Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1909-03-12
COURT OF APPEALS.

] 49, y hhtcC Ca3to FCAO e~NA@SN -
tsrday by the Court OF Appeals. A
STATED 10 yesterdays Gazette the lit
gstloa involving the cOnsitutionslil!
OF the Ward election law, under which
many of The locsl-oplion elections il
Virginia have been held, and the Nor
folk poll.tsx case, both of which are o
the greatest inlCres, all over the state
were not Ia'sed upon.
The Corporation Court of ChSrlotles
vile is reversed 10 the case OF The com
monwealth against the executors OF j
Samuel McOue, convicted of wife murder
and hanged, which involves the question
whether the es ate OF the late mayor mus
must btar the expenses incurred and psiC
by the state In the prosecution ofthe case
As result OF the opinion the estate o
McOue must ultimately pay these costs
which amount to about SO, 900. Tb'
decree OF the lower court vas reversed
and set sside aud the cause remandeC
for further proceedings In accordance
with the views expressed ir the opinion,
which was written by Judge Harrison,
The case OF the comrlWtalth vs.. tho
Norfolk city school board was decided
in favor of the state. This litigation
came up from the Law and Chancey
Court OF Norfolk. The facts 10 the
case are that the State Board of Etuca.
ton was empowered by legislation tC
select the supplies and furniture for the
schools Of the state, the various Local
boards to select any desiGn that might
have been approved by the State Board
Of Education. The Norfolk city bosrd
disregarded the law, but Was not cogni.
zsnt Of its provisions, and made q con-
tract with concern which had lost the
contract 10 competition with other con-
Germs. The Norfolk beard entered into
contract with the concern for supplies
aud furniture, and the equipment was
iostalled. Tie Law aud Ohancery
Court OF Norfolk upheld the action Of
the local board, declaring it had author
ity to deal with the subject. The opin-
ion yesterday says that the defendant
concern did not act in good faith. Alter
quoting the statutes, the Supreme Court
reversts the court below and enters q
decree prepetuaiing the Injunction, Gas
the ira court ought to have done"
Judge Buchanan wrote the opinion.
The court sffrms Its decree OF July
IL, 1908, ia the case Of The Peoples
Pleasure Park Company against ROhle-
der. The case comes up from the
Henry County Circuit Court The de-
tense claims that under the provisions OF
deed conveying the property Il wss
stipulated that no sales were to be made
to persops of African descent. 1t was
commended that The park, owned and
naintsined by and for negroes, was q
violation ofthe contract. In the syllabus
of the original opinion, resffirmed yester.
day, the court says:
L. Conditions subsequent ere not
favored in law, because they tend to
destroy estates. When relied upon to
work a forfeiture they must be created
by express terms, or clear implications,
sod are strictly construed.
2 A conveyance Of land to q corpo-
ration composed OF negroes, the object OF
which WAS to establish snd develop a
pleasure park for the Amusement Of color
ed people, does not violate q restriction
upon the alterations of the lsnd to
"psrson or persons OF African descent, I"
or colored persons, Tor the restriction
neither expressly nor implicitly prohibits
such a use, and corporation Is an attl-
zeal person having az existence separate
and distinct from the persons who COM
pose it.
The other opinions we're not Of special
interest 10 this neighborhood.
Proceedings yesterday In the Court Of
Appeals were as follows:
HundIey ct al, Va. Ntale, oyster in
spector. Fully argued and submitted.
Potomac Power Company vs. Blrchell
ct al. Argued and submitted.
Next cases to be called: Jordan and
Davis ct al. vs. Annex Corporation ct al
Branch VS. Bulkley; city OF Portsmouth
VS.. Houssmau; Lake Drumond Canal
and Water Company vs.. Johnson I;
Wright VS.. Atlantic Oosst Line, snd
Singluf vs.. Collins being Nos. 70 10 so,
inclusive.
Charles Shannon, who Is serving q
term in the Giles county jail for violal-
ing the section Of the Byrd liquor Law
relating II the sale. of malt beverages,
was denied a writ OF habeas corpus.
Shannon was arrested, tried aud con.
vIcted for selling malt liquors In smaller
quantities than allowed by Law, and for
not having the name and address Of the
Manufacturers and the words malt bev-
ersge" blown in the bottles.