The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-06-05
RIGHT OF PHONE
LINES is SETTLED.
Companies Not Liable for Dam
ages for Failure to De-
liver Messages.
FOUR APPEALS REFUSED
Damage Suit Up From Peters
burg-Old Land Grant
From Crown.

Telephone companies arc not subject
to the Same penalties in Virginia for
failure to deliver messages as the
telegraph companies, according to a
decision just rendered by the Judges
Of the Supreme Court OF Appeals In
refusing to grant q writ of error. The
case was that of Thomas S. Starkey
against the Southern Bell Telephone
and Telegraph Company of Virginia,
on an appeal from the Law and Chan
Gerry Court of the city of Norfolk.
Starkey showed that he had at
tempted one day to call five different
parties over his telephone from his
place of business in the Norfolk city
market. He was refused connection
on tho ground that he had not paid
he was not only not in arrears. but
that he had in fact paid ahead for a
month.
He claimed the penalty of 500 In
each case. $500 in all. chargcable
against telegraph companies. The
lower court threw the case out on
the ground that the statute was not
applicable to telephone corporations.
The Supreme Court, by its refusal to
interfere, sustains this view.
Hurt on street Car.
A writ was also refused to the Vir-
GINA Railway. and Power Company
against Mrs. Pattie S. Pearce, from a
Judgment OF the Hastings Court OF
the city of Petersburg, rendered on
February IL, 1910. The plaintiff was
Q o J.r for N ittrio- o.
ccived while alighting from a car at
South and Washington Streets. in Pc
tersburg, on July 1. 1909. The COM
pany attempted to show that the car
had stopped for reasonable time, and
asked for a new trial on the point of
error In admitting certain evidence
and rejecting other testimony.
W. S. Grymes also drew blank "
his appeal from the Circuit Court Of
Orange county, where he had sued tho
Southern Railway for damages for the
death of two horses. the injury of an
other and the loss of wagon. 1t
was claimed that the train which did
the damage was exceeding the speed
limit ordained by the town of Orange
In a first trial the jury gave verdict
for s435 damages. but the lower court
granted a new trial. AT the latter the
court instructed the jury to bring IN
a verdict subject to its consideration
of n demurrer which was offered. a
verdict for the same amount was &C
cordingly rendered, the court sustain
ing the demurrer.
The point was that the driver of th'
horses was guilty of contributory neg
lIgence. In his evidence the engineet
In charge Of the train testified that M
man living can tell the speed of
trail nwithout an indicator
Old Land Title.
A complicated land suit involving a
patent from the English crown came
up on an appeal from the Circuit Court
of Caroline county, writ of error be-
ing likewise refused. Tho suit was
that of Joseph Sutton. trustee, against
Collins and others. a road, it appears
had been closed, the plaintiff claiming
that 1T was the only way which he had
to reach tho public road from his
property. He claimed that he was on
titled to the use of the highway both
by prescription and by the right OF
necessity.
The lands in question. it is stated
We're included in a grant made by
King George III. to John w. Baylor
on July s. 1926. This is evidently an
error, since George III. did not reach
the throne until 1860. part OF the
land. 1t is noted In the volumnous
history of the property, was sold by
Baylor to Major George Washington
and by him to William Washington.