The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-06-23


treot,ires That the duty Alleged Ii, be
cwjrr from the defendant and the acts
Of negligence relied 81, shall lie stated
with stfflcient particularly and clear
ness ID enable the defendant To under
he Ii called upon to answer. MA
PAVING ASSESSMENT
IN Fnlkersot1 vs.. City OF Bristol. tho
city so,eht to enforce payment of an
assessment upon the property of s.. VI.
Fulkerson FOR the purpose Of dsiraylng
the expenses ot paving stree, npoli
which the property abuts.
Judge Cardwell handed down the optn-
Ion In this case, holding that tax
upot, property owners, according 10 bene-
flts arising from local Improvements. like
any other tax, can neither be levied ror
collected Without special Legislative ni,.
[ tiofi,y, and the burden OF such tax
mist Be borne equally and uniformly BY
al Of the owners OF the properties be,,e-
fitted, Therefore, no matter al what stage
Sof the proceedings 10 assess and COLLECT
the tax the lack OF the required equality
and Uniformity In tho burden OF the tax
to collect the tax ceases.
1t was shown that 1.-THE city had abars.
dotcd ali effort to enforce the assess.
ment for this Improvement against eoma
Of III. owners 81 property, nbutting upoi
thu improved strSet, ana In one case, the
opinion states, the Supreme Court has
held that ut the time Of assessment called
IN question, the new constitution had re Z
peaied the provision, il, the char ter Of tho
n1et1t wab made, and II was, .Aerefore.
without authority to make IL.
II was coYltended b. the city that iii
this case The assessment sought to be
enforced was perfected before the adop.
ton 81 the new constitution, and It ,s,
therefore, different from that case.
But the court declares that although
the assessment was made before the re-.
peal OF the statute, the right to enforce
The Judgment OF tho Corporation Court
Is, therefore, reversed. and the supreme
court VII enter such decree as that court
should have entered dismisslng tho city y
Bill With costs to Fulkerson...
RAILROAD MUST FEED STOCK. 3 I.y
II, Norfolk and Western, Railway Com
pany vs. sutherland, from tho Circuit
court Of Russell county. the suit was
by Sutherland to recover for loss OF
carload OF 2z2 sheep shipped from
Cleveland, in Russell county. to Philn.
i delphia,
It was claimed by Sutherland that when
Z he received returns from the sale or tho
sheep, he found that an inferior lot of
sheep had been delivered to his agent
In Philadelphia. The railway company's
"a efense was that under the contract OF
.risf ana expense Is load, take care 81,
Z fead ana n IA tergs His sock wlxie eng
sra,1sported. d There was endorses across
The faca of the contract IN pencil, 70
be fed. and altered at expense Of ship
9,,era' loaded, AZ =. N: No one in
charge. 81 s.
T1re court. speaktng through Judge,
sBnchnr1ai1. holds that part Of this en-
( dorsaInent ciearIy$tm that the feeding
ana watering was 10 be done by tho
N ilway company & and the further, en-
dorsement showed there Sas no on 8 in
charge 81 The stock: u that receiving the
stock under thosa 3 conditions mist DO
.reaa rd "a "a i wal yer by the company Of
Z the condition that the shipper was 10
look aftars and caro- 8for the stock. It
( "a furt her shown that II the carrier Is
aware That no one Ii accompanying the
a rim l. IA cnr4 Yor them. 81 Is its duty
- .ira ,tan, nro,er 8 q ttant,on. The same
: thnneh L 40 s cnn tract mad been mace
90 30 80 10 IA at,inf,ers Il III
- 4, X on,nI lon That 1T IL
= "a ~ - iss,,e nrocess 9on an
= "a daci Z rat ~ oh fend-
e. !, ro,,ss II reroa 81
: - 3 n ~ "a =, rs rfad aclarn ton
e TUES, - Il,
g os lieu -, 4 sor .he q ain.
a. g. ease ps's a I'M 1t
al 1s ss ,tar ~. court
nrsl 5.s - +lan
remana'hg .ne ynse - 80 IA rs,,as 4 l.
without new pIoce essad ~ II, =, 'a,,as d
&c regulally proIsssu 1,, tons sx,o ma
the manner proyiueo Ds 50 sons o4 =
shs4g OF me sCo ,u,. s. ,o,,i - y !
Upon the Wnole sa as f.. ~ - houia a .,
there was no 81 e.rV e. = ahs rn,sd
plained 81, ana ie y a,.-r ln s
Virginia Coal. ana COKE Soha,
pany VS.. sn's az aloi =,
Circuit Court q iniaski County, ,a. J.
Harrison handed an
hrming tho F5ungment4ol me OWE w vuus
stating that8 aiter !.
or the eyid ence the court ls q opinion y,
that It has no power to interfere WIN me
conclusion reached By the: Jul
@e Cash was an engineer employed oy
the Virginia Iron, Coal and. COKE Com o11
pany, q corporation engaged IN me =, man
L L. ta~x ~ q NJ