The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1904-06-19

| gas works. The personal representative
Of Wakefield Instituted suit against tho
Standard OIL Company and the city OF
| Richmond. for negligently causing the
death OF her husband. Tho trial resulted
| In a verdict and Judgment against tho
oil company. to which this writ OF error
was granted. The oil company denied
| tg liability on three grounds: That 1t
did not owe to Wakefield the duty OF
keeping tho valve in tho carr In a reason
ably safe condition. and was not, there
| fore, guilty OF negligence as TO him.
| Second, that the condition OF the valve.
even II tho oil company were negl gent.
was not the proximate cause OF his
death. Third. that. II 1t were. he was
guilty OF contributory negligence. The
court In an exhaustive review OF au-
thor.tles decides against tho oil company
on each and I'LL the three grounds on
which denied liability. and held that tho
trial court did not err In the matter
or giving or refusing Instructions In the
opinion, the court says that We hnvo
fully considered them the other assign
ments OF error, and are OF opinion that
the Instructions given fairly submitted
the case to the jury. and that the court
did not err In refusing to set aside the
verdict. and that we see no error N
the case to the prejudice OF the plaintiff
.
ed OF should be affirmed.
In the case of Gordon Brothers vs. the
City OF Newport News from the Corpora
!. ton Court OF that city. the opinion OF
the court Is written by Judge Whittlo
and affirms the Judgment OF the lower
court. Gordon Brothers were fined by tho
police justice for carrying on business
az tailors without license, in violation q
the city ordinance. The Corporation
80 stista Inpl the police
Justice, and writ Of error was asked
and granted. bringing the case to the
higher court, The court holds that
license upon business or trade can only
be Justified upon ono OF two grounds:
Either 1t Is a tax upon the occur tion.
or else It Is a police regulation. In tHe
first case the legality OF the exaeton
depends upon Its compliance wlsn con s.,r.
st!tutionnl limltat ions upon the thxnls
power. This case involves merely the
consideration Of the first branch OF the
subject The power OF taxation In TINS
State is vested In the Leg stature and
subject only to constitutional restrictions
may be exercised to the utmost extent
with respect both to the subjects O, taH-
alton and the amount OF the tax. h az
authority OF q municipal corporation 10
levy a tax on trades. etc, depends upon
It's charter and the crucial test IN such
[ case is whether that instrument contains
q grant OF the power sought 70 De cA-
, ercised. The court holds that the charter
!, OF Newport News confers upon the city
all the powers possessed BY the state IN
respect 10 the imposition OF taxes no
mower OF the state, and, therefore. OF the
city under It's charter to impose =
license tax on tailors cannot be doubted
IN the light of repeated decisions OF this
court. says Judge white Finally the
court holds that the Judgment Complain
cd of Is without error and must be
affirmed. ,,,,,.
In the case OF the Newport News ius'-
fishing Company VS.. BcauneisSer lIplil
| the Circuit Court Of the city OF NeWpofs2
News. Judge Harrison writes the opinion
~ the court. reversing the Judgment or
the trial court, setting aside Its verdict
and REMINDING the case for new trlai.
Reaurn @ ,ster pressmnn, lost q ha'iu
while working in pit beneath o Prlii.-
ing press, while such press was IN ' usN'
and attributed his injury 70 the THU - NY.
OF the company to light the ple ns
promised. He thereupon sued the eo',
pany. attributlng his injury 70 y, ,.l .,ee
rence in falling to provide y iisht, Z.
verdict for 5000 was given In liiVoi' - =.
tha nlaintlff, and the court refused "
set II aside The chief error relied on ~
the appellant was tho refusal OF ',ia
court to give an instruction oHered ~, ~
tho defendant, which told the jury l ll.i
All employee was not entitled TO re-
cover for an injury received N dol ,
his work In an obviously dangerous NJ
,.S NIT q could have been performed WITH
out danger in a way. well known 70 no
employee etc. After reviewing aSS .ne sa .y
tmnny in some detail the court sas s,s.
1snnnrh has been said OF tho tacls ~ Wv
case under consideration; ana w r Nc
applicable to make manifest We 49,
III fe ae.and,rt relied on the contribntory
, me ue Of Tie plaintiff as the ground
~ nsfi It's release from liability and espee,u,t
" hi his contributory nesllgense IN n ! t t,o
stopping tho maohne before s 81. su nn,i
pit For the reasons s .a,ct set aside.
is reversed and the veraiet %.