Volume 128 — Virginia Reports

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Washington county. Decree for complainants. Defendants appeal.</p>

<p>1. DEEDs-Delivery-Appeal and Error-Conflicting Evidence-Case at Bar.-A mother deeded a tract of land to her son. In a suit to subject the land to a lien on a judgment against the son, respondents contended that there was no manual or other transmission of the deed by the grantor; that possession was retained by the mother upon an understanding that she would deliver the same, provided that her soa would quit drinking; that there was no valuable consideration moving from the son to the mother, entitling him to demand the delivery of the deed. Hence, upon the failure of the son to meet the conditions imposed by his mother, the mother was free to do as she pleased with the land, and that after the institution of the suit she had deeded the land to her son's wife. On the other hand, it was contended that the defense that the mother had retained the deed was a makeshift and an afterthought, and that it was an ordinary case in which acknowledgment of the deed was followed by delivery to the grantee, thereby closing and making complete the transaction. The deed while in the mother's possession had been accidentally destroyed by fire. The evidence was conflicting, and the case turned upon the credence to be extended to the witnesses, and the weight proper to be given to admitted facts.</p> <p>Held: That it could not be said that the decree of the circuit court subjecting the tract to the lien of the judgment against the son was plainly wrong, or without evidence to support it; hence, it must be affirmed.</p> <p>2. APPEAL AND ERROR-Weight Attached `to Decree of Circuit Court. -The decree of a circuit court is always entitled to respect, and there is always a presumption in its favor.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Tazewell county, Decree for complainants. Defendant appeals.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Smyth county. Decree for petitioner. Defendants appeal.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Montgomery county. From the decree all the parties appealed.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of. Washington, county. Decree for defendant. Complainant appeals.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Pulaski county. Decree for defendants. Complainant appeals.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit 'Court of Wise county on a motion to correct an erroneous assessment. Judgment for the Commonwealth. Plaintiff assigns error.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Dickenson county. Decree for complainant. Defendant appeals.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Dickenson county in an action of debt. Judgment for plaintiifs. Defendant assigns error.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Law and Equity Court of the city of Richmond in an action of assumpsit. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants assign error.</p>

<p>Appeal from an order of the State Corporation Commission.</p>

<p>Error to an order of the Circuit Court of Washington ■county. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff assigns error.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Tazewell county in an action of ejectment. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendants assign error.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Giles county in an action of assumpsit. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiffs assign error.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit 'Court of Wise county in an action of assumpsit. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendants assign error.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Wise county. Decree for complainant. Defendant appeals.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Wise county-in an action of trespass on the case. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant assigns error.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the 'Circuit Court of Bedford county. Decree for complainant. Defendant appeals.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of the city of Williamsburg and county of James City. Decree for defendant. Complainants appeal.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Shenandoah-county, in a proceeding under the cedar rust law, ordering the destruction of certain' cedar trees.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Russell county. Decree for defendant. Complainants appeal.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the 'Circuit Court of Rocking-ham county. Decree for defendant. Complainant appeals.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Rocking-ham county. Decree for defendants. Complainants appeal.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of. Nelson county in an action of trespass on the case. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff assigns error.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Amherst county in an action of trespass on the case. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff assigns error.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Rockbridge county in a suit for divorce. From that portion of the decree fixing alimony, the wife appeals.</p>

<p>Error to an order of the Circuit Court of Augusta county ordering the probate of a will. To this order proponents of another will assign error.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Page county. Decree for defendants. Complainant appeals.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Rocking-ham county. Decree for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Botetourt county in an action of ejectment. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff assigns error.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Albemarle county. Decree for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Albemarle county in an action of trespass on the case. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendants assign error.</p>

