The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-02-06
Right of Easement Denied
Judge Phlegar.

Several matters of great Importance
engaged the attention of the Senate yes
terday. Two lengthy debates consumed
practically the entire time and in both
instances the bills under discussion were
recommtted for further consideration.
Several interesting new bills were intro
duced.
The session opened at l:30 o'clock with
President Ellyson in the chair and a
fairly good attendance of members pres
ent. Not more than half-dozen people
were in the galleries. Prayer was offered
by the Rev George H. spooner. OF the
Broad Street Methodist Church Com
mlttee reports We're very brief. Few
new bills and resolutions came up under
the call. ii
When the calendar was taken up n
House bill to prohibit the setting and
fishing of purse nets or pound nets In
Cfaddock Creek was passed without dis.
cusslon. The House bill to prohibit the
selling or furnishing or having in one's
possession for the purpose OF selling
blackjacks, brass or metal knucks and
like weapons. was amended In an unim-
portant particular, and then ordered to
Its engrossment. BY vote of II to the
Senate then recommitted the Wickham
bill exernpting the salaries of judges
from the income tax Mr. Rison of
Pittsylvania. thought that the diverse
views on this measure could be recon
ciled II II were sent back to the Finance
Committee for further consideration. Mr.
Chapman. of Greene. earnestly oppos-
ing the bill. asked that the vote be de-
layed no longer. The patron of the bill
voted for recommittal.
Discussed Thomas Bill.
Considerable discussion arose over the
Thomas bill allowing cities, towns, coun-
nd f,x,k
an easement 1t was pointed out by the
Lynchburg Senator that this right is
now possessed by railroads and other
private corporations.
II this privilege were unreasonable
he thought Is should be withdrawn en-
tirely, but If 1t were proper that a
railroade corporation should exercls
it. governmental corporations should
certainly possess this right In at least
an equal degree.
On behalf of the Committee for Courts
of Justice, which reported the bill adj
versely. Mr.. Strode OF Amherst. stated
that in the Judgment Of n majority
of the members. 1t was unwlse If not
dangerous to extend further this Eek
traordinary right of easement and
were more disposed to withdraw the
right entirely from private corporations
and everybody else Mr. Chapman, Of
Green, argued 1Or tne Dill, Wnlch was
similar to one he had offered himself
early In the session. It was, he de-
clared. a matter Of dollars and cents
to his particular constituency. The city
of Charlottesville is endeavoring now to
lay pipe lines for transferring water
from distant reservoir to the town.
Landowners along the route proposed,
are holding up the municipality for
great sums for the fee simple right to
the strips of land needed. Condemnation
of new easements over these lands
| would furnish the desired relief. This
right was now exercised, Mr.. Chapman
said. by private corporations, and should
not be denied to municipalities. The
position of the opparents Of the bill,
he asserted, was "absolutely absurd"
In defending the principle of easement
he pointed out that when the fec was
condemned. the railway or other cor
poration absolutely owned the strips OF
land in question. and If 1t so desired
could enclose 1t within fence extend-
| ing from the high heavens to the center
of the earth. But in the case OF an
easement. the pipe is laid. the ditch
covered again, and the farmer or other
property owner can continue to use his
/ IL,