201
20
4487
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/Rockingham_County_Prohibition_Records_Criminal_Cases/RcPr-box1-008.pdf
2056deb933ec5f1fd62ae0ec4542d9d3
PDF Text
Text
Commonwealth of Virginiat
County of Rockingham, to-wit:
In the Circuit Court of said County:
The jurors of the Commonwealth of Virgin ia, in and for the
body of the County of Rocking ham, and now attendi ng the Circui t
A ~~ ~
,, <j/ ~,
Court of said county , .UPON ~EIR OATHS PRESENT, that
---- ---~
agains t the peace and dignity of . the Common wealth of Virgin ia.
AND THE JURORS AFORESAID, UEON THEIR OATHS AFORESAID, DO
FURTHER PRESENT, that
agains t the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Virgin ia.
This indictm ent is found on the testimo ny
o fr ~
(/
•
,
witnes ses sworn in Court and sent before the Grand Jury to give
eviden ce.
�;,
COMMONWE ALTH
Indictment
vs.
:.,,
- Ji ;
......: · ···
y . ,.
,_r'l-'
t
\
t
...--J..ti-JJ,..A._ '
I
•
C.
_.r
_.,,,.
~
/
\
For Felony
For Misdemeanor
~AT~UEB ILL
~r ' ~-
'>?A .......f ..~
....?!/.LrZ.l
I
---·-···-···············
Foreman
•
.,.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County Prohibition Records: Criminal Cases
Description
An account of the resource
The first series of the Prohibition Records collection consists of all criminal case records associated with cases brought to the <strong>Rockingham County Circuit Court</strong> from 1916-1964. Not every individual was indicted for a criminal offense and many were simply judged as misdemeanors. The cases have been separated and arranged by the last name of the defendant. <br /><br />For more information on the Prohibition collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--History
Prohibition--Government policy--United States
Prohibition--Virginia--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916-1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/7">Prohibition Records: Liquor Inventory</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/6">Prohibition Records: Affidavits for Ardent Spirits </a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4524"> Prohibition Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Commonwealth v. William Jordan
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--Virginia
Alcohol--Law and legislation
Criminal courts--Virginia
Rockingham County (Va.)
Harrisonburg (Va.)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Craig Schaefer, Kayla Heslin, Selena St. Andre, 2019; Updated by Megan Pullen, 2025.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001_001_008
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
JMU Libraries
Description
An account of the resource
Defendant charged with unlawful purchase for and furnishing to William Jordan, a habitual drunkard, ardent spirits. Not a True Bill.
This item was originally identified as RcPr-box1-008.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Jordan
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/Rockingham_County_Prohibition_Records_Criminal_Cases/RcPr-box1-007.pdf
72ac6a357f1be58ea27d32cc9d9033a9
PDF Text
Text
�- -
���/ 7 _) u
I
I
2.
,s-
'
��:J_ A.
<f2-u-rt &.). lv7~
6 .Jr. , ~
f. b. ~J/4U
i ,
5
l
1-,S i!
1'
.s t'
z .J
J)
i-'-l~/4d--- .
;r'lt ~
~~I i ,_:_~o
2- , Ji~
ri.
Jtt,I,~•
I
j.
Iv:!-
I
7-s/J
'
> I (1
¼:c71
e>--
'1 /
v
Kl~ -
:t' . (j Z,
X
..,-.... ..
"
.S
•
' t>
$
a
�Circuit Court of Rockingham County,
ORDERED, ThaL . ....
. ................ .
............... ........
Term,
191.. .
...... pay unto
.................. .......a witness f'or ........... .
....................................... in suit at law of'
... vs
................................. lJoUnrs and.
. cents f'or........................ _.............. ................ .
days' attendance and t rnvelinJ ................. .
Cents Toll.
$.
.......miles rind ......... ·······-·······························
.il.tteste:
............... ........................................ ....... Clerlc
FORM 7 6
�1.o ~ ~ ~ ~
~) J;:J;_~~t,
~~d:V
I
{,v1_ .(0~
r
{'_,, ,
>
ur:J3
~
~1-W 7~
?/. 7A--M- 7
~
4
~ /
~- &:11, 1! ~
f,-h. ~~
1,
? (fl- ,fr' ,
r
C,
/D
~ 17
tu, e. l b-, . . j
!/« ti t /«A_ ! ~
'
,;<. J</ ~ ,,-/.(!../,P(.
~
, ✓ 15-:Jy,
~u
/i
��
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County Prohibition Records: Criminal Cases
Description
An account of the resource
The first series of the Prohibition Records collection consists of all criminal case records associated with cases brought to the <strong>Rockingham County Circuit Court</strong> from 1916-1964. Not every individual was indicted for a criminal offense and many were simply judged as misdemeanors. The cases have been separated and arranged by the last name of the defendant. <br /><br />For more information on the Prohibition collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--History
Prohibition--Government policy--United States
Prohibition--Virginia--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916-1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/7">Prohibition Records: Liquor Inventory</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/6">Prohibition Records: Affidavits for Ardent Spirits </a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4524"> Prohibition Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Commonwealth v. Roy L. Fridley
Description
An account of the resource
Defendant charged with unlawful operation of an automobile under the influence of intoxicants. Misdemeanor, Guilty.
This item was originally identified as RcPr-box1-007.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Intoxication
Drunk driving
Prohibition--Virginia
Alcohol--Law and legislation
Criminal courts--Virginia
Rockingham County (Va.)
Harrisonburg (Va.)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Craig Schaefer, Kayla Heslin, Selena St. Andre, 2019; Updated by Megan Pullen, 2025.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001_001_006
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
JMU Libraries
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Relation
A related resource
Commonwealth Order Book 2, page 225.
Fridley
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/Rockingham_County_Prohibition_Records_Criminal_Cases/RcPr-box1-006.pdf
781b47df01413d64cb8a3fe42cbcd377
PDF Text
Text
Commonwealth of Virginia,
County of Rockingham, to-wit:
In the Circuit Court of said County:
The jurors of the Commonwealth of Virginia, in and for the
body of the County of Rockingham, and now attending the Circuit
.
at its . Sept a..l'...e.r.m 191 6 ,
,
.
Court of said county,/ UPUJ.'f 'TH.IHK
bATHS PRESENT, that FranK Fi t zwater
on the _ _ _ _ _ __ day of _ _ _ _ _1,. 916 , in said County , near
Dovesville , i n Plain s
11
a giste i all District , the sai d Distri ct be i ng
no li c ense territ ory"did unlawful l y sell to .I . L . Reedy , ardent sp irits ,
against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
UPON THEIR OATHS AFORESAID, BO
a ~~
- t
-f t-he Comm
This indictment is found on the testimony of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
,
witnesses sworn in Court and sent before the Grand Jury to give
evidence.
�Sept . ~e r m, 1 916 .
sell ing of arde nt s p iri ts
COM MON WEA LTH
vs.
Indic tmen t
Frank Fit zwat er
~
For Misd emea nor
A TRUE BILL
u
Forem an
!
Harr y k • . 0tri ie: kB r
Att y . fo _. ,c11e Jor•1 .
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County Prohibition Records: Criminal Cases
Description
An account of the resource
The first series of the Prohibition Records collection consists of all criminal case records associated with cases brought to the <strong>Rockingham County Circuit Court</strong> from 1916-1964. Not every individual was indicted for a criminal offense and many were simply judged as misdemeanors. The cases have been separated and arranged by the last name of the defendant. <br /><br />For more information on the Prohibition collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--History
Prohibition--Government policy--United States
Prohibition--Virginia--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916-1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/7">Prohibition Records: Liquor Inventory</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/6">Prohibition Records: Affidavits for Ardent Spirits </a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4524"> Prohibition Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Commonwealth v. Frank Fitzwater
Description
An account of the resource
Defendant charged with unlawful sale of ardent spirits. Misdemeanor, Not a True Bill.
This item was originally identified as RcPr-box1-006.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--Virginia
Alcohol--Law and legislation
Dovesville (Va.)
Plains Magisterial District
Criminal courts--Virginia
Rockingham County (Va.)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Craig Schaefer, Kayla Heslin, Selena St. Andre, 2019; Updated by Megan Pullen, 2025.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001_001_005
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
JMU Libraries
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Fitzwater
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/Rockingham_County_Prohibition_Records_Criminal_Cases/RcPr-box1-005.pdf
d89fda33ad0d21376427f04d6b5c7602
PDF Text
Text
Commonwealth of Virginiat
County of Rockingham, to-wit:
In the Circuit Court of said County:
The jurors of the Commonwealth of Virginia, in and for the
body of the coixtt~ t9l flc·8i1i\\.~¥Jllrln ~ ,pow attending the Circuit
Court of said county t UPON THEIR OATHS PRESENT, that da lvin B re
s i nce lJovemb e r 1s t , 1916 , in sai d County , did manufa ctur e and u nl awful l y di s pense an d g i ve wa y i nt oxi c a t ing c i der cont i ni ng mor e
t hun one pe r cen t of a l co ho l b y volume i n vi ol a t i on of t he proh i bi tio n adt o Vi r g i i a ,
against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
This indictmen t is found on the testimony of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
,
witnesses sworn in Court and sent before the Grand Jury to give
evidence.
�~'
~ I '1 I '!
<{
I
t '
. . . .,,. l
\
~1'~~
t
1• i
t'
COMMONWEALTH
vs.
1~~ ~ ~
Indictment
I
\ ••. - i
_\''
~
~. . t ! ~..... .-.. ~~ ..... ·f'
/fJ
/J
I
£J
"
'
I
-,li-~~r./ .
~-11
I
~
(
I
i
Foer 11':ol9R~
For Misdemeanor
[,
i
)
1
l
A TRUE BILL
. . . .~ a . 2~~
I
-~'I ) { f7-
~-•- ti
t~
Foreman
I
~
ri-
- ti
't-.
~
\
~
~
'('?
~
~
\Jr -\
�T
,.. .
1
I
I ·"
' '
"'c
I'
r
(
i
11
n
_,c;
r,
G
. 1·,
, 1_
,...
n
r'; I·
..
,.,
~
r.o
Ll
• !'
. ,.. ,...
l l. l.
,
--
'
X
.
~'
r•
l,'
1,
f
;r:;1
O•
r·
0 1I
i
r
I ',./
()
0
, c L i • V1·
lL
f i 1· .., L
J
.
i
,..
.,
i
ct, . r·
'1
'
J
L'
O r'
f
'
i
.I~
'
.I.
I
n
l)
...
,
•:;l_ • l
,~
0
i
('
...
r· , l
,_
, , t t.
1 0
1. \ .
T ~t
.
I
\.,
,·
1·,
. ,
:<
, .I t '
1 1.., 1
',, y, C i
(
,
'
·ol a 1. 1
l
(JI
]9
_) t
·)
r·
r
C J.." , ..
:-l
l
'
1'j
j ,,..
'
-~
·1 .0.1
i
r
d . ,'
I
l
·r·
" l o :l lfi
I 'j
,
.1 ,,._;
l,:
'.:;
LI
•i
,,
! 6'
(
I.)!' .,
'
'I.,
,,
cr
I.
_\ !
)
" 0I '
• I
J
J
i r•r.,i_'
/
l i"
l
I '
..r·
'i.'
r ,.
i
0
1
'
At,
('!.
j ~
r?
.
nL 'crJ•. C
• I
z·
,j
,,.
t
r
I' (ltf. ; ,
,
;,
.·,'
,L
"'I,n-.:.(:.
- ..'
<;
,
t
l,
1,
,
~
,r
'IJ
I
,..,1
/ t>
, ·=
•
I
v
~-
I
lC'
..,
. :iu
T
'"'L if i '
,...
·,:,
i
T'\ (.__)l_'k
r l C\
'di
.,i
....
,lJ
,
'i:·
(
I
.:.
a.t
or
~
(l
.l l
t.
'J ,_
0
.,
, r11.<
or
..,
".,
•
'
-
.,.,.
.,
-
1'
I
..,
• a-
),
i
i
).
-
I
ro.1 J
')
,_
.r,
j y
l '~
~
I
,..,
for
r
>T
A
l,
..,
,.,
Ol
I
., -
.I.
,.,,
~,... , - I
"
f)
~
,1
1
.
'1,
�[
�0.
0
r
'l,
.' ,
i n,..
· l}
,.
r· • '
'1
,. ] 1
.
,
ol
• i c·
·0
; ,
IL'!'
t. '1 ..,.. Jf
.1. t,l i
•
c
!' -
l'
I _;
dr ·r· J "
1
·r· ,
.1,l l
.'
.1 T• l
(I y •
i
f )
I
~
~
,'
1r
~ w ~ ~ ~ f. ;(
.t ,, .r "
: ..
:
t
.
vJ
•
.,
A
~ .!_ •
i
I
t,
or _;
a L i..
1 ~='. i '
.,
l
.,
t
10 ;
(
1 ... 0
i,
,.
__ ]_ ;,
nt •
i,
.i
I
lo_ ; t
j
.;l , , r·
_;
I
1(
;
r,
.,
J
\ 1._\
1
,
,
i )
T
.
el
.L't ,
'
I
I
.,
'f'i
'
~
•
,
t
•
l
...
,
r
"
Y
I
•
n , M.