<p>1. Streets and Highways — Taxation—Charter of the Town of Narrows — Constitutionality of Provision — Allowing Town to Collect Three-Fourths of the Road, Tax. — Section 27. of the charter of the town of Narrows (Acts 1914, p. 573), which provides that the town “shall have the right to collect three-fourths (%), of all the road tax levied by the county on the inhabitants of Narrows,” which shall be expended. on the streets and roads within the town, is not unconstitutional as in violation of section 168 of the Constitution of 1902, as indirectly exempting the citizens of the town from the payment of county road taxes.</p> <p>2. Streets and Highways' — Taxation—Charter of the Town of Narrows- — Constitutionality of Provisión — Allowing Town to Collect Three-Fourths of the Road Tax. — Neither the road law of the county of Giles (Acts 1908, p. 611), the charter of the town (Acts 1914, p. 573), nor any other statute, exempts the inhabitants of the town of Narrows or the property therein from the same rate of taxation as imposed on persons and property within the district and outside of the corporate limits. The charter appropriates to the streets and roads of the town three-fourths of the road taxes collected in the town, and the legislature had the power to make such an appropriation.</p> <p>3. Taxation — Appropriation—Potuer of the Legislature. — So long as the road taxes raised in the district are to be expended in the district, it is clearly within the province of the legislature to say when and how they shall be expended.</p> <p>4. Streets and Highways — Taxation—Charter of the Town of Narrows — Constitutionality of Provision — Allowing Town to Collect Three-Fourths of the Road'Tax. — Upon the question of the constitutionality of the 27th section of the charter of the town of Narrows (Acts 1914, p. 573), it is immaterial that the town is not required by its charter to keep”its streets in order, and that the residue of the district is not exempted from any expenditure on the streets, as the other road funds of the district are wholly under the control and direction of the board of road commissioners of the district, under the special road law for the county, and no funds can be expended on the streets of the town of Narrows without the approval and direction of the board.</p> <p>5. Streets and Highways — Taxation—Chrnter of the Town of Narrows. — Section 26 of the charter of the town of Narrows (Acts 1914, p. 573) confers upon the town power of taxation for the purpose Of “working and keeping of its streets, roads and bridges” in repair except county bridges. To this extent, but to this extent only, the town is constituted a separate district for road purpose's. That is to say, the town may tax its inhabitants for improvements of its streets, in addition to the three-fourths of district road taxes, but cannot levy an additional road tax for any other purpose.</p> <p>6. Streets and Highways — Separate Road Districts — Charter of the Town of Nan-rows. — There is no doubt about the power of the legislature to create separate road districts of the magisterial districts of a county for local purposes. The provisions of section 27 of the charter of the town of Narrows (Acts 1914, p. 573) do not go as far as the legislature could lawfully have gone if it had made a separate road district of the town. The greater power, of course, includes the less. It is no objection to the charter that the town is not given the power to levy taxes to maintain county bridges that are or may be within the town. This is not a purely local affair, and the prohibition to levy taxes for county purposes does not affect the validity of the charter.</p> <p>7. Streets and Highways — Separate Road Districts — Charter of the Town of Narrows. — It is immaterial that under section 27 of the charter of the town of Narrows (Acts 1914, p. 573) that there may be streets or roads in the town which are not county roads, and upon which the town authorities might use some or all of the tax assigned to them." The same thing would have been true in greater degree if the legislature had gone the whole length of making a separate road district of the town.</p> <p>8. Statutes — Title and Object — Charter of the Town of Narrows.— The charter of the town of Narrows (Acts 1914, p. 573) entitled “An act to provide a charter for the town of Narrows, in Giles county, Virginia,” does not violate section 52 of the Constitution of 1902, declaring that “no law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title.” The title is sufficient to include the provision for division of the road tax contained in section 27 of the charter.</p> <p>9. Statutes — Title—Object—Amendment.—While any act, regardless of its title, may not bs treated as an amendment of a previous statute simply because it might have been enacted as such if the legislature saw fit to do so, in the instant case, the act of 1914, p. 573, entitled “An act to provide a new charter for the town of Narrows1, Virginia, and to repeal all other acts or parts of acts in conflict therewith” is, in substance and effect, an act to amend the previous charter, although it does not in terms say so, and the title actually used' is sufficient to cover amendments of the previous charter.</p> <p>10. Acts — Title—Object—Act Incorporating a Town. — The construction, maintenance, and repair of the streets and • roads of a town, and the means of raising revenue to accomplish that end are plainly germane and have natural relation to, and congruity with, the incorporation of the town.</p> <p>11. Statutes — Title•—Object.—Under section 52 of the Constitution of 1902, providing that “no law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title,” the fact that many things of a diverse nature are authorized or required to be done in the body of the act, though not expressed in its title, is not objectionable, if what is authorized by the act is germane to the object expressed in the title, or has a legiti-. mate and natural association therewith, or is congruous therewith, the title is sufficient.