s. w. Travers. James
D. Patton. Ashton Starke. Warner L.
Fleming. James B. Pace. Junius B.
Mosby \. N. Fourqurean. z. P. Murphy.
Arthur 8. Clarke. G. Watt Taylor. l.. z.
Morriss. Clay Drewry W.. H. Scott.
Jonas Marcuse, J. S. Moore .,tgIaee,