,_;
---~
i
r,
C! S
i.
i.
OT
i•
n
L
I
•
I
..,
..
, ..
•
~ ~ ~,
' ~
1
•
•
li
I
' 1 0
•, I\ ,
~
1'
}i.jl'
•I
t ~
--~
-...-~
~
i
I
•
•·n
'- r
oL . 'J
....
·
,
, I
·-'
• .
I'( \] ]
I
V
.,
,
•
i.,
l,
..,
•
<•
•
·-
,
•
1•
'
L 'l
,4. ,.. ,..[ L,. ..,. ~
,.._ - ; .,,; • • • ~
,1- Jtc ...~ ,~
~
u - ,_. -_~
•l '
t
o"
oC
·01 1
n
• ·
i}
, ,.
~-~~~~I ~
,.
l
l
i.
I•
0.., ,.
I
fl -ir
f
_)
huLllr~
.
'
'1 a '.
j
i,' 0
11 of
~
1.l
,,
·m
L l ,.l ' l
'
'
1o or -
j
T
11
IJ
,.,
..:
r
1(. 1
.
· ,-t
,v
nl
l
.J
~
C
l
r;
l
,..
,
1i
(; j ' ' • r •
(
t
'•
0
,,
.r
r,j
I
.,
J•
0
,..
1
.;
()
.,
r
,
,
rJ.
• 1"
I
l'L '.
I
i' t(
I
L•
•L
' ., ,
"
.,
eo
•. i v i
'
.;
.,0
.,
r·
II
I
l 1.- , i '
J.
,·
'
·)f" .-. .
l
'
t
•
r- l ~ , . . ~ ~
.
~
~~
- ~ '~~~
~-~
~ ~
~~,
l
'
~
•r
•
l ... . l
.:,
L~ ~
n
•
1 l
l
4,-c . -
..,,-
,
~h ._
·
, r)
l
1..~,
-I
~
" l ,.;
,,..t_ _
'
·L • C
T
_;
:_.1· .v · l
,
.,.
,j
ffv L -. 6 .
tr ·
,1 t
to L; .,
i ~ ...
'-.
~ I>. /.----~f>---f "-{ ~
t
· 1•r l
_
~
. , ~ t '·
rr r ~
- - /
- c, .-- .:; ) '11-r, . z
H
l, 1
i .., it l., r .
1 _
n
C
"v
.
~
~
rr
~.
f'
�-
�1--- !
-
, !
' Lo
V
t·( --· J
(;L
Jl"._ _: ,~ } HJ
•
; 01
V
"' a.I
01
- Lf ,
:t' 01
'O
.· !l
l
]
'f
,., a.
L
0\)
L'
lJ.C .
0
,
i
·r'
r-1.
'
.,,,
-
.l, ~;.,
en oi
'-·
ur
:ciODI
r .,
l
50
. •• I
J
J d.C ,'
I' • •
i
J
nlJ 3 J
,-icl
-d..a,t
-x:=..::::J.J.=..:
ll
,,.,-
4
n
in
OJ.J
,,
•,.,
,.
tr p
i' .3
J..'
Cn
1, _'1_,
r,
j
') ,lGr· ...
; /.
'
(")_.
- .. j
.r
p
fl
'
4
iJQY
,
r Q
I,
i Jl
' r
..t_;_
,
r
..,
,
,
.,
,
I
,
l
3 j_
'
1
..
.
_1J
J
JV
,..,
l
.L
11 .in•l 1
.
n,,
R,(.; (
-
.rz·
i
·er•
,,
- (ll
lul
,
(
- i el
I
i
:, 1
J
I
>t
Ci
n
~
..
>
1
,
l
l
iz
r.
n:· L,;
ur
-
.;_
a,i. 1..,--
-
.:.
.l
·o
~
1·
·r
1• ...,
~r}
i
)
-j
i _ Vi
]
I
'f
1>1 Ci
-·., .
.:_
V
1' ,
'' ,
Ll
-.
l
ir
,.,
f,
,,,
d
•1
i (' n
oon
" 1 iir~ 1 •
)1_
C' ,:; r..; _:, J
t,
i '1
L
;,.
~
l
;~q"" ir
a, L
OV
i
!'
,..
• L
.f
~I)
ol le
.":
'
, l..
. <n·t.
•!
', ,_
':rl ~
J
' l
~I
l ::l.C
ts
L1 '
.'
,-
1'.'
..,11
>
:J.V
i 1
1·001
,.;o o 1
CJ
,
-
fr
-l '
~-
" d. J 'J'
'l'
jd.,
i
l
3I I I
to.,, · cat r
co ct · I,
d
r· ' .
'31
l'
', I
I 0
,
in
;., /_1
-''l in
-.
. ,L,1'
r_,f
..
.,
V
1
li
t
J
)
,
_, r·r
✓ r·
iri
I
; ,.
Li
., i ,·1
L
L 11.J
•c;•,V i
•:,j
'
I
~
--
.,' .
r.
I
,,'
of L, l ,.,
-- :
'
i 011
ot... •
--
1n1_ ,,
1
[I
,1 i ..! 1
, I'':l.
{"
l.,
I
L
L1l
..,
,._ .
I
I
Cl ..i.c
e)
-t
,, 'l
��I(
,
~'A
.I '
.,
r
')')' 7
t'
J
1)
l"'i
l i .:
.) J.
r.
1-1, ,
!'1
l 'r
)
i l..,
,..,
r.
•
. I' l
' I
r-- L"
I
I
4,1
ic '
T
•CI ' .
3.
,.,
(
'"
Lo
• • r-• •
. ;l
0
l. :,
ii
I
C~ r•r i ,,'
r-
1 o::i:·
,:·1a
--
i cl
1
lV
I'
,
n J.1· :
,.
l
~o ol
it
tn
(
1
t,
uf
I
T
t·
i
il
r.. I'· l
l;,1
.~
I n
01
,,
,,_;
I'
j
_J
'e
'
1,1_•
' ir
V
1,1
r.
:e
" ..rr ; ,on l,1J i '
:J.
on
, r 1· · r l
I
i
','
l
.J. I ,_
-:i.nci ' '
r
J ;,
' i ;
n,,
I
r
t:
',
I I I•
' n
)
,..
!,
l ..
ni (
['
;
-r r
C' J.
{l
T
r
I
in
'· l,
:,
n,
•
.1 '-' ,)
t (l ,,' ,
-' (_;j,
... -
• Ol . .,
• {'
:,
r.
'I
'· I
, : i,
I -•-
L1
f
l .
'
k o
!' r I
' ~' .
Lo
O" er l•
',,
tn
'L '
. cl
(' t
r
· .l
1_1 I
11
I
..)
C
a.n.,
I'
_;' Y'(:,t
1
: 1,·,
·1·
11
ii~
..
l
·t
['1 11
X
11
••
0
t'
• If
'·l, i J,
o'·
01.
l.
"
l
(.) i
r1
I
l
...
0
· "or ·
V
...
-
0 t• (;
.,d 1'
I
frc11
• 1.
Ll
no o Ll1
,. ..,
fl
U •
•
I
I,
r l,.
I' I
,
of
q
L;
,,, r"
l , J'
• r·
, ·1
1.,~
,.
·
... ,1
.
! ['
I
c.tn t,
;
.{
.c
r
,J
0
_,_r
I
'
I.,
n
l"'
• l;c.) 1
(J
,.
i,
.
t
•J.
')
T
ir
J('
QI
()
roL
•!l' "'ri L
.r· ain l
'1.
J
(.
-'· \.,
1,
,.,
Lt ·i_,
I
l
I.,
J
~.
1(
c; ()
_!_
rii,
)
·o
' i
r l jv
L
I,
r·
_. inn
' L
.;_ . O .:_
I
I)!'
·r·o
L <'
T
I
,,
1
" l.
in
I
.
r,J r
,c;;
1
, l l!J. r
n. v .r
1)
_;I_, 1:.i :r·
. ., .
n
f
!T'
d,r
. J
V , ,_; i rl ·r·
l)U ;
fo r L;
'd
,
l ic1
l
ln rx ice .t in
..,•
I
:..i..C.,
C " f'
'l 1
��r
r
3 r nti
,.,,,,'I
r.;10.3·
•.!
,j_
l
-r
n
' I
'·
l
f
,..
I
~l'
)
l
) I
.,.,
l in
_:or'.J '"
l
Ll
I
,-j.,r
,:,,l,
1 I'll
n
..
.,,
,.,. f
c,nr__;
a
J
•.
rn
~
·r
'
..,I
t" l
'1
'
LJ I~
- a.
k
,_
l
IY
r
'i
'
i 11
l'
.
in L11
i:.
• l
,
':...e
.,
L n
1_r
.
,.-
ll
iI
•;(~
l I Lo
('(1
.
)
01'
',
( l
.coll
L
.JC
u
L•
1.,11
('l
.
ct )'l 1 •
-£
1
I
~
~ ...
t
. .,
.
d
nf
i•l. I'
__; r:''1
.I
1
p
JOrl _:
.....
V i lJ
', . ,j .,
r·,· l
I,
I
f ()
r
·ct
,
() l,
•1
.J:•
l
c-,
l,1
GO,JJl J
J
.•,U I
.,.
1r,
I
'() 1
IJ
L
., r
'
r . . ,11!
'f I r_t,f
•r'
.
',
or1
~
~
o:.· .r
..,
•
i_l
.Jr
fo
G
1, j
,
'!·,
,
or
. j -
(.;
L•
;
r
T ,
li
Vi r
r n
.
·'
0
'
i r' t
I,
,1'
C-•
, :>
it
n,
l .L )
I
,I.,
n
L
r
o·
.
C
"t
T
J /_,
,. ;
V
i , ~ •:-i X LC ti. t
i
,
'
i ,)
'
tl f
,1
I
l
.
''•l
i
K
, 4' j
' l•.1.·
I
;,1
i 11
I'
I'O
n
, L
nt.
'IJ 'I Jt
I
', ur
iL
· ix :.
l
,
l l
:,
J
'
L
I.,
r·
•
0
.
lr1a
I
,~' .
1· .•
rt
✓
I
a...,
or ,, '
iv,n
T
I'•Jt
T
C
•
lL
.
.,
<
',0
:
I
L
i_.,n~, ,'.nt
~I
~r'
,..,,
I
I
t
i
·•]."K
1., .•
,
.
CL
tL
,
r·
.l
Li r·n .L
1:·a,
u
er
,
frn,
L
r
1 ; t,
.
,
,
iJ
•
ti._,
r·
'
L
- __( l
10
I.,
:,QI
Lr :
,..,'
j
tl
j
::i(lJ
1
.. . J
T'
C1·0
-·
V
tl'
·r
[.
.
,,
, .,
d T ' on i:.
<•
.l'
r;v
,
r
r,IJ
'
'"
'c."'~ ·j 11
'
, ,
>
,
~
.r
,
• J
r
TT'r
i r.
IC
- - : . ' ,I..
or
, '·l
.L '
f
j r: :rl
!( !
1 I
I
i l Le
I
Ci•
-0
l,
n
r
,,... r -
i
L ,
1
0
.3
J
1
J'
""ro,,s' ,0!·1
JO
· :ctt
or 19 l
0
-
0 I
j
~
ni
r
.d..,
-= .. r
j~ ;
13.'J
I.,
i
\(
'.l
tla..,
.
I
[> )
I.
on liis
• l l _.: ~•v
1i
t.
(J.
•l
,1
'> L.,
- 1J. ~
" r· . V l ;
"
m
•i
r- i ri
1_
l
lc.. c
arr· :J l
JJ
r_
0
L'
L 1.,;,; L . '"' .
,
),
'J. ' :n
nn
,
d.t
jci,
'
.L'
I
..I
.i r
- - 0' ...
' L
!f !''
r . . 0,
~
•iav ·
L t;
I
l
r·
.., 'ct,
; -:, ~
{J
Tl
Vil
fcl
,:
,
'
1..,
0
!.
i
i (l
t
'(•
..,
L
O•
V
1 , .,
.-
l OrJ
·I'
J
t,1
,_n 1
4
n
l
.,
ni
r•
l•
'n .,
. (l I
J
',
__;s in
T
!'
.L'
II ..,
L
• ,1
: i Li
.
��,..
(1
r
L
l,
'
r
j_
t
.r1
i
en
'1
(
' i
T
• .. , • •L
•J
i
)t
lo
.I.
.i
.i
:..I• .)
...
-
T
, I. I
.
·.['Cr :
, i,
r
.:l
O
I
ln
i•
~
_..,,
l,
·f
, ,.
I
'
1
fr ·
L
n
T
(I'"'
i
r]
<.;ou1
, IC'T
f: l'O
.
['
J]
1
I
• 'L,
0
l
i,
('r'
J I
I
nf
i
L ,
..
I
L,
!tJ
n
i,
~
;
I,
I
I
\,
J.S
,..
i
I
rl'U
·r
I
.,.,
I
/ i IJ
I
.,,1
J
l,
I
.
,;
"'
Vi
.,I
I>
' I
,-,,_JU :
l
,
..
If
;O
r
I
l
1'
'
' 1·
in J
,;; . 1J _.
..
