The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-07-31
Holds Governor Respon.
sible for His Finan-
cial Ruin.
REVIVES CHARGES
MADE IN CAMPAIGN
Governor Does Not Deny En-
ployment by Farmer, but Says
He Forgot 1t at Time of His
Retention by Akers Lum-
Der Company Would
!. Accept No Fee.

Suit for $4,000 damages will be in
stituted this week in the Law and
Equity Court of the city OF Richmond
against Governor William Hodges
Mann by William L. Royal. attorney
for j. H. Farmer. The charges in this
case are the saDle as those brought
out during Judge Mann's campaign.
preceding tho primary OF August 0.
1909
1t will be remembered tha. Farmer.
who is resident of Burkeville, claim
ed that Judge Mann had. in 1907.
promised him that " would act as his
attorney in some expected litigation.
Later Judge Mann was engaged to re-
present the other side, for which ne
prepared an injunction.
This injunction. claims Mr.. Farmer,
tied up his business and has reduced
him to condition Of financial ruin.
The notice that suit would be brought
was served in person by Mr. Royal In
the Governors Office yesterday. The
executive later talked about the mat
ter, making the same explanation OF
the occurrence which was generally
published during his campaign for the
eubernatorial nomination.
Advised Farmer.
"I was approached" said the Cover
nor, "by Mr.. Farmer for some advice.
which I gave him. and for which he
paid me- AT the time he asked
me II would represent him II there
were legal proceedings. to which
replied tina, / knew no reason why l
should not do so. This conversation
/ entirely forgot.
Later the Akers Lumber Company.
regarding whose contracts With Mr
-. uatlta tal t,,n
employed me as counsel. and l drew
nm an iniunc tion for that concern. oir.
Farmer then employed A G. Ehy. for
nner Mayor of Burkevilie. and the lat
ter talked with me about the matter.
II then recalled the half-Ironiise J
had made 10 f.r Farmer. and wrote to
him. asking II in his opinion had
done him an injustice. He replied.
telling me TO be my own judge OF
that matter. ! thercupon Withdrew
from the case, receiving no fee from
the Akers Lumber Company. 1 GER
tainly lost one fee by this action.
Mr.. Royal would volunteer no in.
formation regarding the case, but, on
learning that the Governor had made
a statement. he consented to give his
side, which does not differ from that
of the executive in any essential point.
IN fact, there appears TO be no diff
ference in statement as to what hap
pened.
Said Mr.. Royal: MY client, j. II
Farmer, was. in the summer of 1907,
largely engaged in the bsuiness OF
cutting and saving lumber in South
side Virginia He had a contract with
the Akers Lumber Company. of Lynch
burg, Involving large amount Of
work. During that summer Mr.. Far
nd ra kn.c 4,
controversy regarding these contracts.
Alleged Promise.
In the latter part of August Mr.
Farmer consulted Judge William Fl.
Mann, a practlcing attorney. regard
ing these differences. Judge Mann ad-
vised Mr.. Farmer to certain course.
The client said. That advice, If fol-
lowed by me, will cause Akers to sue
me. Can l rely on YOU to defeuu the
suit? Judge Mann replied, You can
Mr.. Farmer paid the attorney SIS for
his advice and his promise TO repre-
sent him. No other word ever passed
between them.
ION October 4. 1907, only a few
weeks after the above occurrence, Mr..
Farmer was served with an injunction
which forbade him TO take another
step in his business. This injunction
was part OF suit brought for the
Akers Lumber Company by Judge
Mann The suit tied Farmer up in all
his business transactions and pro-
duced his absolute ruin. From being
q prosperous merchant, he Is now re-
duced to beggary, supp his wife
and three children on a salary of $50
a month.
Il called on the Governor this
morning regarding this case, and
asked him what defense he had. He
said that he had forgotten his en-.
gagement to Mr.. Farmer To which /
replied. That Is no defense, az tha
law will not allow one to forget such
an engagement
7 shall file the suit in the Law and
/ Equity Court during the comine
week.
Both Governor Mann and Mr.. Royal1
when asked II such litiga tion were not
unusual, said that they had never he.
fore heard of such "a proceeding.
1t Is pointed out by friends or Gov.
ernor Mann that the charge made Thv
Mr.. Farmer was brought out In the
heat Of the campaign and received
practically no attention from the n,,h
lie. They do not believe that an ac.
tton for damages under such circum.
stances can possibly lie against him.
They further say that While the
(, claim that Mr.. Farmer lost his case
counsel is complimentary to the Gov.
ernor, 1t does not reflect much credit
on the court nor on the attorneys who
represented the ltigant
( sf}a .s. s.s4
Dies of Infuntilc Parnlysis. \