The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-07-10

Altoaay plsagea, wanted the eleet'o
postponed for n month or two, or sly
4 eral months. In order to give Mr.. Bee
Sine to finish Zip certain work III III
d Office of the city Engineer, which wor
MI. Dnbncy seemed TO think can i
! done only By Mr.. Beck.
aiessrs. Pollock and w. l.. VIII,
and 8oshers took n different view, I'll
eieetioh was entered into, and Nj
Beck WINS elected
E,s The other candidates were Capital
nYSs u Dim,nock and Messrs. u. {
Woodward, j. r. skinner, j. w. l
johnson and VI. NJ, Ragland. all 9
whom received votes; bat before III
n ballot was announced numbers q
changes were made, and the vote wn
finally announced as follows: Becl
30; Dimmock lS; Woodward,
The Joint session then came to a
end
Session Of Aldermen.
As soon after the adjournment of til
Joint session OF the city fathers a
possible the Board of Aldermen begn
their meeting. with n bare worliin
quorum. 1t was a:ao o'clock when tn
Aldermen started work The MESA g
of the Mayor. yetoing the tax cNten
sion ordinance. was read and approved
The Mayor also submitted a messag
on the St Johns Church trouble /
pcads as follows:
The vestry OF st. Johns EPISCOPAL
Church, having served notice upon the
Mayor and the City Attorney to the
eneo. that they Will break ground for the
erection of building on the church,
yard on the 18th day Of July. it be-
comes necessary thar / should notify
your hcnorably body of their determine
ton. This action OF theNestry is taken
after the church has made three april
cations for permission 10 do this work,
And after the refusal OF the Council on
each occasion to grant the permission.
1t appears from chapter - OF tho
City Code Of 1898 that by an arrange.
rient with the vcstry of the said
church the city was at oil times TO have
power to establish such regulations as
they might think proper as to the
ground within the enclosure. and the
Council In pursuance Of this arrange,
mcnt instructed the Committee on st.
Johns Burring-Eround to keep in good
order the whole OF tho said enclosure,
with the gates and steps for passing
through II. and everything that is with
Orininn of City Attorney.
II further appears that the city At
torncy, in an opinion rendered on the
nth day of May. 1904, expresses himself
as follows; Whether or not the church
Is located on any part of lot No. III
Or liz. to which the city has mn abso-
lutte title In fee simple, under the deeds
above referred to, / am not able to de-
examination of the deeds and the sew
era ordinances above referred to- I am
satisfied that 1t was never in conte,n-
plation of the authorities of the city of
Richmond to assume, nor OF the vestry
OF the church to surrender to the city
OF Richmond, any control of the church
building, or any part of the land Occur
pied by 1t: nor was It, think, intended
that the vestry should have control OF
Gny of said lots. Nos Ill and 112 not
then occupied by the building II the
NrpnOsed enhancement pf he ~
III and li2l to which the city has ab-
Soute title, then, OF course. it will be-
the consent of the city to the making
of such enlargement, or IL the proposed
enlargement OF the building materially
interferes with the right OF the city to
regulate or control. for cemetery pur-
poses any substantial part of the other
two lots. or either OF them, then. in that
case, the enlargement ought not to be
made without the consent of the city,
In as much as the city Is. by the ordi- .
nances referred to, which are substnn-
tally embodied In the present City Code,
page l29i made the custodian of every
thing thatis within the enclosure out
side OF tho churcn''
In an opinion rendered on the 18th
approves of the extension OF the church
in a certain direction, because he is sat
listed that the extension will not ma
right of burial nor injure nor deface
monuments intended to perpetuate the
memory of those who have been already
buried on said lot"
No Future Appropriations
In view of the fact that the city un-
doubtedly had certain agreement rights
In this property. set out In chapter 20
of the City Code and In view of the
two opinions of the City Attorney, above
quoted. which entirely consistent
the one with the other deem 1t my
duty to call your attention to the pro-
posed action of he yestry of the church
and TO ask that you adopt resolution
authorizing and nstructing the city At
torney to file bill OF injunction and
take the necessary steps to try and settle
definitely the rights OF the city in this
property. with the necessary authority
70 the Mayor to execute tho injunction
bond which will be necessary In the
deem 1t important to haveethis mat
ter finally adjudcated not merely for
the protection OF the graves and an
tiquities of the place, but also in order
that the question of the Legality of APP
bd expended on the church yard may be
determined If the city has no we'll
established legal right of control over
this property. then no future apploprIa-
tions can be made without the violation
OF certain Weil-recognzed principles
May Get Injunction.
Mr.. Elicit moved that the Mayor
message be referred to W City Atto
ney, with power to act in the matt,
in accordance with the suggestions
the executive; but on the statemei
of Mr.. Dahney that resolution lool
ing to Mat s'ild, properly drawn
legalsform. would be presented late
Mr.. Elicit withdrew his motion.
the rush of business Mr., Dabncy