I
cu i n
~- ~
t-
, 1n
Lo
i .,
'onv
ro
V
rl(
t
()
'.,
JI
•
ni
•
J!J•1
t • ('..,,
1·
.I
, il ('\_!" rr•n
.;
. ,
i.
/'
_; j
I
1'
r1
r·
I
l,
' ., 1
I
~~ ~
i
<:en
Otl
'
L__ ~ . · , J _
- ~
,,
-- I IL'
f,
I
' 'I
•r
'l{
T
0
J.V
.L
s .. . ,"'
(
of
]
Ot
1· 1
•tl
L
·r.
l:J 1 J
J.. ,_ l'
- l
>
V
r:r· . J
t.
jT u V .
i
! l,
,. , ,
(; i t 1 . (
I,
l
t'
' ,
f;::?- h-", ~ -~~ •
A
J
.'
'.LOY'
1)1•n
r ;t
lr fl
. C- ,
'
\,
T
1
J
a
l • f' ; ,,.
l
io
T
,.. i"' •( ! ' ,
T
I
.
, I
T,
dj
~
J.
- ~ t,
n
'
I
T
'C ~'
r,
,
i
ot
t·
I'"'
n
i
)( -
T
Jc l
C
I.,
(
.
0
l\
.
.,. .,
r•
'
I
·'
!'
11
L
~
,.
I
",
.; i
.L'f
r i,l v
_•_
" . l lv
r ··o
'l
,.... .,.)
').L'
r :1.l t n
T
l
.
1.,
I
I
r
i.. !'
l,
I'
n
I
n
\o,
;:,
.,
l.
l
1)
it
'.l(j
lo,
"n
1..,
L1
~
L'
l
t,()
,;
I
I
.r
ig
I
j
r• \
��7
.
' ').
'.
i
T" 'C ' T
. ,,' r
, t
I'
~-
'
I!
. f' o .
fo l ln
T
l i '1
' i
I
l
'
j
] .--, 'i
('
:- 'ro ,
f'r·o,
1'
r-
t
' I.)
l.
,.;
~
t
(11 1 j
ui dj
"'
•
1
"o r
.
t:•
a. nt
.
L,
f
I
•
L
,
i
.'
T
v:
i
Ll l
r,
I'
'I
J .'".
.L OO
J
f) .
"
r'•
1 l
•
J."
l'
t
,
I •
e., ..
t..
t
J
.Lr- •
I ...J I,
r
l
l
. . a ~ h - , . l. Z
"r ,
1 I
•
,
:,:
J..
.
a. lf
t,
l
;(
..:~
n a.1
.i '
• I
t,
,_
V • !
~'- )
J
T '1
I' i .
l,
r· i L f,
L
1.·
1., (l
r,
__. 1 I
,...
O !'
11
l.'
ir
I
Ol "
l,
lo c
r
,_,
il
r
'I.,
1
f·
r·
., ('
r,
L
.:,
1
I,
j r L
ti..., ._
I
,, n
!'
/
n
ri · .1
' : 1·
i
L>
'
,l
.1 ., ' i
OC lJ
r
•L
0]
:.l
l' j •
t
- I; '_ !
(.J "
t
I
•
j -
! ' .i;
L
iG
L
l,
•
J
l
t . [' i..: -· L
��To
I I
l -. L ,,
j_
,,),J a..,;
. . ,re · •en to r d.n' c, 1.11 ·
1
t~ : '\ llu in _ fu ri: 1
j
i ' i _rl
)•
'i
01·
:1·
0
r. ., • 'u i l
Li r., -.
l.
I.,
_Y
;i
~1·
I,
1
YIQ
0r
i r
Ll
"
(I
of
~,
(; .
.r·
<'
t. r
I
~
-'-1
~ ~~~ P L / ~ ~ 4 .;
-~
~~ '12 ~ 7 ~
tJ .;J
It ,
~ 'v i. ..
~
u
u
1 ~ ~~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ PL
~~ ~
~ ~ ' ~ ~
~ ~
~ ~ ~ 'zfr;/"-d /4
.";;, ~ ~ "4
.,Q ~ ~
I
~ cJ -e
~j~ i;,j ~ '
~ ~/ v
~
<Z.c.-o
J - .. L.'.
~
�...
�9
l'
ic"
•
r•..., _,r
'
t,
J , J
''
rt
- r·
I
. -· l ti I
Qt
\, i
or i
,,
I
l
()
-t
\.
i
I'
I
.
i•
11'
lv 1
,
.. r,
l
l
.;
-,
o f"
(
I
--
r• •
'I
I
lC
, C ,,
r·
i
J
.J
t,
iI
r
-
f
I I
r
•I
r
I/ ;
i
i •I
\
)
,I
.!'
,
n
.L'
00
.L l
...,
I,
C
n •
.C._,
.i
i
r·
·t
t; (
'. ()
r
I
l;
r
11
0
'
' l
1 I ,1
,t )
I
i·,
0
,..
I
I .f.
)"I -1 f
11
i i'.
)
t'
✓
't,
I I
LI
f
'\,
cur
r- l
_;
l
3
l
r I
t,
..,., l. C
,_
•• I CJ
....i
_r;' j 0
I•
, ,· r
,,
' rl
()
l I;.,
I
j -
I
•
J
~J ., 1
i
f
I/
,, f
.
!
I1
(
j
Ci ,
r·
0
i '-~ i
(
,... l
,.,
~-
,_
I>
'l
.,Q
I f•1
l'
'-
r (l f
• I
[' 1 1 <
,.
(
I_
d
ir
j ur ..,
•l
, 1
'
C.
t,
0
Cr
!'
l
i t,:
•
,1
~
j
•r
1
(•
J
1o
. c"
f<
l'
.,
l'' i CI
r
ip
"'
, i •l
(1
'o
_;
.
I•
(__,
nr '
'
l J o"
'
J
1_
i c: ·.
I • I\
l '
·t
Y'
[0 1 • O
I
,1 · u l
• l
!,
,..
('
,,'
,., o ,:; ,
r<l
i
C
l
• 1' v
....
'J
V
,:,
L
l'1
(
C
V; r}
..,
I
t,
•'JO
t
L'
.r,
l
\
n
.
..I'
0•
1
t
co
I.
r,
,.,, (
.;J
i r. j . t
rl
.
,
L
l'
��he Court instr ucts the jury thr>t "rhile the ll'l'l of
th is 8t 1 te &l lcY7S '::. · e rson to make cid e r of r ny stren gt
h
r u it o
1is omn r i s i ng , f or dor.ie stic consu mptio n£
h ome ; t...n d , ::urth e r more , c.110··
rom
h is
O"'Vn
one in his 0Y11 home , to ei ve
a rden
srir its, inclu din5 cid er of more then one per cen t a lcoho
l,
to ~neth er pe rson , or t o ot her perso ns , ye the r i ht o
c,-i ve
0
t o ~neth e r pv rson cider conta ining mo· e th non ~e r ce
n t of
a lco ol by volum e , or a ny other .rde nt sriri ts , cn n only
be
0
eze rcise d in the home o
the jury th~ t
f iver ; rnd ·he
~e defin ition of
which th i: t T?ro r
b e e~ten ed
th
~
h e word home , i n the sen e in
is used in the 1 w in
rnd
our t furth er tel s
his conne ction , c ~n no
oes not inclu e , the outho use men ione
the e vi dcnce in ··•hich t e e cc ise d ~rn:pt his c i e r; r n
1
th'" t i -~ the jury belie ve fro
doubt
he, t the c ide
s.s sho,.·m i
J
per cer-tu m o
~c cused
at
q
fi~J
con ineme n
the e vide .1ce be yond
dis pense d or ::-i ven
f.v.n'
th re fore
et>so::1r.bl,.E}
-,.
y by the de fe 11d cnt .
the e viden ce , co11t ~ined E·t the ti"!le mor
A
8lc ohol by volum e, then they shoul d fin
the
unish ~en
not less then 150 . 00 and not more than ~500 . 00 , 2nd
:m. :ci 1 fo r not less then one m.o:'lth
s · x mont s .
. I~ I "'I_,.,,,
thtn one
u ilty , s chcrg ed i n the indic tmen t En d fix his
0£
in
c.
nd not more the.n
�r
�Th e c ourt ins tru c t s t he jury t hct i n o r de r to j us tify
t hen in fi n i nz t he e ccu s e
9;ui lt y ns ch . rge a. in t he indi ctment ,
th. y should first be conv inced of his gu ilt , f r om th e e v ide nce ,
be yon
[. re r.sonr b le doubt.
i s enti t l ed t o th e bene i
mey r-ri s e f r o
shoul
l'
'1
I n e v ery cr imin 1
r i r-1 t he r c cus ed
of ev e y reasoneb le doubt th ·t
the e v idence, or fro1J t e lac.:: o
evi ence , r n
the Co.:., on-;e ~ 1th f a i l to 1ro ve , by the e v idence , boyon
reasonc le doub t, the f'c cts ne ce s t' r ;y to ·.-:err n t
the.·1 t he jury mu st r e u i t .
~
co nv i c t i on ,
��,Jommomv eal t~1 o:: Virginia ,
County of ?..oc~dni:;;ha~ , to - ,-;i t :
In t:ie Circ:.1it Jour t of said Jounty :
I
The jur or s of the ·Jo,..,u:1on-.'rnalth Jf Virginie. . , i · an5. £or
tnc bocy of the ~aunty of 2ocki ngha~ , a t its Januery tcrm , 191 7 ,
and no·,; a t ten, ing ti:1e ,;ircui .,~ 8ourt o:: said. county , 'JPO..:T '.:.11~...:.:I2
Q~BS Prl~~~IT~ , that Calvin Boar sincG ~ovemo0 l , 191~ , i_ the
cg.id. Ccrnnty , "Llcl. u:1ls. ;fll.11~~ 1:1a:1u.fact-.:i.:re , sell , off~.r , 1-:eep , s-'core ,
,_;..r1d ex: J O Se ::or s al e , 1sive a~rmy ana. di s p ens e a r aent spi 1'i t s
i n vio
l at ion o-: the orohi b i ti on a .; t o-: Vi r gin i a , a g3, i ns t t '1e i)OS e and.
d i g.1i ty of t1:e Co .. mon-,-:eal th of 7irgi·:1i a .
AND .LH B JU?-O:
A::i10_~ ~Sli:I :D , U? J T :i:'T~I ' :;}1.'.2HS _;_FO_ . :SAID ,
~ ~
:r '
... ,
' 1 .
-, . S l. ~ · --!-~
b e 1 ' J 1. u· ' in
.
t'ne
_, - - ,_..,_,__; _,._· '
un.a ./.G vD..
V l '1. .5Gc'
,_.~ i· a. ·i 0 ln./. 1ti7 ( 1- i· d -~
'"' e:'n -----_.,-w""'"'v,ll
Q,... .4--,, .,..-e
n..
.
()._ Sp r=>no,--.
.-:t=-.1.,....i!,.ii,
a..;.
v
a·
.:..1-..-11 _..rL .._v
i·
ve
-...J....,
__ _
a·.-raz; intoxica tL1g cicle:r , conta ·_"li.c.5 :nor e thc.1. one p ·- centu::'. of
~icJhol b~, voLme in vio l atio· , of the proh i bition act of Vi r ginia , a~ainst the peace and f g.n.i t;,
f the Jorru':'.on:i'eal tri of
V.i.rg.i.nia •
) nJ ,~-j
1
~--4,
"'
17
H
1~
_ _,._·. h ,
.J
-~
-
1
,
J ~ -
,
~
_
.....
.._,
.!CD :m:= JU?c0.2.S ~.FO1130!tID , UPON :.lIH. OAH:BS !\.]1 OR~iSAID ,
'JS:5:"';.:-t J! •• '.SEE' that Calvi;'l 3ear since :-ovenbe. r 1,191G , in the
sa i a. ,;ounty did unla 1.7f ,1J.ly ma11c1factu::co vinegar fr.Jm cidGr and
f · u.it a·1a. i.i.id unlawfu ll:l se··.::. , c iG·o ,::m:::;e r.,,ii --;i~'e 2.-ray sa:r:10 2.s a.
bevera~e , .:..n violatio n of the p rohibiti a1 ~ct of Virgl~i~ , againo
tl1e })'31:1ce u1'1 cU '2: .i ty o:: the ]o t110n 7'.::-al th J:f •l lrg.:.. ia .
:::_')
i
1
)~:s in l ictment is fo~nd on the te8ti-ru ny of
7Ji
tn e s ses sworn i n ~ov_rt and . . ent ·oe '' o· e t :a e "'ra nd. Ju·::-y to g i ve
evio..oace .
�Januar y rern , 1917 .
Pr ohibi tion:
.J,
C;orru.non71eal th
vs .
)
Indi ctment
j Ju.lvin Boar .
Jor a ~isdcm eano~ .
t,-
,.,~-. ! -.;,
-·
... r'TJ ,L
c2--v 4 - _ 1 - r , ; / ' ~
.;!'O r eman
.r
1:Iar qr · "" ,jtr·ick lc r ,
Comrr1onwealtl1 1 s Attorn e~7 .
�ommonwealth v . Cal vin Bar e .
