Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1922-03-09

one of intent of the mind and Mr.. WI
liams took his seat as member OF lhe
City Council of Alexandria City.
Cooper Case
In the Cooper Case the State OF
Virginia endeavored to collect taxes
on intangible personal property OF
Cooper which under the law Is asses
sable at the residence and domlclie OF
the taxpayer. Cooper for several
years had lived in Salem, Virginia,
with his family in handsome resld-
ence he built there, and he was con-
nected rs director and otherwise with
various banks, companies and Eusi-
ness enterprises there as local clti,
zen. He attended church there, moved
the bodies of his dead children to the
cemetery there, and there his living
children went to school. He occasional
" went for visit of day on two to
West Virginia which he claimed to os
his true residence and donicile and
where he claimed the right on such
occasions to sleep in shanty on one
of the properties of a company ne was
interested in. The Supreme Court OF
Appeals sustained his claim, against
affirming that the matter was largely
a question of intent OF the mind.
Baggctt Matter
Judge Moncurr stated that ne had
been in Alexandria actually 10 years
and that when he came here he only
knew three people in the City. He told
of his early struggles as young law
yer with an office in the Alexandra
National Bank Building. As he began
to succeed he bought from Mr.. Frank
Davidson at big price an old di!api-
dated building on South Royal Street
and in this building, her name then
unknown to him, lived as tenant a
widow named Mary L. Baggett with
two small children to support, and
she then ran a penny candy shop and
kept as roomers and boarders men
working on the Alexandria Washing
ton trolley line Judge Moncure stated
that after he became acquainted with
Mrs. Baggett as his tenant she ap-
peared to be we'll meaning good wo-
man struggling very hard to support
herself and children and that she was
thoroughly honest but that she was
woman of very low order of intellig-
ence. Later Judge Moncure had the
old building torn down and on its site
had erected his present residence and
Offices. After the completion OF the
new building for short time Mrs.
Baggett occupied a portion thereof
and made her living by keeping as
roomers and boarders employees OF
the trolley line, and during the entire
time she was q tenant OF Judge Mon
cure she never to his knowledge kept
as roomers or boarders persons seek
ing divorces. Later she moved into her
present home next door and this 1t
was pointed out was more than twelve
or thirteen years ago. Judge Mon
cure stated that he did not know when
she began taking as roomers and
boarders persons seeking divorces but
that his first knowledge of 1t was
when occasionally she would come INTO
his office with some one desiring d.
vorce. He stated that he did not know
how many rooms were in her home
nor the arrangement of the large
building, and that he had only been
in the front room, more than ten years
ago when it was used as an office by
an insurance company for which ne
collected bills, and he had been IN the
hall of the house occasionally to
leave a message for clients when they
returned home at night from their
work. Judge Moncure stated, and cited
the records of the Committee in cor
roboratior. showing that for the en-
tire period of two years preceding
mis- elevation to the bench the firm of
which he was then head had only Sc
cases in all courts where the party
seeking the divorce lived at her house.
Judge Moncure then took up the re-
cords of the Committee which show
in the 81 months he has been on the
bench that in about 40 cases persons
claimed residence at her house and
stated that these cases were filed by
many different lawyers scattered over
that entire period and came to the at
tention of the Court separately and at
different times in that period, and not
in the summary comparative and COM
piled form resulting from the three
weeks of labor of three members of
the Committee, and that the report of
the Committee surprised him and if
he had been asked as a guess how
many persons had lived at Mrs. Bag
gets he would have thought thirty Or
forty. Judge Moncure stated he
thought conditions should be carefully
and properly investigated and that the
members of the committee who COM
piled the information would be most
proper witnesses. Judge Moncure then
stated that he felt sorry for the Bag
gett woman like he did for everyone
in any difficulty but as Judge did
hot want TO express any opinion at
(Coptinnad on Dopa thrael