</p> <p>12. Statutes- — Title—Object.—If there is doubt as to the sufficiency of the title of a statute under section 52 of the Constitution of 1902, the doubt must be resolved in favor of its sufficiency, as courts will not declare an act of the legislature unconstitutional unless it is plainly so.</p> <p>13. Statutes — Title—Object■—Acts Incorporating Municipalities.— The title of a statute must not bs made a cover for surreptitious or incongrous legislation, nor be such as to mislead the legislature or the people, but should fairly state the general subject covered by the! body of the act. Subject to these limitations, the generality of the title is not a valid objection, and this observation is peculiarly applicable to acts incorporating municipalities. Such acts usually provide, not merely for the formation of the corporation, but also for its powers, legislative, judicial, police, and taxing, and for all the machinery necessary or usual for their effective exercise, and yet these are but parts of the whole, which is1 sufficiently expressed in the title declaring it to be an act to incorporate a designated community.</p> <p>14. Statutes — Special Laws — Acts Incorporating Towns. — Section 117 of the Constitution of 1902 does not forbid the enactment of special acts for the organization and government of cities and towns if they are passed in the manner provided in article four of the Constitution, and by a recorded vote of two-thirds of the members elected to. each house, nor is it necessary that such special act-s should conform to the provisions, of the general law as to the incorporation of cities and towns.</p> <p>15. Statutes — Special Laws — Acts Incorporating Toivns. — The main differences between the charter of a town and the general law as to municipal corporations related to the time for holding the town elections, and the powers and jurisdiction conferred upon the mayor and upon the council of the town. It was insisted that these could not, under the Constitution, be different from the provisions of the general law on the subject.</p> <p>Held: That the right to create the differences mentioned was within the legislative power, provided the charter was enacted in the manner prescribed by article four of the Constitution of 1902 and by the vote required by section 117 of the Constitution.</p> <p>16. Statutes — Special Laws — Acts Incorporating Towns — Showing Compliance with Constitution. — In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the fact that the charter of a town was passed in the manner and by the vote required by the Constitution is sufficiently shown by the published act of incorporation.</p> <p>17. Judicial Notice — Acts Incorporating Cities and Towns.- — Acts incorporating municipalities are public acts, whether declared to be so or not, and the courts will take judicial notice of them.</p> <p>18. STATUTES' — Enactment—Presumption of Compliance With Law. —.When an act has been duly published by authority of the State as a valid law. there is at least a prima facie presumption that all requirements as to the validity of its enactment, constitutional or otherwise, have been complied with.</p> <p>19. Statutes — Enactment—Calling in Question Validity of Published Act — Quaere.—Whether or not the validity of an act can be called in question after it has been duly enrolled, approved by the signatures of the presiding officers of the two houses of legislature and of the Governor, and published by •authority of the State, is a question upon which there is serious conflict of authority, and not being in question in the instant case was not determined.</p> <p>20. Municipal Corporations — Annexation of Territoi'y — New Charter. — Section 1 of the new charter of the town of Narrows (Acts 1914, p. 573) taking in new territory and its inhabitants-, not included in the original charter of the town or its amendment of 1908, is in contravention of section 120 of the Constitution, which declares that the General Assembly shall provide by general laws for the extension and contraction of corporate limits, and that no- special act for that purpose shall 'be valid! But as this part is readily reparable from tfte residue of the charter, and such residue is complete in itself, and in no wise dependent upon the part to be stricken out, the residue of the charter is not void on account of the unconstitutional provision contained in section 1.</p> <p>21. Statutes — Constitutional in Part, Unconstitutional in Part.— Where a part of an act of assembly is unconstitutional, that fact alone does not authorize the courts to declare the other provisions of the act void, unless they are so connected in subject matter, depending on each other, operating for the same purpose, or otherwise so connected together in meaning that it cannot be presumed that the General Assembly would have enacted the one without the other, and, further, that if an act attempts to accomplish two or more objects, and is unconstitutional as to one, it may still be complete in all respects and valid as to the other, and, if so, the latter will be upheld.</p>

<p>Error to an order of the Law and Chancery Court of the city of Roanoke. Decree for complainant. Defendant appeals.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Albemarle county in an action of assumpsit. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff assigns error.</p>

<p>Error to judgments of the Circuit Court of Nelson county in actions of ejectment. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff assigns error.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Corporation Court of the city of Eadford in a proceeding by motion for a judgment for damages. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant assigns error.</p>

<p>Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Pulaski county. Decree for defendant. Complainants appeal.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Russell county.</p>

<p>Error to a judgment of the Corporation Court of the city of Lynchburg.</p>