I
1UCTI ON A.
rhe cou rt ins tr uct s t he jur y tha t i t
is l a ful or any
er s on o man ufac t u re an kee p for dom
esti c c ons ump tion , at his
ome , c i er f r om fru i t of his own ra i sin
g , re gar dl e s s of t he
alc oholic t ren gth , or t o manu fa ctu e
fr om fru i t , c i der not
con t ini ng mo r e tha n one per cen t of alco
hol , by v olume , for us e
or s a e , or f or i ne gar
I STRUCTION B.
Commonwealth v . Bar e .
1.
he cou rt ins tru cts the jur y tha t the
wor d home as use d
in the l e w her e to be app lie d, me ans
the pe rma nen t r es idence , or
abi din g pl a ce of a per son (oth er th&n
a clu b , hot el , boa rdin g
hou s e etc . ) and inc lud es wit h the act
ual dwe l lin g hou se, or
pl a ce , a l out bui ldin gs commonly use d
and inte nde d for nec ess ar y
or con ven ien t use in con nec tion ith
t he u se of the wh ol e a s a
home .
~'{het he r or n ot the cid er g ive n away by
the a ccu sed
s at
t he t i me of s uch giv i ng of gTe ater s t
ren gth t han is by l aw allo wed ,
II ..,he re the giv ing is n ot shown to be wit
hin t he home of the g i ver ,
and w' .eth er or n ot the giv ing
occ ure d wi thi n the home o f the
ac cus ed are que stio ns of fac t to be de
term ine d by the jury , upo n
Lhe evi de nce .
Commonweal th v . Ca lvin Bar e ,
Ins tr oti on
c.
he Cou r t ins tru ct s the jury tha t a p
rso n hav i ng a home , a s
de fin ed by h l a , and by t he i nst
ruc
tion s gi ven ,
y l awf ul l y
gi ve a ray CIDER , i :c. suc h home :
_
rov
ide
d
thc.
t
suc
h
gi v in is
in no • i se a shi ft or dev ice to eva de
the
pro
vis
i
ons
of
the l av·.
And the c our t fur the r ins tru. cts the jury
tha
t
if
the
y
bel
ieve
fr om t he evi den ce t ha t the giv ing of
ci
de
r
by
the
acc
use
d
,
us
cha r ged in the ind i ctment , and
wn in t he evi de nce , occ urre d
onl y wi thi n the home of the a ccusho
, in t he sen se i n whi ch home
ha. s bee n define d to them , and thas ted suc
sh i ft or evi ce to eva de t he pr ovi sio h giv ing was in no wi se a
ns of t he
\ , the y wil l f i n d
t he acc use d not gu. iltl •
�O'I
l
'I
r
0
OU
.
r
'I
u
u
r
"!
;t .i:
.i:
I
II
0
.[
r
.t
0
.i:
u
!I
_t
o.i:
a
.i:
�C-:.. 1Vi1
V
id..r· ·
i, .;tr·1 ,_,L •J
...- ..,
'" { f'
e,.: .
,__,
1 •
I
,.
.3 - ·
j
~
l.11
l .'
,
...
1
~
13 _,._
I,
•
~
'
-·
,..
(
I
.J
or
'J
...
L
' I'
I
I.,
,..
' '
I
,
~
Ll
.i
1_.
T , r
L
H.;
l .;.
Li e 1
1
~
L ,
,, , e "
l ,•. :.,
/'.>
...,
L
.
,I
I
'
l,
I
. (. IJ
.
v
,r
...,
av ..,
I
>
'JI
l•
1-~
1I
.,
...
'
..,
...
l,
rr
01
.i'
l,
t.
I,
L
J j
Lr ,
I
i• ~ ~ 1· l
,j
~
•
~
ntd ..,
V
>
1 ...
• I
,
.... i
c•
•.J
Ll , o "
'
8
,,'
,
>
1
,r ·
r
~
:-
t,,
I
'
t1
• I, .!°' ~
(:' f
~0
"
1-
1n
-
.
i•
1
~
d
I Jeri
nr ,. ~
- ....
c•
.l. i 1
r
•
•
a
j
)
Iiiu ?Jt
r
V
L
~
()
.
f
'...
t.,
:- ·
11,
1e
'JCY'
,:;., , , en
r
C
j
'
..., l,
L
• --i
i 'I
I.
i rl
a..,
..,
l(e
., v
cl.C
,;c l .)e•
~ 11
I
,
1 t
;::i_
(
of
0
P •
~
•
n
).':?
Q 1
d
,,
I
!) •' .
I'; 1
:;I! '
l C:J L
. () 1
!'
'
a
'l, :: o f•
,.
IJ I
Li ...
'
:. i., 1~ r
l
1,
~
J i rj
j
r"'
'l, '
.. .
•
c t,
.,... i (; ,
.
of
iv r
t-l
3. .,
,
"I ·1.
.
.,
n r.:
l,
.
cL
' 'i
I''
J
""
I
i
I , )!'
Jct
:1
I
~
I
,i
11
'
'
,ri
"
i.o
L(,
tI
l C t, J ,1
J
l'
.., j
I
,
l
_1_
i , i n __,
~1
.:: 1
·on . J .
' -~O
\T
i (. )
1I
(
,,
.
,v
j
'·
r
1
i
~
, ..,
I
I
,
'J
l
'
I
1
)r . ,.
, l"'·
1
-l
l _, H
-r .,, : 1 '4., r
J
,
c.. ~r_; ,
1..
cV i r]
'·
l ! ' 1)
J \,. I '...,
[.:
I,
i ,1
,...
i'
l'"\
''
c.;
,.,.,.
()
· L1·
r1
iI
I
! ''Jl
_\
...
l•
L.,
(.••
r
l, .}
Ji (
; !" ..) ;
t_\ I
'
I
>
,
, l..,
>
,
J' ,
I
or
.1. 1)!1 ~I
' !' •
j
'· l
,,
.t cri1
8
L
J
- ,l· :
L
_,I
,, '
f..1.,
,..
(
J Jr,:,
.
I
'~
r
"( -~0
(} I
/1
I
i
Ii ' 1 i
''~· .I j L
!'
'i C
., 't..l
(.;
'
I
..1 ~
j vc_,:
'
Lr
oL
G
CL
l
_11 ·
,
L
,
~- .
_(jH
...,
l•
)
J
L"'
_, I
V
I
, ... a,
t.
...I
,
(>
<...'fl
, i n ...., of
1'
Lo
'
,...
co ...
to
t' J. 1 I r ' H
'
{ 1,
I
j 1} ·:
l l I
Cl
..
I
r
.
') "':"' -' ~
.
��//
... J
JC1'T.1i
T,J;-';"'
.
f;-p
I
r.
:
'
i
l
;,
r.
: Ln, t,
l •
l' •
1) j
I,
,,1
,
ow
r· i
) • ()
r·r,. i'
'r c;
11
.i
j 1 r .,
'
,Ju
f
i ·_;
I(; '
_::/ 1
:.
l lj'. •
,..
,,
' '
'
"'( •
I
. . .,
,,, a
i l .L, l ~ 1,l f or
,..
1• l '
('
)
,(,
t·.., a.l
I
not
llS
·1
.., 1.
lu
,... .,
() l"
V
.r fr
C
o' cJ · c ;;tr,n ·
r '
C
(_) r'
.:. ""': .., on to
.
""
t icr
_\ JI., .1
, . itle r·
•
i,;
a,
r
_,r,... r
0
I
o
!J.
~
t.
.
...~
, r·
(
l ..'
-l
_,::>
,
I
1f a ... tur~
"l,
('
., l
c _, 1·L
~
I
,.
\F
Pia
',o
•
CJl' -'
l
0
1· .
rl
.n·
,,'
· Lr n ~ Ll
r
ti
0
,
,(
J
id
jn
I
r·1
i
.., (I
on,
:ln
E;
l
:,c.1,
Je ., )
I,
;
J.
[' LC l
re•
.ni
,,'
r
J
i) Ii
s
I i:;l
C
:J.
" ..., i v ln __, of
l c ( o' ol , L~
;j(; Q f!d ,
l·
1·
Jl i
,'
"n
r
nat 1-1:t· ::tl
..,
<.;
l,t w1 1a .
II
')0{1
j
l, l
'I.,
:., i ,, in
11....
I
r
r
r,
(::)
• . 11 1 ·1
i :r· · L3
in
J::t .i
i,' l
or
rf:
.._ ,
l,
I
0
8
1 02 ·
or
r1::: rt I, er
J nr.1
-. r •qn
1
.
;;. ,a.,r
"'LlC1
re
"'
I
•
, ul
n c l,
l·
for· USE:l OI'
0
OJ
.
, r·'· ,
.m~
t · n..., ci ·er c t1 l- o.in i
Lox · c
1,
nl,
.>
.,'
.,
Lr
•
'
fc1
o l l)Jl...,
I
1 ,_;( r ; 1 1) l
ll
•
il
t
r
•o r • or·
:,
i '1
ll .
0
Y)r'
L of
cll'."•:
u.
Lr
a:
I.,
V l_a....,
Y.
! .,{ !
...
,e~ (; i ij ,r
{
-,
()'T
cL•
. ~1·
11
r
C
i
f
•
1 er · ;;;0n to
-1-..
it ,..,i-·
1'"
ta .,IJ -·..,
~!
..
V
{'
fl'\. ' ·,
·'
·~
1/
1""--...
�'
.
�-
,c ... n1
~2.•
he
.. er
t
be
t~- v .
.L,
,., ri
J ..... .j
I,.
--r• .L\....- ·.., .....
, r~ •
c·1rt instr ucts the jur
";.Jli~ d ,
c
that
" ens trJ.~ pe 1 :r.ar.e nt
• ~.1.
..
,.,...
esi ence , c
a pers n othe r than a club , hote l , boar 'nc hous
e e~
tr e act ua 1
-,
l
.1.
i n 0 b use ,
u _d inten ded f r .
c essa
-
---... ~~"v
U.::,e;U
ln the
lcJ.V,
abidi r._; '11::..ce cf
. ) ana ircl des
r . 1.L . e , a l o u t bu i 1 di~~ s c c ... nC'
•
.i
y u s ed
or ccnve ni~1 Luse in conn ectio n ,it~ the use
cf t:ie \Lole as ah me .
,r net the
sue
l d.,r c:;ive n av:uy by the ace 3ed was at t~1e t · r1e cf
lvin._ , of ~re[.. .ter sten~ th ~han i s by lav. e.11 wed
, vhere the giv·n g
is not shewn to be wi thin the h e cf the ~lve
r , ur.ti t
t · e c - not t e
givir .r- ccu ed v.lth in the home o t;:.e ac cusea are
qu stic s of :i.act to be
aeter nine d by the jury , u,on Le evi enc .
1
0
��v _ C .. l v · n
,.,.,. ; Go r L l tl ·
r· ,
t r1J c., I,
,
i.
j 1 ·y
. r,
,:,
.,
~
l ' '
in
Ji
I\
1
i. L t. •l I'
I
i
1/
: l .t
L-.
I t..! 1
t
iG
L,
l -vin "
l
1,
1,
t ru L j ,. n · ., · v •n ,
Pr~v .i •
C,11 •
·V
.,11
t. _;t c l
r, v · s
j
t
s
~1.
l '
'·.,'
V
·11(.; ,
Lll . ~
i1
ivi n
nt
t~
i,
I
I·
£ 1. • L f
l),
3i
1
t,
1
>I'
[jn ,
!V . C
.l
t
L
1
(.;Cl) • '
.'J
c.:· , r·
.•.n
of L
,,
I
tl
V
n t
----' l.., ~1
Ll
n,
'
·1
I
L,
3
vi
ll '
i nn
'
i
f
j () ,,
�..
�ornmonwealth v .
S
Calvin Bare .
UC TI ON D.
The cour t i nstr ucts t he j ury that befor e t he y would be
just ifi able i n i ndi ng t he a ccused guilty , it woul d be neces sary
fo r
hem t o be lieve , f rom the evi den ce , beyond al l rea s on ' bl e
doubt . hat t e ac cu s e , a t some t i me a f te r ovemb er ls t ,1916 ,
a t s ome -ol a ce n ot wi t h i n the h ome of the accu sed (as home ha s
be en defi n ed ) gave a.wa. cider
;,., - t the titre of such g iv i ng ,
\·,,as of great er st rength than one percen t of a lcohol , by v olume .
And t he jury a re f urthe r ins t r u cte d t ha.t while the
offici al analys e of t he sampl es of ci der is c om etent evi dence
t hat t he sampl es of cider analys e , -ere , ecch , at the time of
t he compl etion of the analys e s , of t he streng th certif i e d to in
said
port , i t i s not e vidence of the streng t h of t he c i de r
r om hie
such s amples
c ide r was g iven awa y b
s
les
ere dr a
e re dr vm , eit he r
t t he t i me
hen the
the accuse d , or a t the time when s uch
fr om the bar r els .
