The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1913-10-23
With Many Phases Are Decid-
ed by the Supreme Court
of Appeals of State.

preme court OF appeals were of long
and cover many phases. i
Among these was one reversing the
circuit court Of Fayette county and
divorce case. The case
was that of Samuel Dixon against his I
wife for an absolute divorce, the de-
cree of the lower court having been
entered several years ago, following
a decree granting partial divorce
a number Of years before. Dixon Is
the former head of the big New River
Company, at that times operating some
thirty mines in Fayette and Raleigh
counties. Dixon now lives in the
eastern part of Virginia, and his wife
in this city.
According to the decision of the
court handed down Tuesday the re-
versal, however, is on technical
grounds, The syllabus of the opinion
written by Judge Lynch, is as fol-
lows:
can application. under section 10
chapter 81, Code. for an absolute di-
vorce, subsequent to decree of d.
vorce mensa ct theoro, must be by
petition or bill averring grounds for
relief. and upon the usual process and
proceedings at rules, as prescribed
by the ordinary principles of equity
practice
sDepoaitions taken before the FL
ing Of the bill or other pleading, and
before process or appearance. can moi
be read on the final hearing Of Q
cause. They should be suppressed
on the motion of the opposite party
"Nor can dispositions taken on
legal holiday, under a notice specify
ing that day, be read on final hearing
except with the consent of the parties
the notice, by virtue of chapter 15L
Code, being taken to intend the fol-
lowing day
The Sullivan Case.
The supreme court refused the writ
Of habeas corpus applied for by Jesse
v. Sullivan, whom the legislative in
vestigating committe summoned to
testify before it relative to the re
ports of bribery in the election OF e
United States senator last winter, and
l who refused to testify at the instance
Of Prosecuting Attorney Thomas G
| Townsend on the ground that the
| trial Of the defendants were ther
| pending in the criminal courts
and that if the testimony OF the wit.
ness were given at that time 1t would
he showing the information had by
the prosecution in advance Of the
| TRIAL. Sullivan offered to testify i
/ the court held he should. The court
so held and Sullivan testified but nc
dominion was rendered until Tuesday
The court holds that a committee
of the legislature can compel a per
son TO testify and punish for failure
TO do so. The opinion was writer
by Judge Miller, the case bein'
titled Sullivan, petitioner, VS. Bonne
| Hill, sheriff of Kanawha county tn
syllabus OF the opinion is as follows
"a summons for witness before :
joint committee of the two houses
I the legislature. ordered by the unan
4 imous action Of such joint committee
IL not invalid. If signed by the chair
4 man of the committee from eithe
house, pursuant to section Z, chapte'
II 10. Code 1906, though such chairma
he also the chairman selected by tn.
I joint committee to preside at the
sessions of the joint committee
IF the subject of investigation BIZ
fore such joint committee be within
the range Of legitimate legislative in
curry and the proposed testimony
l the witness called relates to that sui
l iect, obedience to its process may be
enforced by the committee directin
the summons, by attachment. fine O.
4 Imprisonment, as provided by sale
/ section z, chapter -. Code 1906.
Said section Z, chapter 49, Ccd
ll906 authorizing either house Of thu
tleEtslaflre or a committee thereof T
| enforce obedience to its process !
copstituF onal and valid.
/ knowledge or information ac
| CURED by a witness, though at tn
insta0ce in connection with and un
der the direction of a prosecuting q
torney to use in the trial OF indict
ments AGAINST members of the legls
lature for bribery, is not privileged
and furnishes a witness lawful
summoned no LEGAL ground for re
fusing to respond to legitimate ques-
tons by the committee"
Sullivan was one of the men Sc.
lected by Prosecutor Townsend to
witness and listen to the rendering
and acceptance of money by legisla,
tors who had sold their votes,
City OF st. Mary's Case.
The supreme court in an opinion
written by Judge Williams, affirmed
the circuit court of Peasants county
In the case of City of St. Marys vs.
Locke. The opinion holds that thu
legislature has the constitutional
lrleht to confer upon cities, towns and
villages the power to collect special
assessments, for street Improvement
by personal action against the prop
erty owner, in any court Of competent
Jurisdiction. 1t may also empower
such municipalities to determine for
itself, by ordinance, the manner Of
collecting its taxes and assessments.
Chapter Al, Code, concerning the
powers conferred upon municipalities
and their officers" says the syllabus,
us an amendment to the special
charters of all cities. towns and VII
~ rr,kt Ia. r14N -