The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-06-02
|HUST|NGS COURT,
PART TWO, MAY
NOT Be VALID
Auditor Marye Holds Up
| Pay of Judge Ernest
| Il. Wells.
ANNEXATION ACT
is QUESTIONED
Attorney-General Williams Asked
to Decide Whether Cities Can
Create State Court and Pro-
vide for Payment of State
Officers Without Legis-
lative Action.

1t Is possible that within the next
few days the supreme Court of Appeals
may he called on to consider whether
or not Hastings Court. Part 9. of Ricil-
mond. is legal court; whether Judge
Ernest II. Wells is legal Judge.
whether any of the former Manchester
city officials drawing money from the
State are properly holding their Offices
with the Richmond city government.
and whether the liquor licenses granted
in Washington Ward are constitutional.
Judge Wells himself, with City At
torney Henry r. Pollard. feels satisfied
that the annexation ordinance, by vir-
tue of which the court was created. is
entirely valid and legal 1t was re-
ported on the streets all day yesterday
that Attorney General Samuel w. VIII
| liams held contrary opinion but when
seen Judge Williams said that he had
as yet rendered no decision in the mat
| ter. Further than this he declined to
discuss the case.
Auditor Interested.
The whole matter comes up on Il
question submitted to the Attorney
General by Colonel Morton Marye Aud
itor of Public Accounts, as to whether
or not he could legally pay from the
State treasury the salary of Judge
Wells as Judge of Hastings Court, Part
., of Richmond. when that official had
been elected by the Legislature as
Judge of the Corporation Court of the
city of Manchester
This situation opens an endless vista
of possibilities. Should 1t be decided
that the court is nut legally IN eXIs-
ttence the proposition might come up as
to whether or not the consolidation or
dinance is valid. While the action OF
courts de facto are usually held to be
valid and binding, there would be end
less questions from attorneys regards
Ing cases which have been before 1t.
1t is understood that the question
raised about the matter covers the
point that courts can be created only
by the Legislature. No act was passed
by the General Assembly constituting
Hastings Court. Part 2, for Richmond.
Then, again, the Constitution says that
judges must be elected by joint vote
of the two houses. Judge Wells was
elected to the Manchester court. and
not to any court of the city OF Rich-
mond.
All May BE Illegal.
This being the case, perhaps none Of
the city officials may be legally hold
ing Office. The clerk Of a court which
did not exist could not certify the ac-
counts OF witnesses and of sergeants
to the Auditor of Public Accounts.
Treasurer Pace could not, perhaps, ac-
cept revenue for municipality which
did not elect him.
No salary has been drawn by Judge
Wells from the State since the consol-
idation ordinance became effective on
April To- He. with Mr.. Pollard, has
had a conference with the Attorney
General, the matter being, Judge Wells
said last night. left open Since that
time many authorities have been looked
sup and Judge Wells believes that they
show beyond doubt that he Is legally
the Judge of Hastings Court, Part 2
Mr.. Pollard is firmly Of the same
opinion. He says that decisions have
been rendered In other States when
courts have been transferred at times
of annexation. which have held that
the proceeding was regular and legal.
There is no doubt in his mind that the
consolidation ordinance is entirely
valid This ends the matter so far as
the payment of Judge Wells's salary by
the city is concerned.
State Pays Portion.
1t does not however. affect the States
portion of the compensation. Colonel
Marye, VINO never by any CudNCs pays
out a cept of the States money unless
with full legal warrant. will naturally
take the advice of the Attorney-Gen-
eral What that advice will be has
not as yet been indicated.
should Judge Williams rule that the
court is not In existence, Judge Wells
would proceed TO sue out writ or
mandanus before the SUI
preme Court OF Appeals. TO compel
the Auditor to Issue a Warrant upon
the treasurer OF the State for his
salary. Upon this question the whole
matter of the ordinances Legality
would come up FOR review. 1t would
not be necessary to have the matter
drag along in a lower court. since
the Supreme Court has original juris-
diction In all mandamus cases
1t is, of course. sincerely hoped By
all parties that no litigation or trou-
BILE of any sort VIII ensue. but thar
II Will be found that the ordinance Is 4
legal and binding. The enormous NUM-
Der of complications which would otli-
erwise result would seriously hamper
the business and legal proceedings OF
the city for n long time To como,