The j ur y i n r ach ing a conclu s i on
a
t o the streng t h
of t h e ci de r at
he t i me i t .as given away by the accuse d s h ould
t ake into con s i era ti on he ev i de nce .s t o t Le effec t that may
have been had on the ageing or streng the n ing of t he sampl e s by
t he e iod of time tha t elapse d be t ween the last date o f gi v ing
by t he accuse d a nd t he drawin g and analys es of he sampl ; the
effe ct of t he shakin g and t he change s of temp rature to which
the cider may have be en subj ec t e d in the drawin g and carry ·n g
of the s ampl es to Richmo nd an c. aJ. l t '- ings th at may have t ended
t o inc
ase the stren gth of t he sampl e s anal ysed up to t he dat e
of compl et ion Jf t he nal yses,
�. .r ,.,
,.
'I ...
cf j
;t
,.
::{
'I
0
lI
1:
'I
.t
t
!I
lI "I
t
0
u[
0
I
.i:
9
I
f>
0
r{
.00
I ..
I
l:
I
�Co1.u )11.1ealt,1
I
,
J l ''
r.
I
.
..,
:, I
)
·, .,
i
cl. i
,
I
..,
~
,
f
-•G
•j).
T
I
l,
(.,.l
7V •
l
;J
..1'
· JI ' .i I
..;
,
__, .l i
)
.,
" 1·,
'l,
i:'.
r
I
i.
of
. Vt:
l,
Vj r
•rl
r,'
V
QC
11
i11•1
' I
V
io I
\::)
,l,
~, ~/
L ,
Jf'J I.
i
Ii
;
r,
;J't'
r j
I
(.
l
I
•
''
in,t1.·vr-s
"' .
.f'<;j
I
i
1 ~r•
It,
~
0..c.:;._;1. ("'! e, "
3,1' i
f'I'
-,;
,
I
- --n ·. i
Jf
'·'
t,
in
l..,
. l,
; <::tr -in,
,
~-~
. ."
J
0
j
rrl 8,
,
t3,=l
,,'
-
)/
} ' L-l 1 'j
V
j
o-r·
nr i
r·
j
a. c:rn rict.j o
.,.r· r·• ,,r
l.
'1
1,
.C
l,
j
I. L' .,
rloub
I•(j,.J,SO 1,;_ l ,lu
-'
~I
l L~<l
•r
•
1.
~t (' 1 11
1
~; '
0
( ) or
•
I
I
l,
r ('
j
'
'
------
�-1
�Commo nweal th v . Cal vi n Bare .
Ins t ruct ion
•
The c ourt instr uc ts t he jur y that in or de r t o j us t i fy
t,
t hem i n fin di ng t he ac cused guilt y a s cha ge in the i ndi ctmen
e,
t hey sh ould irst be conv inced . of his gui lt , fro m the ev idenc
d
be yon d a re s on able doubt . In e very cr ·m·n .1 r i al the a ccuse
is ent i t l ed -o the be ne f · t of ever y
.aso n
l e doubt t hi t mE.y
d.
a r i se fr om the evi dence , or fr om he l ac of evi dence ,
d
shoul d t he ommonwe 1 h f i l o p r ove , by t he e viden ce , beyon
i on ,
a r eas onabl e doubt , t he f a c ts ne ce s sa.ry to a rre.nt a conv ict
or if any on e of t he facts neces sary to show t he guilt of t he
ac cuse
i
c on s i tent --, ith a
jury must 2cqui t .
heory o f his inno cence , then the
�.,
. vl
~
.i:
jJ
0
.rf
0
11'I;t .!It
'I
V
,..
n
eu
I
1:
'I.U
0
0
0
'J:
0
f rru •,
.[
rt
;t
. 9
')rti: JIO
'I
.9
•
!I
'I
;t
1:
r A9
!)
;t
.uoh
I
~o
'I
'
:tI t
'I
1:
rf
Qr
.u
'
r
.
�Commonwealth
VSo
Cal vin :Sear.
The Cou rt ins truc ts the jury t hat in ord
er to jus tify
a ver dic t of gui lty, the jury sho uld , upo
n the evid enc e, be
con vinc ed, beyo nd a reas ona ble dou bt, tha
t some of the cid er
show n in evid enc e to have been give n awa
y by the acc use d, afte r
November 1st , 191 7, was , at t he time of
suc h giv ing , of gre ate r
alco hol ic stre ngt h t han one per cen t, by
volw ne: Tha t the bur den of the pro of to show such fac t, by
the evid enc e, beyo nd a
reas ona ble dou bt, res ts upo n the Commonw
eal th; and if, upo n
ful l con side rati on of t he evid en ce , ther
e sho uld rem ain upon
the min d of the jury a reas ona ble dou bt
tha t the cid er give n
away by t he acc use d (as show n in evid enc
e) was at some one or
more of the tim es of such giv i n g, of such
gre ate r stre ngt h
t han one per cen t. of alco hol by volu me,
then the acc use d is
ent itle d to the ben efit of such dou bt t
h at may aris e, upo n t he
evid enc e, and if such dou·bt exi sts in the
min d of the jury , then
the ver dic t sho uld be not gui lty.
��ommon ealth
vs .
Calvin Bear .
! N~TR UC . I0 "
•
e Cour t ins t r u c t s t he ju y ths.t in orde
a vero i c t o
conv in
gu 1 ty,
he j ury sho
, upon
to j u s t ify
e evi dence ,
e
d , be ond a r eaoonab l e doubt , t h a t some of the c i de r
sh own i n e vi den ce t o ha ve be en given a v-m y b y t h e ac cu se d , a f t e r
rovembe r l s t , 1917 , was , a t t h e t i me o f s uch g iving , o f g reat e r
a l c oh olic str e n gt h
han one pe r cent , b y v olume : ~h .t the bur de n
of the proof t o show s uch fac L, by the e vi denc e , be yond a
reason ab le doubt , r e s .... s upon t he
ornr.nonv1eal t h ; and if, upon f u l l
c onsi derat ion of the evi denc e , there shoul d r ema in upon t he
mind o f t he jury a r e a sonable doubt t h a t the c i de r g iven awa y
by the a ccuse d ( a s s h own in ev iden c e
wa
at some one or more
of t he t i · s of such g iving , of such greate r stre n gth t an one
per cent . of al cohol by vo lume ,
t 1',.e be ne f i
of s uch doubt t h at
en the a c cuse d i s e ntitl e d t o
y a ri se , u pon the evidenc e , an d.
i f s uch doub t exists in the mind o f t 1e jury , t hen the ve r di ct
ou_ d. b e not
il t •
�.[
II
e.
.t
,...
o.i:
t
•
("
cI
r
e
r{
d
or.to
·rv
II
t
r.r
I
u
a
0.
r
'I
{
,[
) b
.i:
'I
I
.a
rfo.u
0
J
D
II
t
·;t .tI
,.
j- . .i:
�ut t h e Cour t refu s ed t o give s a id ins t r uc t i on/ F . a sked f or
b y the defen d nt , and· to thi s a ct ion of t he Court ,
r efus ing to give
s a i d i n 0t r u ct ion; F . , t h e de fe n da nt ex cep t ed, an d n ow ten der
s thi s
h i s f our th Bi l l of ~x cepti ons , whi ch he prays may be s i gn ed
, sea le d
a n d ma d e ar t of t he recor d of sai ' cau se , wh i ch i s a cc ordin
gl y done
t h i s 9th d · y of .ia rch , 191 7 , wi thin thirt y da ys f r om the r
i s i ng of
~
the Court at w, i ch sa id t ri a l wa s ••&•a, wh i ch Court a dj ourne
d on
the 1 7 t h d~y of Febr a r y 1 91 7 .
�'I ..
n.t
l
o"
0
J.
j-
ff
.a
0
..
.t
l
0
-
n:o b
0
d
mo
b
.tw
.c .c
~
.t'I
• I.I
r :- .
~-\
,..)
'
'
_;9
}·\
""
....
;
re
'•·. ;.
.:.-$""
"
i\ \,' \,
'I
l
l
l
�But the Court re f u sed to give t he s a i u f ive i n s t r uc
t ions
a ::J ked f or by t he defe n dan t , or any o .. t h em, and re f
us e d to i n vt r u ct
t he j ur y or a l l y s re que s t e d by the At torn ey f or t h
e ommonw ea l tb
a n d ga ve t o t h e j ur y th e t hr ee i n s t r u ct i on s s et out
i n defen dant ' s
il l of ~x cepti ons r o. l; a n d to t h e a c tion of t h e Cour
t i n refu s ing
to ~i v e th e i n st r u c t i on s a ske d fo r by defen da nt , a nd
e a ch of t hem, a s
af or e sa i d , t h e defe.n da nt by c orms el exc epted , and. n
ov1 te ,1de r s thi s
h i s t h ird Bi l l of P.x ce ption s, wh ich he r a ys may be
si ne d s ea l e d
and ma d e c1rt of the r e c o d i n s a i d caa.s e, wh ich i s
a cc ordi nr;l y
done thi s 9th day of Ja re b , 1917 , wi th in thirt y days
from t he risin _ of
t h e Cour t a t wh i ch s a id judgment wa s giv en , whic h Co
urt a do.o urned
on the 1 7t h duy of Febr uar y , 1 917.
�·I
t
I
j:
l
'I
• l
I,
)
'-
'
\
,.
\
�0
"""17"-r'T"
r
I
1r
.•
T"
I
'{T r~r rrT
f"t1'1'1"'
I
n
T11rl i 1.: t,
T
i,
V
QI'
I
,,~
T
.i '
"""· 1.,c
rl
0
· l,
r ,n
,)
.
,,.
l'
,
11
I'!.'
J.
i,
t 1
n
r
l
n
. 1 rl t"
l,
1.,1
· n~o c,
... \
"" TTO't'·
f
I 11
j_
j (.;
l, I
,.
•I
,
I
,
i
-
,; :'111Y"'3
V
L J '? G
1
1, -
n
J:
•
·'
i r)
r l,
ic',1.
r- . , T z·
1
.}
r
I'
j rj
l.' t,
,1
•i
i.:,
To
i
r t,
l 11· l ic L
.CL
iG
.1T11
j
J _. i •l r
1.. •
,,
'3
-
l)rl
r d
i n ., 1
t,'
11
t __ r d ov
L
- ,_; OU l' t.
i
1,
'
l..,'
•
r·.:.-o
.,
I
/4
L •l'
,..
'v
L
i fl
l1·[•
l'f' ,
,,
.?
,
.. -· i ,
i
·1·
L
•
.c,
.;_
i, j O•
,..,
t1 f J.
•
t,..
f'
,
C \llj
•
,.,
L,I
m11 rr •r _
....
(
,..
.]
~
or
ii -'...,
r.
C,
i
-r .
DL/ '
r.
I)
r'J.
l.
c.;
nL
Ot l't
I
•l
J:;)
,, i <-"
,
.
.
(
.
,r
; ~ 1g17
r"f7ic.
.
.,
_O
<
j
i
•
r1•1J.l • 11
nrc il
,;
r'nr1
,
n · .I, l or
i~ i
,
.J
i1
of Cur
.i
c;(;_r•'j r:
--
I
l r
r
I
J.
r
ov
;cJ
,
~,JlJI • i;
- i ,::11
l j <.
; iei
:c -
r
I
]'' l'7
i 01
I L'rt
r'
�.7
,.
�Commonwea lth of Virgi n i a
vs .
Ca l v i n Ba r e
efendant ' s Bill of
•xce ption s No. 3 .
Be i t rememb ere d th t R on the t r i a l of th i s c u se , af te r
the evid en c e ha d been clo s ed a nd bot h the Commonwea lth and th e Def endant h a d r es te d th e a t torney f or t he Commonwea l t h re qu e s te d the Court
to i ns t r uc t t h e j ury ora l l y up on the l aw of t he ca se , and t he defendnt by h i s c ouns e l move d t h e Cour t t o o-i v e the jury the f ollowi ng
f i ve i n ~truct ions , t o- wi t :
�.,
l
l
0
nl olI ...
. .i:
l
: Jl -
o
�/
Commonwe a l th of Vir i n i a
vs .
Ca l v i n Ba re.
Def enda nt' s Bi l l of Ex c epti ons No. 4 .
Be i t r emembe re d tha t up on the t r i a l of t h i s caus e a f te r the
Cour t ha d r e j ec t ed t h e f i v e i n s tr c t ion s as ke d by de fe nda nt a s s et
out i n defa nd~nt 's Bi l l of Rx c ept ions No . 3 , a nd had settled the ins tr uct io ns to be
i ven i n the ca se , a nd wh ich were subs e ,1u ent ly
iv-
en t o th e j ur y as se t ouf in def endant ' s Bi l l of Ex ce ptions ~o. 2 ,
1
but befo r e t he s ame wer e in f a e t gi ven to t he j ur y , t h e defendant
by c ouns el mov ed t h e Cour t to gi ve t he j ur y t he f ollowi n
t io n/ , ma r ked F : t o- wi t :
i ns truc-
�0
- .i:
b
0
.i:
l
o.i:
t
I
\
�o~monwea l t h of Vi r gini a
v.
Cal v i n Bar e .
De fend ant s
i ll of
~ ce t i on } o. 5 .
