The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-01-26

nuisance may be ahated through the
institution OF action and the securing
% irlunCtion. closing the house for
year. The expense OF the proceed
ings. the bin provides, viii be borne
BY the personal property, which may
he sold. and the proceeds applied p
payment Of the costs. After costs are
paid such sum as may remain will be
paid the defendant property owner.
The attorney for the . oDmonw ealth
may, VITA approval Of the court. grant
immunity 20 any witness called - tes-
tify In behalf Of the prosecution.
Violation Of the Injunction Will be
punishable BY a fine OF not lees than
s2ne nor more than $1,000 or impris-
onment OF not less than three nor more
than six months. or both. Any prop
erty closed by Injunction shall remain
closed for one year, unless sooner re-
leased by the court
To Credit Jail Terms.
Mr. Beaie's bill provides that any
person hereafter sentenced by any
court or Justice TO ial or the peuiten-
tiary for any crime or IN default OF
ane shall have deducted from the term
ALI the time spent by the prisoner in
Jail while awaiting trial or pending
appeal If. however. any attempt Is
made 10 break jail and escape, the time
Sredit will not be given.
Mr.. Bristows bill provides that oys-
teFs sold in the shell shall be measured
in metallic containers. The half bushel
and the bushel sizes are given their di-
mansions and shape In the bill Oysters
sold out of the shell shall be by wine
measure. Violations OF the Law will be
punishable by hne OF s25 TO 500
The interests of workingmen are
looked after in the bin of Mr.. Epes
10 require concerns employing men on
railways, in construction or operation,
70 build sheds for the protection of en-
ployes from rain. snow and weather.
and In the bin by Mr., Myers, making
IL no defense for an employer, defend
ing personal damage suit. to cite
that the employe was negligent, unless
he can show such negligence was will
full that the employs was injured
through negligence of a fsllow-employe
or that the employe assumed inherent
risks In taking employment.
Gordon Replies to Newspaper.
Shortly after the House osgan Its
session Lindsay Gordon. of Louisa,
arose to a question of personal privi-
Iege, and reading an editorial from
the Richmond Evening Journal, launch
ed into an attack on Colonel Alfred
B. williams. its editor. The editorial
contained several sarcastic references
TO Mr.. Gordon ana MS resolution put
ting the House of Delegates on record
as roposed to placing the nation In a
state of defense against possible ag
gresston. Mr.. Gordon took exception
10 these references and did not spare
the editor in personal attack that
consumed about fifteen minutes for
delivery, the rest Of the half hour he
spoke being taken UP with q defense
OF his resolution,
Colonel Williams fs living in an
age of long ago. declared the Louisa
man He is hundred years behind
his times: he does not know that the
war ts over: he 10 bound hand and
foot TO the dead preJudices OF the past.
sirce ha came from South Carolina TO
place hts feet upon the sacred soil of
Virginia he has opposed every reform
that has raised its head. He fought
yaiiantly for the barroom and the sa-
ioon-keeper, and is now hghting 10
manufacture public sentiment in the
interest OF the manufacturer OF mum
ttens OF war"
The Louisa delegate. referring TO that
portion of the editorial which spoke
Of President Wilson, recalled the fact
Colonel Williams fought Mr.. Wilson'S
nomination at Baltimore,
Speaking directly to his resolution,
Mr.. Gordon declared that he would not
tolerate an attempt to smother II in
committee" adding however. that he
had received the assurances OF Chair
man Reed that IL would be reported by
Friday. and expressed satisfaction with
hose assurances, II IT were not re-
ported he said, ,he would move the dis
charge OF tie committee.