The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-06-02
SHARP. CONTEST. IN
ANNEXATION CASE
NUDGE CAMPBELL HEARS MANY
OBJECTIONS FROM HEN
RICo's COUNSEL.
CONSIDERS DEMURRER
DECISION ExPECTED THIS MORN
INGsWItEN COURT CoNyENEs
At 10 O'CLoCk-APrEAL
:. APPEARS CERTAIN.

Objections on the right of him, oh
iections on the left of him, objections
In front of him. judge a. a, Camp
bell, of Wytheyille, who was designat-
ed by Governor Stuart to sit in Hem
rico Circuit court to hear the anneXa-
ton proceedings instituted by the city
OF Richmond, yesterday morning, after
listening to arguments Of counsel for
more than ar hour, adjourned court
until 10 O'Clock this morning. during
which time he proposed to look into
the arguments of the opposing coun-
sci in entering q demurrer. judge
Campbell first oyerruled a motion to
dismiss the suit because Of the
/ technical objection that the Henrico
school board had not been notified ri
the PROCEEDINGS. but later stated that
points new to the court had been
raised and he would take the AFTER
noon to look into the law and consider
his ultimate decision on the demuI rer-
He requested the attorneys to submit
briefs of The questions raised
Every Point Contested.
With the bone If contention the
constitutionaity of the Legislative act
authorizing the annexation. the law
yers for the opposition are indicating
that thoy Will stubhornly contest every
point. A brilliant array OF legal tall
ept was present In Hourieo courtroom
and each OF the attorneys had with
him numerous law books and maps
which VIII he used in the hearing on
the petition.
Commonwealth S Attorney Satton
represents all the residents of Henrico
in general He is being assisted ny
! Attorneys Richard +. Byrd and r. Nj
Smith. il. Ginter Park is epresauted
by hoy f. Gabell ard e. r. Gar
nett. Attorney George Il. White is
looking after the interests of Highland
Park. and T. W. Gardner represents
Barton HEIGHTS. iohn 4 &'utchins -ap-
pears for the residents uf North R'ch-
mon4 and COMMONWEALTH Attor-
ney Haskins Hobson, Of Chesterfield.
represents the residents of the South
side county. part OF whose territory
is included IL the annexation plan
City Attorney Pollard has associated
with him in representing Richmond
Assistant city Attorney George w.
Anderson and Charles Y Meredith
Would Affect oaicers.
That the Annexation of a large por-
ton Of territory as Richmond conJem~
plates taking in wauld mean a rear
raageuent OF the political bouadaries
Of Heurieo, and that this Is an aat
which 10 court can grant tina city
the right to accomplish and which
eogad eHiy be accomplished every ten
years by the general assembly, was
support IF the demurrer That the
county would be deprived Of It's rep
rtseutatiVe in the senate, by the fact
that the residepee Of State Senator
l.. q, Weudenburg would he effected
by the annexation act, VAS said To
further emphasize the uncou&titul on
ality of the act,
II was further pointed ont tHat the
officers of tho county would he az
fected III violation OF their constitu-
tiQnaI rights.
Commonwealth Attorney sutton,
of Henrico, took exception 10 the an
nexation proceedings on constitutional
grounds. lie claimed that annexation
would destroy the right Of the voter
in the annexed territory to vote as he
desired and would also disturb the
apportionments Of the county districts
as made by the legislature Tor lenisia-
tive purposes. a citizen taken in, he
said, must. vote for the Richmond rep
resentatiye, when he wanted 10 vote
for the county repre- sentative. The
forcing Of L higher rate OF taxation
on the annexed citizens Was also
argued.
Law and Precedent.
City Attorney Pollard and Attorney
Charles Y. Meredith replied to the
pointing to law and precondent against
the grounds for the demurrer.
Every indication il that the anneXa-
ton question IS Far from settled, and
both sides are preparing themselves
for legal Tight te tne very limit II
the demurrer lis oVerrtned, the lawyers
viii take the case to the Supreme
court. In the event that the court
should sustain the demurrer, the ely
would, no doubt amend lis petition
and the case would be allowed to pro-
coed
The same contention as that ad-
vanced by tho attorneys In opposition
To annexation was made In the an
nexatton proceedings of 1905, when
Richmond took in certain parts of
Henrico. 1t was claimed at that time
that the pportionn1ent Of the lesis-
latiye and senatorial districts would
be unconstitutional The court over
fexI gJki 1N Ia