Be i t r emembered that 11110n th d t ri ~l of t _1i s caus e , a ft er the
e"'.-ido:1 e h~ d c l os ed a n
ant
:a'
a ft er bot
t e ': o".'llmonwea l th a nd t he d,3 f en de
r e s t e d , t he uof endant b y ; ouns el move d t h e Cour t t o i ns tr uc t
t he j uxy a s s e~
0 11 t
i n defenda nt ' s bill s of ex c e pt ion s ' o. 3 a nd No . 4 ,
wh i c h bi ll s a r e h ere r ef err e d to
n d made par t of thi s b i ll of ex -
ce pt i ons , a nd t h e a t t or n ey for t h e Co monwe a l th mo v e d th e Cour t to
i n s t ruc t t he j ur y or a l ly up on t h e l aw of the ca se , but the Cou r t over r ule d t h e mo t i on of t h e def en dant to gi ve t he i ns t r uctions pr a y e d fo r
by h i m a s a f or e s a i d , and de c l i ne d to
i ve t he s ame a nd li kewi s e de cl i n -
ed t o i n st r uct t he j Qr y or a lly , a nd i n l ieu of t h e i n s t r ct i on s a sked
by t ,10 defend nt a nd of t he r e y_ues t of t he at t or n ey f or t h e
we a l t h
ommon -
a ve t o t h e j ur y the i n s tructions s et out i n defenda nt 's bill
of ex c ep t ions No. 2 , wh i ch bi ll i s ma de a pa r t of thi s bill b y re ference; a nd t o
th e a c t i on of t h e Cour t i n g ivi n g No. 2 of said i n -
s t r uc t ion s ~i •en by th e 8ourt th e de f endan t , by c oun s el, exc ep t ed
and n ow t en ders t h i s h is f i ft h Bi l l of ~x ceptions an d pr ay s
s ame be s i gn e d , s ea l e d , en rol l e
an
th t t h e
m~de par t of t he r e co r d , wh i ch
i s a c c or di n _.., l y don e , t is 9th da y of r.:a rch , 1 917.
�•
. .(
cf
Li:
0
.t
0
I
• I
. :;, '
,,
\ ,
'-.
\ '
\
''·
.r
�Tr i
0
ir
r:
r
tq
J
......
i l1
J.
l'
r
t
I
n
'
}17
'
t.
,
)i
I
'tlT
r
f'
,
r·
I'
lb
O-
,1
I '
.
t·.
.(
I
.:,
,,
J
') l
i
r
i ,.,; 1
C
L L'
.
'
n'
!)
I
'
I
I
'.
r
r, '•
l
1•'
·l
1· -
~
t·
r- '
\I
I. I
3
l'
i
oc
,.
i
I
i
in n
·1
j
I [
l
' y,
•i
(' (l
V j'
I '
I"
' .t,'
,,' '
11
l.
j
:.
C
L
l' v
\._l
iI
'l.,
~r
• I
$1).(.;
,.,,
r<
I
r,
'
.,
('
'Y'
u
'I
.,
n· i
_;
0
i
J.
.,ln
I
,.
(;
.l in
• t"1
.r,
in
r,
l:0,
t'
t •
1
i:
'I
't
'J
..;
r,
_;
r-
l
'1
)( 'J
l l
,;;;
(•
:lhP'-J---
,,'
~
i or,
·,.'
or
... '
H_; I
r.
0
''I
J
01
'
IJ
o:
,
,.,'
,,,,
r,
r·
L
\I
ti
.;
,.... ()
r,
,
or
,.
l
() {'
I'llC
• r; [) , ,
r;
\T"
I'
L
QIT
·~
!.'
c.: ~io
t
'
r,
,.. ,.
I I
t
•1·
r,
l
'T"
"
r
() I
r•
!' l '
1
<'
I,;
(Jr ?· 1 1
1 i cJ
n1·1
✓~-
/2/a_a.--;,
~~
��I
J
r,
I
j
T
I
L ....
r,
1 l
-:-,,
,, I
~
r r,
1(
J,.
7
~
I
r ,,
r
I i
It I
.;
l
r
r
,
f
11
fJ
Cl
,.
'J'
.
J
,
•r i I
,:
,J
....
r,
1.'
'
I
.
i.c '
C•
C
I) .i.
('
l
J
l
r
f
'
.-,
I
n'
. ,
i,
...
;j
,;
I)
J
L.
l
'
_)
(l I r
n
'
t.'
'I,
t1.
I
'1
J
',I
V
£'()(_;
j
,.'
.
j
r
l"'
G
...
...
;;,
r·
r·
'
'-"
'
r,
I,
<J
"
I
I,
o,r,
i.,
m,
~
"
l
n
I
(
I
of
1·
0
,,
J
!(
I
,..
t _;
.
J
:o,...1
0 I
f
I)•
'.
() T
•I
"< L'
•I
l
r, ) •
.:;
or
;1 ',
JI
in
n
I
l
r .n
'
•1
l) •
.
"'
(
,; .l)J
'
l'1
t.
.r·
Il
"
[
,
rJ l•
-:,-
'l
1·
'
J
n
i.,
To
r
l '
ii)
'
'J
i.n
;
-
'
.,_
,
·,
L
I.
L
)f
j
I
t
I'
.,1 •r_~
lJ
,, '
.t
i ()
,1
.i.
,1 , r
nr
!'
-
/'
,,
l .I
C< : n
i.,;
(.
I
J
i
3
·c;L
., .
.,
,
.l.
()
C
r•
L r
·r
,.
r)'.
,1
'·
C
~
,,
j
,I
1"77
./.h. /41~-h
��J ~-
~ i •
l
"I
r
v . r! lv i 1
.!.
n
I
f;
t
,r
ill or · x ..,• t- i or _;
·.,
J
I'
Ii
l'
r·
1.
1
' ,
'
11
' ~ f'
l
~ -
:
!
i l' l
1
l_l' (lil
(d1
i ·
I
,.
I
I
I
•
,
.,
l
['
I
,r~
t
. ., _.
._
... ·t -
i c'
C
I
,. ,.,
i,l
....l
r·
'
.
I
•r>(d
,
1I
l
,11 '
C' ''
i
,-.
'
V
J
I,.
l
r
.
i ,.
!'
i l
, 1'
i C~ 1
r, '
I
~
-.
,,
·,
.
...
~
,-.
I
, ....
j
.
n
1
.,' '
I
)
{)
<'
('I
.
..,
',
or
.,..
t '
I)
i
l)V
r
l,
,.,
!'
I I
·f
(.
.,
,.., ,
i ,1 IC•
I
i .-'!
'
.•;
J
.
I
(,
1·
')I I
.. .ioril
('\
,..
t.c.1
• .J
I
I
., ic :_,
i.,
nr'
r-
I
G-
l,
.L
l,
_,
'
,.-,
01"
nil
.. ,
n
I
L
',
--~
r•
<
I
"
C"
.T
,...
.,
i nn
.
I
1' 1?
l
.]
1
11
•
l r
. ,_; l
lo
J
r
-i .,.
'
I
.; (
I
l
1,/
~
·Lion
r)
Lt
r
1•n , )
c'
i (:,
~
I
,.. '
.!.
611
, .,
,:,
l.J
r,
' .I
JC
<
,,
1
~~ -
t·.,
J
i
,.
l•
I
n
I
: _;1
,_
•'
~
0
l i Ii
'
J
(
.
,-.
_; ~
ic·
(
., ic
,...
,
(.'
,
(
o-
':,
~
,-.
r·n .
,., 1
1
.i
•r
i'
I
~
V
_3
i
?
�I
.
.,..
�.v
�}
/
,
�/J [
f(
.
•
.J .,
• {,,L l
I
/J r~.
--
'"\
'?
{'-t
~
'
C; ;
L-
I
•
f ,~, ~
I
GI> - ·
{)fl (y
,
2... .> ~
(3;
Ci
.'
r ,
•
'I l -.
.
,,
/
,
( 1- I
2' (') (' f r
i
I,"
9t..f j . · ·
.i -
0 ) tt
':) (1 /
•
,.
I
J
�.
'
I
•
. I
�~
vs
.
' I
il
~
~~
~=b-&.~
.- - -
�I
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County Prohibition Records: Criminal Cases
Description
An account of the resource
The first series of the Prohibition Records collection consists of all criminal case records associated with cases brought to the <strong>Rockingham County Circuit Court</strong> from 1916-1964. Not every individual was indicted for a criminal offense and many were simply judged as misdemeanors. The cases have been separated and arranged by the last name of the defendant. <br /><br />For more information on the Prohibition collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--History
Prohibition--Government policy--United States
Prohibition--Virginia--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916-1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/7">Prohibition Records: Liquor Inventory</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/6">Prohibition Records: Affidavits for Ardent Spirits </a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4524"> Prohibition Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Commonwealth v. Calvin Bear (Bare)
Description
An account of the resource
Defendant charged with unlawful manufacture, dispense, and give away intoxicating cider. Misdemeanor, Guilty.
This item was originally identified as RcPr-box1-005.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Cider
Alcohol--Law and legislation
Prohibition--Virginia
Criminal courts--Virginia
Rockingham County (Va.)
Harrisonburg (Va.)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Craig Schaefer, Kayla Heslin, Selena St. Andre 2019; Updated by Megan Pullen 2025.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1917
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001_001_011
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
JMU Libraries
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Relation
A related resource
Commonwealth Order Book 2: pages 236, 241, 243, 261, 275, 329, 331
Bare
Bear
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/Rockingham_County_Prohibition_Records_Criminal_Cases/RcPr-box1-004.pdf
17ff4cc66e0aeaee48532944bd44ae82
PDF Text
Text
WA 'R.' R.A ]VT of A'R .'R. EST
State o f Virgi nia, City of Harri sonbu rg, To-w it:
To Frnnk L. D ovel, Chief of Pol-ice , or any Police ma,n of saicl
City:
Where as ................................. ...................... .has this day made
compl aint and inform ation
on oath before me, .J. H . DOv\TNING, :Mayor of said City, t hat
..... ~ ./~....
~
.&.~
i
...................... ........... .................. ............................. in v iolatio n of
b
a 11
ordiuanco of the sa iu Cit~\· :
Those are therefo re in th e name of tho Comm onwea lth of Virgin
ia to comm a nd you forth-
yc't th e sai <l ... ... ....
····················~ k ......~ ......~ . . . ............ ........... ..... ............. . . . . .... ....... . . . . .... . ..
with to apprehend. and br;ug bcft me, or some other ,J ustice,
the hod
to answe r the said compl aint and to be furthe r dealt with accord
ing to law.
G;ven undc~
.
my hand and seal this .. ,"°:.da)' oL .. ~
'. .
/' .............. ~.191 6'.. .
7
.
[h
l r~k~ ~ ;,;:cal)
�.)
:
.lt w
J'r i~~
~
·
~t...
!
r-1
:
>,(J
"'
._,~ t"-
~
ARRANT OF ARREST
4 /4 .10
-~
}t -~~ j~~l j ..J
t~
~ !
0
I
-- ·-;n,Jh~/
.-1-
~
1!::0£~T
-tJl.t--J.,(_,,
~ l ½1 JJ::
,: ]' .'~-1
r
--7?7•
4! ~ 1/~
•.
Surnmons for Defense
I
~
I
ell
~
'
2rn
0
0
.
.
1
fl
~
.
~
Summoning vVi tnesses ......... .
'"O
!~ -~~''l J ~I .l ·J
~
cil
{h .~
~
$............
Fin e
~
Issuing- and Trying \Varrant
~
i
COSTS
1:
l
\
(l)
,
~
CITY OF HAR,RISONBUR G
vs.
/Jll
b.O
~
it-
.
"~
i
~ ~ ~ 'it
,ll
!J j
.Tail Fee
,Vi.tncsscs' Attendance ......... .
Arrest
~
-- --- -------
i·
rrotal
Executed ....................................191.. ..... .
<2k1/l hl(,1. i-~ • i o
}
���
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County Prohibition Records: Criminal Cases
Description
An account of the resource
The first series of the Prohibition Records collection consists of all criminal case records associated with cases brought to the <strong>Rockingham County Circuit Court</strong> from 1916-1964. Not every individual was indicted for a criminal offense and many were simply judged as misdemeanors. The cases have been separated and arranged by the last name of the defendant. <br /><br />For more information on the Prohibition collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--History
Prohibition--Government policy--United States
Prohibition--Virginia--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916-1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/7">Prohibition Records: Liquor Inventory</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/6">Prohibition Records: Affidavits for Ardent Spirits </a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4524"> Prohibition Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
City of Harrisonburg v. Clyde Armstrong
Description
An account of the resource
Defendant charged with unlawful drunk and disorderly conduct.
