Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1916-01-30
Petition for Correction Of
Lines Bounding Segregated
District" Falls Church.
APPEAL is PRESENTED
BY COLORED RESIDENTS
Hearing Before Judge Thornton Of
Fairfax County, Va.-Points
at Issue.

Residents of Falls Church and. in
fact. throughout the state of Virginia
are awaiting with interest the decision
of Judge J. b. T. Thornton of the cir
cult court of Virginia in the "segrega-
ted district" case of number OF
colored residents o. Falls Church
against the town Of Falls Church II
is expected the court will render an
opinion in the near future.
Following the introduction of testi-
mony and the hearing of arguments
by counsel for both sides at the Fair
fax county courthouse Thursday. Judge
Thornton announced his intention OF
visiting Falls Church and seeing the
Segregated district complained OF be-
fore he would render his decision.
Attorney w. r. Oliver, former mem-
Der of the Virginia legislature. and
Attorney Thomas l.. Jones. colored. or
this city appeared for the colored resi-
dents. while the town is represented by
Attorney william NJ. Ellison OF this
city and Falls Church.
Compliments Petition.
The complainants-E. B. Henderson.
Columbia B. Scott. William Henderson.
George Hunter. Matte Hunter. Henry
Taylor, George W. Summs and Rev.
w
Fairfax county. Va. recently filed pc
tition asking that the court correct
or cause to be corrected the errors in
the map of the segregation OF Fails
Church made in pursuance Of a resolu.
ton of the council of the town Janu-
airy II, 1916, and also cause the coun-
Gil to make a correction of the sege-
cation district SO as to conform TO the
provisions of the act of the assembly
of 1912.
1t is alleged in the complaint that
the Segregated district" adopted by
the council of Falls Church in at
tempted compliance with the act of the
assembly of Virginia of 1912 is not a
valid segregation in compliance with
the act. and that the map prepared BY
said council alleging to show the
boundaries of the segregation district
has not been prepared in accordance
with the provisions of the act" and
that the council is prejudiced by said
attempted segregation. 1t is declared
the segregation is Illegal and that the
with the act.
Allegation of Error.
The error complained of is that the
council in determining the boundaries
of the segregation district" and in the
preparation of the map showing the
same ran TWO OF the llneS
along what are called Douglass and
Liberty avenues and an angle. 1t Is
declared by the compliments that the
avenues are not legally streets within
the meaning of the act: that while they
are used as thoroughfares they have
never been accepted by the corpora
ton of Falls Church as streets by any
legal act of the corpL ration. and that
the corporation has no legal control
over the same.
60 Eraf.
Church most of the colored inhabitants
live in close proximity in one section
of the town." it is declared in the petit
ton, land that the adopted segregation
leaves in the white district two-thirds
of these colored people. and, conse-
quently. limits the territory in which
colored people may live. and thereby
works them great injustice"
Answer of Town Council.
In the answer of the council of Falls
Church, it is declared that the plaintiffs
have not the interest in the subject mat
ter of the bill of complaint which will or
does entitle them to the right to sue. nor
do they set up in the bill Of complaint
any title or Interest. or damage, preju-
dice. loss or injury by reason of the act
complained OF which entities them to In
stitute suit. or Tor the granting OF the
relief prayed for.
The defendants contend the RELIEF
prayed for In part. at least. Is beyond
the jurisdiction of the court, in that
the compliments ask the court to ALSO
cause said council to make correc-
ton of said act of the assembly"
1t is declared further that the bill is
such that il sustained would tend to
a multiplicity of suits. because Of its
uncertainty as to who the complain
ants represent and their respective In
tereStS."