Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1909-11-27

in the federal courts. The state statutes
provide the same, bat the distinction
is made that the accused has never been
convicted 10 the state court and was,
therefore, a competent witness in bic
own tehslf. The court IeveTses the
verdict and remands the cass fer new
trial.
Judge George NJ. Garrison hsudtd
down Two opinions 10 appeals from the
Circuit court OF Alexandria county.
Both sppeals are sustained and dis
missed. rhe facts 10 the cases are lnest ;
W. D. EdmonstoD, OF Alexandra
county, was fined ego and sentenced 10
serve twenty days 10 jail for alleged con-
tempt OF court he Was q witness be-
fore the grand jury In certain lottery
operations which were being investi'
gated, and be declined to snsWer certain
questions propounded BY the inquisltors
on the ground lba! BY 80 doing he would
iucrimiuate himself and render himself
liable to prosecution. The refusal Of
the accused to testify was reported 10 the
court, and he was directed by the court
to answer cstegorically three questions,
bat that be would not be required to tell
why or how be knew the facts to warrant
bis replying yes or no TO the questions.
The witness declined to answer at the
direction of the court, aud the court
Imposed the sentence roted down. The
opinion, after reviewing the facts,
declares that there is not a suggestion
that the plaintiff sss acting contuDa-
ciously or in bad faith or with view 10
protecting ]. o. Nelson, who had bean
indicted for setting up, conducting and
promoting a lottery, bat, ''on the con-
trsIy, bis refusal to answer appears to
have been Ifor the sole and bona 6de
purpose Of protecting himself from In
evitable indictment and prosecution.
1t Is manifest from the form OF the
questions that nothing could be accom-
plished by obligiug the witness to make
4 snch limited answers. The acton OF the
| court 10 requiring the plaintiff 10 error
to make these monosyllabic answers vas
10 effect a recognition of bis right to
refuse to answer fully the questions pro
pounded by the grand jury" The judg'
mtnt complained Of Is reversed and the
proceedings against the plaintiff dis
| missed.
The identical questions are involved
in the case of Ohsrles Lilly, for the
came offense, the same Punishment, the
same csse, In the same court as the Ed.
mundslon case, aud The decision in the
latter Is applied to the Lilly case.
In The case OF The Camp Manufacture
log Company against the commonwealth
the court sustains the circuit court Of
Brunswick. The plaintiff objscted to
the assessment on standing timber,
claiming that the assessment Was CHROME
Gus. The opinion Is by Judge Whitlle,
and the decision Is that there is no error
| 10 the circuit court OF Brunswick county
and the decree complained of Is affirmed
10 every particular.
Proceedings Of the court we're as fol-
lows:
Norfolk and Western Railway Com
psny VS.. Thomas, trustee. Partly argued
and continued.
Next cases 10 be called:
| Equitable Life Va, Wilson; Evan
executor We. Loutbau; Fenlress VS.
Steele; Norfolk and Western Railway
Company vs. The Virginisn Railway
Company, and Meyers, receiver, vs.
city Of Richmond.
Richmond, Va, Nov. 27-The OouI
Of Appeals today upheld the Prince vii
liam Circuit Courts decision that Charlie
Deg walt should pay $25 6ne for failing
10 stop bis auto when signalled to do 81
by man In buggy on a road near Ma