This item was originally identified as RcPr-box1-004.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Intoxication
Prohibition--Virginia
Alcohol--Law and legislation
Criminal courts--Virginia
Harrisonburg (Va.)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Craig Schaefer, Kayla Heslin, Selena St. Andre, 2019; Updated by Megan Pullen, 2025.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001_001_004
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
JMU Libraries
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
September 2025
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Armstrong
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/Rockingham_County_Prohibition_Records_Criminal_Cases/RcPr-box1-003.pdf
2f76fe6bd7d4eef1a8285346ed1ec079
PDF Text
Text
Commonwealth of Virginia,
County of Rockingham, to-wit:
In the Circuit Court of said County:
' and for the
The jurors of the Commonwealth of Virginia, in
body of the County ofa t Rockingham~,
and
t tending
the Circuit
i ~s b~p~ e moe
r r:,Qow
~e r m,a~~l
b,
Court 9.t 0 sai2:_ c-9unty, UPON T I OATHS PRESENT,. that. Lut her, ~.erey ,
on the~rt/2. 1 ~ ay of -+-'-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,1 916 , i n s a i d coun cy ,
di d 2e ll ci der cont r ary to
against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
AND THE JURORS AFORESAID, UPON THEIR OATHS AFORESAID, DO
FURTHER PRESENT, that Lut he r- ~ere y on t h e ______ da y of
, 191 6 , in sa i d coun t y , di d s ell c i der , con ta i n i ng
_a _l_c_o_h_o_l _i_
n_ e_x _c _e _s _s of s i x pe r centum , in t errit ory where lic en~e t o
s e l l ardent sp i r i ts at ret c:. il he s n ot b een g r ant ed ,
against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
This indictment is found on the testimony of ~
cJ~ ~
---------------------------------,
witnesses sworn in Court and sent before the Grand Jury to give
evidence.
�Se nt embe-:::- ::.·erm, 1916 .
COMMONWEALTH
~l
Indictment
vs.
T11t her ..-'. . ere.Y.•............................................
i
B-9• Feleu.¥,
E:m,c::Misdem:uinmc
,
~
u
d I'"
~ t J '2-a
'~:::r::v::-:-
ATRUEBILL
Harry M. Str i ckl e r ,
comrnonTTeal th ' s Att orney .
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County Prohibition Records: Criminal Cases
Description
An account of the resource
The first series of the Prohibition Records collection consists of all criminal case records associated with cases brought to the <strong>Rockingham County Circuit Court</strong> from 1916-1964. Not every individual was indicted for a criminal offense and many were simply judged as misdemeanors. The cases have been separated and arranged by the last name of the defendant. <br /><br />For more information on the Prohibition collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--History
Prohibition--Government policy--United States
Prohibition--Virginia--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916-1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/7">Prohibition Records: Liquor Inventory</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/6">Prohibition Records: Affidavits for Ardent Spirits </a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4524"> Prohibition Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Commonwealth v. Luther Aerey
Description
An account of the resource
Defendant charged with unlawful sale of cider, containing alcohol in excess of six per centum, without a license. Misdemeanor, Not a True Bill.
This item was originally identified as RcPr-box1-003.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--Virginia
Alcohol--Law and legislation
Criminal courts--Virginia
Rockingham County (Va.)
Harrisonburg (Va.)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Craig Schaefer, Kayla Heslin, Selena St. Andre 2019; Updated by Megan Pullen 2025.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001_001_003
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
JMU Libraries
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/20">Rockingham County Criminal Records</a>
Aerey
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/Rockingham_County_Prohibition_Records_Criminal_Cases/RcPr-box1-002.pdf
07c08fd15b3566be7b4fe744c2a204da
PDF Text
Text
-- .
I N T! ' CI .CU I 'l' C .
Cornm o!1 eal th
T OF ROCKINGHP ff. COUN 'Y , VIRGD IA :
Virg inia
Vs.
U on an i n dict ne n t f ar a mi sdem ean or.
Vict oria Dav is .
BE I T
1
!.nmm ,RED t hat
n t ,e tria l oft is c au
1
mo nwea lth to main t ain t he i ss e upo n its
as a w~t n ess , who test ifi ed t ha~
Coun
, Vi r e; i .ia ; that
_1e
a rt , i t ' o uce
e r Psid e d in -1 to
for si .t
was a t h
om., t 1i n
or c ider , he " did not know w~a
He nr
d'
ou
t hat wh
a v e adde d s o.
ood whe n
h e got t h r
o thin g ~
· '7:r..t call i t "; t at Ced.
was
e wen
d h
was f e .lin er
di d n ot add a ny th in
test i f i e d t hat he was t e r e on
o the rs ,
r ank
.1.
oo
t. e r ; t hat
; t at he
when ne c ame awa
to bis fe ling and t ook
t hat h e c o ld not h a v e car r i d
urch as d t o
He r man Bau her , ao her vitn ess int rodu ce
a n le r , an
1ine w ic . h r
rink ing when he wen
t ; and he f ur her t esti fie
ss
o
Dea e
he r e , inclu c:.i n g
litt le , as ev~r y lit t le bit hel
ug_1 o f the w · ne or cide r whic h he
Mo h ay,
te ~n or t wen-
to dr i nk f om he r , ei t be r wine
pl e.ce ; that seve ral r,ers on s were
n o t h a"'te much effe ct ; t bat h
as f e el i ng
ei
of F.lkt on an d in Rocld n- h
Moubr ay an d the Bau "'h r bo ; t hat the c · l •
the wi ne na
e
1"3
tanl ey ,
r e i e n eon Oun a y 1 in S ptem b P.r 1913 ; t ha.t
c e ts he p rc hase d
went wi h . 1ini to t
oso
Roc 1 ingh - .
i
has know n Vict o r ia Dav is f o
arz ; that s l-:.e r esid .s t hree mi e ,_. sou
Cour .ty ; that h
the Com-
of Se t
1
a ve a f i e cted hi •
i n t his beha lf ,
er, 1
.. r e the r e ; t 1a.t he
urch a
If,,
lon of wine , payi ng t he defe ndan t ~1
. 00 t 1 r e f er ; t ha i
eno ugb of i
it woul d hav e s o,e e f ct ; t a 1e 1as not
R ss et ta l e y wa. drun k ; that Stan ley was dr un
when h
w
en Henr y
d a gal -
you dr a nk
runk , bu t t at
crune and dr
k
wh n he we n t awa , a nd t_-1.at s ome of the othe
r s we r e appa rent ly f eeli ne
t he eff ects of s ome drin k ; t hat "I was fe elin
i t a li ttl e
sel f";
that it wa::; i nto._ ic at i ng 1 a rld t e li quor was
t h . c o lor o. ri n e.
Ceci l Dan e , a no t ~ r witn es
i n trod uced i.n t _ e same b ehal f ,
�''
''
�-- 2 --
t est i f i d t h a t h e
en t t o Vict oria Dav i s ' wit
St anley ; t hat he saw
went
i n w en
tanle1y g et wi ne whil e t h ere ; t hat Stan l e ·· was dri nk
bo ttl e of t e
th .r <:? , an d , j u t be f o e e n t eri no· t:e .1ou se , em:pt i d his
hi.sk e
O
:1enan d oah , b
h e had got t en i n
drink in
t ; t 1a
he w· tn ess
he dr ank at Vi ctor i a
had b een dr i nking a nd that the wi ne or c i der whic h
t heI
T is witne s f
Davi s• d id not h ave much ff ec t , if a n y a upon h i m.
t
ti iP.d t hat Herm an Batg he
as n o
in to xica t ed.
par t of t be
And t h i s was al l of t he ev i de n ce i n t rodu ce d on t he
Co momrnal t h.
r p r .. ,
r eupon t ..e de f endan . , t o ma i n t a in the i !".l sue upon he
s he di n ot s 11
Ylas wor n i n h e r o wn b e 1.alf , a nd test ifi ed t a t
cide r or r ape
Stan ley anyt h i ng , but t at hp did s e ll Bau he r s om
stron g enoug:i:1 t o
j u c whi ch had be en mad a •1eek or s0 1 whi ch W' · S not
On r os s- exa inat · o s. e sai d t h a t th - r a e j u i c
make hem drunk .
le was drunk when
or c ider h a d be en made a c ouple of week s; that Stan
t r ·d of him and gave him some
h wame t here and she was anxio u s t o
a i d noth i n - for it ; the,t , " If you woul d dri nk
he wine , b ut t ha t h
f
Ba h e r h a p i d h er
enou h of i t , i t woul d mak e yo u drunk "; a n d t hat
0
fi f
r
cen t s.
nr
~·oub ra, , anoth,... r witn es s int r od ce
on b ehal f of t he
d was no t fit to
'efen se , test i fied tat it was not into x ic a tin ·, a n
drink ..
i n trod c e
all of t e evi de nc e on b ehn.l f of t he CommonAn d th is bei
te d the jury a s
weal th and on b ehal f of t he accu se d , the Cour t i n struc
ce t ion ro. 2 , Yh i ch is he r ewi t
defe n dant• s Bil) o
refe r r ed toa d made par t her eof .
Jury ~a
The reupo n , aft ,r a r um~n t of . Coun s el , and a fte r t he
11
~re t P- J u r y f · nd t he d e f e n r,ndc r d t he f o l owi n verd i c t , t o- wi :
tnen t an i m ose
da.n t , Vi c toria Dav is , guil ty as charr.; -d i nt e i ndic
,U.~}~
en t 1 the r on b r the Co urt , the
udgm
e
r
befo
~
an
."
rs
a fin of f ift d o lla
v erdi ct and r a nt
acc us ed , by Coun sel ; m.ov e d t h Cour to s e asi de the
was c ontra r y t o the
he r a new tri a l u on t h~ r ou d tha t said v rdi c t
�'-
'
'
''
'
-
�-- 3 --
lmv a nd the e vi d enc e> whi ch mot i on t he Court ov er:rule cl and r ef UR d t o
set a ide sai d verdict and grant t h e a c cusflcl a new t r ial an d procee ed
to en er j d _ ent t h ereon in
t o whic h r u li n e a
a
ju~ ne n
co
ace wit
o f t he C
. .eve diet of th
ju y;
rt , t he accu s db · Counsel
x-
cep ted , a nd tende r s t his her first Bill of Exceptio n, and pr~y s that
and t o eth r wit the e vi dence h e re i b efor e "' e tout
t he s e may be s i e;ne , seale and enrol led a n made a par t o f t e
re co r d , whi ch i s a c cord 'n ly done t h i s 1 5th da
1ithin t hi rt
da s f r om
e e
in
o
of Novenbe r, 1913 ,
t e te rm a t whi c
tried and s uch ve r dic t and j u gment r ende r e .
{I
s a i d c ase was
�.'
�1K-nottt all •~n hg tfl~s~ tltt~s~nts,
1/4· 79-:. .• - -............. .....
'
4
THA T WE .. . ...
........ ...-,rl..J_~ .......................
~
~ he~ • ~
r
und un/Q th,
~
Commmw,alth ef VirginW,
(,
;n
th, ,um ef
'i)
'
L ....... ...'.. ........................~
rft-~ .....
-
-,··••···············/ ················· ·····················• ······••·····································································································•······························· ·················:··············· DOLLARS,
to the true payment ef wlzich, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, ex ecutors and administrators, jointly and
I
severally, firmly by these presents, sealed with our seals, and dated the .. ................. ....... ........................day
,9-::--,.
of. .................................................... .
h..............year ef the Common wealth, and we, and eacli of us hereby waive the benefit ef the Homestead ex:-
r9/. . ..... , and in the ..
./2/~fu( .~. .. . . .[LJ..~
.'J.-v-- . . .... (Seal.)
-.. . /JZ .(; . . . Js~~ .. . . . . . . . . . . ..
( S eal.)
ROCKINGHAM COUNTY, TO-WIT:
This day ..
~
i ..
42 ~~
,. ._. ,. .- , . . . . . . . . . ........
;'t:::;:z;::,:•:::::;::::,;::::~.~:::: : : ~ : h a ~ ; , =,rt~
after the payment of..'. .....
~.... debts, and those whidi ~ .. ..._~7
Given under my hand this .. ..
~
/..J..~. day
ef.... ~
.
$ ... ......•
i4 ~ ~
. security for and expect!?
Duk
.. to have to pay.
(}./ -
.
.
........ ~......
...........
- / U ! ; . ~ ~Clerk.
................... ............ .... .......... Clerk.
e. a. ( } : . .,.
•w-....••·
�~
___
-- -----"'""
\'
•' .
'
.
'.
�I N 'l'HE CIRCUI T COURT OP ROCK I NGHAM COUNTY;
VI RGI NIA:
Corn..11onwe al th of Vire; in i a
i
~
vs .
Vict oria Davi s .
i
Upon a n indic tmen t for a
mis d emea nor.
Be it remem be r ed th A. t u p on the tri R-1 of
a fter the e vi d e nce se t fo rth in Bil l
thi s c a u s e ,
of Exce p t io n s Ho . 1 1
,
h ich
i s here r f e rred t o a n d ma d e p q r t her e of , h a d
b een heR r d by th e
J ury and th i s be i 11g a ll t h e evi de nce i ntr o duced
by ei t h.er p Rrty ,
t he d e f endrtn t
ov e d t he Co urt to i ri s true t the j u r y as fallo ws,
t owi t:
In s tr u c ti on No.
l•
'l'-h e Co u rt ins t r 11c ts t h e Ju r y t hn. t i n A. 11 cri.,
i nal
cas e s t he l n:.
r e c u i res the g u ilt of
t hf:~ ac c used to be e s t a b l ish ed
b y th e evide n c e b ey on d a r e:~.son ab le do 2-o t befo
r e a c on victi o n c a n
b e h 11.d .
S o i n this c A..s e , 1::> efor e the a ccuse d c an be f ound
guil t y
t h e J u r y us t be s A. t i sf i e d b e yond r eas o 1abl e do
u b t t h a. t the de f endan t is cr1.dlty of t he off e ce c h a r g e d i n the
i nd i c tnen t .
Th a t
is, they mus t b e s a t i s f i e d b ey ond r e sonab le d
o ub t tha t s h e rn de
a s a l e on Gund a y a s chRrg ed i n the i n d i c t men
t , a n d t ha t t h e t hin g
sold was Rr d ent s _ iri t s.
ine o r :=my mi x t u re or li qu id wh ich will p r o duc
e i n-
t x ic a t io n i s a rden t s p irit s w i th i n th e ~.ne P.n in g
of
t i e l aw.
Ins t ru e ti_on 1[ o_._ _g .
1'h e Cour t ins tr u e t s t h e Jury t h a t
the Lmv :presu."'Ile s
t h e a c cus ed t o be i n n oc e n t un t il she is p r o ve ~
g uilty b e y ond a ll
r eas onab l e doub t .
I f t he r e i s u p on t he mi nd s of the J·ury , a ny
re s om~,o l e d aub t of t he gu i l t of th e c c u s ed ,
the l rtw m, k es it
t h e i r du t y to a cqui t h e r .
Be r g u i lt is n o t t o be i n f err ed , a l t ho ug h the fa c t s -p rov en a y b e con s i ste n t ;v i
thher o- u i l t, o ut i n
�•
�r
"
ord e r to con11 ict h e r t h e y must be i n con s i stent with h
e r i nnoc enc e .
Me re sus i c i on or
r ob a bi l i t y of he r g ui lt , h oweve r s tron g , is
no t s uf f icien t t o c on v ict nor i s i t su.ff ici ent , i f
wei ght or nr epond er:=m ce of
th e g r eat er
th e e vi denc e s upp or t s a chR. r ge i n the
i ndictment , but to vrn,r r c1r1t he r convi cti on , h er g u i l t
must b e p r oven
so cl e a rl y t h a t t h ere is no r e :t s on able t h e @ry c ons i stent
wi t h t he
e v iden c e upon which she c an b e inn ocent .
To th e g i Yi n g of whi ch i nst ruct io ns , t h e Commo nwe a lth
b y i ts at to r n ey ob j ected ,
he r eup on th e co vr t sus t;i ine d t he ob j e c -
tion t o I n s r u cti on Uo . 2, a n d gave I nstru c t i on IT o 1.
t o wh ic a c t ion of t h e Co u r t i n sus tai ni · g t h e ob j e c ti on s nf the
Corrun orme!l l th
~ i.tv. ~
'
~ ::IJ- y--t o I ns t r u c t io n JJ o . 2 , and ~ refus 4
t o i ~i:i:et- t~ Coi1:ct. a s
p r a:yed for tl,ere i l'l by tl1e d.e fend ..,· 1t , t h e d e f en d nnt
by c oun s e l exc epted a n d t he r ef o r e prA,y s fu a t th i s , he r s ec n d b i ll
of e x ce t i ons
ma y b e s i gn e d. , s e 8.le d an d enrol l ed a s a p, r t o:f t.½e r
ec ord , wh ich
doi1 e t h is
/ ..J~
d ay of Ho v einber , 1913 .
~
~
��..
,.
t'
.
•.. .
VIRG IN A:
~
, /h& r/ujz'}(e'lli& ~a~
Lh&
,oj 4:fiea /6, ,he/d ,at
~/J!a' o/, !!lJadc/4ny
/h& ~o/ ,o/
, MV
16th
J a nua ry,1 914•
The petitio n of Vic Davi s , a lias Victor ia Davis , f or a wri t of err or and
su.perse dea s to a judgmen t rendere d b y the circu it court of Rock i ngham County
on the 23r d day of Octobe r,1 913 , in a pr o s ecution by t h e Commonw ealth agains t
t he said pet iti oner, f or a mi sdeme anor , the unlawf ul sal e of a r dent spiri ts ,
whereb y i t was cons i c.l ered by the sai d cou r t that the sai d Vic Davis, alias
Vic t oria Davis be fi ne d the sum of f i fty dolla rs and co st s, h av i n be en ma ture0
transc ri pt of the
l y consi dered , and the /recor d of t he judgmen t afores aid se en a nd i ns ect ed , t h
e
cou rt bein6 of the opinion that the sai d judgme nt i s pl ai nly ri ght , doth re ject sai d petitio n and refus e said wri t of error a n d supe rsedea s , the e f f ect
of which i s t o af: i rm the jud0 . en t of the sai d c ircui t c ourt.
A copy ,
Test e:
c.c.
�•
�The ,ourt instr uc t n the Jury t ha t in a 1 eri min
re uir c10 the Jui lt
be y .,nd
ri
f
a ,1
tho nccun c- d t o be es t nb ished by the evidenc e
r ~au nabhu doubt bt;;fore a conviction c an be h ad • ..., o _n
t' ;il:' c-:i,e e , be
ro t
s-::, ti~;fi cd bey
d rea cona.b e d ubt t
t be
c ases the
0
f r enc e chnrged i
~el.
..:"'i e d t ee fl ona b e d
a ccused c an be found gui l ty the Jury must be
i
f
the indictment . Tha t is , t ey Muot be 03 tis -
.
t ho indictnont , a nd t hn t t h e
i r; a r dent sri r i ts
t the defe r dan t i tf guilty
:ibt thn t ohe made e. "' l e on Sunday
1
''.' in c or any
2
i ngt old u a ~ a rd 0nt
ture or l i q . id ,,h ich -.i l
o c o.q,,e
~
in
irit •
, r duc e . intoxica ti'"'I
l · t h ·n the .e ning o , t he 1 , .
�..
•
�· · · ·· · · ··· ·•· ·•·. .. .. ..... :. . . . . .. .. .· ·········· ··. . ..... · · · v .
on the ..
'l
e ..a.. ... . . ···· ·····
. ..... ........ .... ......... .... .. .................... ..... ............ .....
.%./. ...... ~.... day o f . , 4 ~ ~·· ···,.,,,,.····• in the year
19~J
,? '----- -
_;I.:_ ~ .2.1 1dt-z j ~
It.. .. .
t
·i:.. ~
. ... . .
,,., i& oiiM@
e8iil Gen ~,
.. Jiz '7 '- I?/.
JkA.?~ . . ...: .... ;; ""d.~ ~ tZ.4J
~~~ =~~~~ ~ ~~=~==·
--(
agai nst the peac e and dign ity of the
Com mon wea lth of Virg inia .
. ... . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. ... ... . .. ... .... .. . ... .. .. .. ......
Gran d Jury to give evid ence .
... .. ... .. .. ..... ...... ... .wit nes ~ swo rn in
open Cou rt and sent to the
. .. ...... ...... ... .... ...... . .. .. ...... ...... . ......
...... .. ... ... ... Cler k.
'
�~
){
""-J\
"'
~
.N
~t
•
r
:
)>
/
-I
-
~
(' ~
I
-n
0
~
3:
-r
t"1
2
~
r
~
~"
'f'-J
............
-
..c.
-r,
<-
)
.
3
30
::s
,--->--.,,
2
rn
m
......._
'."
-
C
}
<,!
.
::0
I{x
(")
0
~
~
~
~
,.....
:r
~
---
�Commonwealth of Virginia,
COUNTY OF ROCKINGHAM, To- wit:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SAID COUNTY:
The jurors of the Commonwealth of Vir ginia, in and fo r the body of the County of Rockingh am,
and n ow atten ding the said Court a t its . # ~ ~ ..... ..
A.
upon their oaths present that.J{
~
•
a
._
~ ....... ..term, in the year 19iJ.3 .,
--:"""
~
~
./VW,A,itf.."'.t...~ .... / ~ ..... ~ ... .~.... ... .. .
on the .. .... ................... .. day of.. ..... .. ... .. .... .. .. .. ............... ... ... , in the year 19J1 .. , ht ~he sai8 0oa&tJ,
against the peace an d dignity of the Commonwealth · of Virginia.
Upon the eviden ce of .. .
/ 3 ~_/'J,(. ~ ~
..................................... .
.... ..... .. .. ..... ... .. .. .. .. ... ...... .. ... ...... .. ..... .. ...... .. .. ... .. ........ witness ... sworn in open Court and sent to the
Gran d Jury to give evidence.
. ... .. ... .... .... .... .. ... ....... .... .... ..... .......... .... ..... ... .Clerk.
�\ U
Commo nwealth
vs .
{
INDICTMENT.
.ic.,..~ ~·· ·~
~
· ·~ -;. !.~.-,...
lfef.21taJ~.··-lM&~·;.·· · · · · · ·
A
TRUE
BILL.
Foreman.
I
/'
~ ~ --'
A-·---::::-
.
/J tJ
fl.-o ,
~
~
��I
L
t
I
�/}
.
V
�\
•
I
�Commonwealth of Virginia,
COUNTY OF ROCKINGHAM, To- wit:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SAID COUNTY:
The jurors of the Commonwealth of Virginia, in and for the bo<'l y of the County of Rockingham,
and now atten ding the said Cour t at it s . ~. ...... 7.. ..... . ... ..... ...term, in the year
upon their oaths present
that./f,.;., ..,.b~. -~
.
19/.'5.. ,
f ' ~ ~ - -~ ~ - - ~ ------------- ·
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County Prohibition Records: Criminal Cases
Description
An account of the resource
The first series of the Prohibition Records collection consists of all criminal case records associated with cases brought to the <strong>Rockingham County Circuit Court</strong> from 1916-1964. Not every individual was indicted for a criminal offense and many were simply judged as misdemeanors. The cases have been separated and arranged by the last name of the defendant. <br /><br />For more information on the Prohibition collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--History
Prohibition--Government policy--United States
Prohibition--Virginia--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916-1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/7">Prohibition Records: Liquor Inventory</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/6">Prohibition Records: Affidavits for Ardent Spirits </a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4524"> Prohibition Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Commonwealth v. Victoria Davis (alias Vic)
Description
An account of the resource
Defendant charged with two counts of unlawful sale and dispense of ardent spirits. Indictment 1: Misdemeanor, Guilty. Indictment 2: Misdemeanor, Nolle Prosequi.
This item was originally identified as RcPr-box1-002.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--Virginia
Alcohol--Law and legislation
Criminal courts--Virginia
Rockingham County (Va.)
Harrisonburg (Va.)
Stonewall Magisterial District, Rockingham County (Va.)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Craig Schaefer, Kayla Heslin, Selena St. Andre 2019; updated by Megan Pullen 2025.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1913
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RcPr-box1-002
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
JMU Libraries
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Relation
A related resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court Court Records
Davis
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/Rockingham_County_Prohibition_Records_Criminal_Cases/RcPr-box1-001.pdf
83ca4050a76b62a4668ea00860f5b170
PDF Text
Text
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County Prohibition Records: Criminal Cases
Description
An account of the resource
The first series of the Prohibition Records collection consists of all criminal case records associated with cases brought to the <strong>Rockingham County Circuit Court</strong> from 1916-1964. Not every individual was indicted for a criminal offense and many were simply judged as misdemeanors. The cases have been separated and arranged by the last name of the defendant. <br /><br />For more information on the Prohibition collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--History
Prohibition--Government policy--United States
Prohibition--Virginia--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1916-1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/7">Prohibition Records: Liquor Inventory</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/6">Prohibition Records: Affidavits for Ardent Spirits </a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4524"> Prohibition Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Commonwealth v. James Crawford, Sr.
Description
An account of the resource
Defendant charged with the unlawful sale of ardent spirits, labeled "Indictment No. 3". Misdemeanor, Guilty. Defendant petitioned for writ of error and supersedeas, which was rejected by the court.
This item was originally identified as RcPr-box1-001.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prohibition--Virginia
Alcohol--Law and legislation
Criminal courts--Virginia
Rockingham County (Va.)
Harrisonburg (Va.)
Veterans--Confederate States of America
Stonewall Magisterial District, Rockingham County (Va.)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Craig Schaefer, Kayla Heslin, Selena St. Andre, 2019; Updated by Megan Pullen 2025.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1913
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Pro001_001_001
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Rockingham County Circuit Court Court Records
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
JMU Libraries
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/20">Rockingham County Criminal Court: Criminal Cases</a>
Crawford
Ellis
Gooden
McDaniel
Shifflet
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/54b41d21ae2944a7de6fd33af8ec41c8.pdf
f35257b71d940d52a0d8b8971e86430f
PDF Text
Text
filed in the Clerk's Office
8gckingham County, Va.
JUL f- 0 1933 f : 80 ~,,..;.
AFFIDAVIT OF A. C. CARSON
DATED MAY 23rd., 1933.
---...,1,
RE. GENERAL.
This affidavit is ma.de at the request of the State Commissionon Conservation and Development of the State of Virginia for
file with the record in all or any of the following Public Park
Condemnation proceedings pending in the Circuit Courts of the Counties of Virginia in which said Commission is Petitioner and in which
the defendants are as follows:
Virginia Atwood, et als, etc., in
Ada Abbott and others, etc., in
the Circuit Court of Warren .County;
the Circuit Court of Page County;
Clifton Aylor and others., etc., in
the Circuit Court of Rappahannock County;
Armentrout,
ers, etc., in the Circuit Court of Greene County;
c.
E. and bth-
Archer, A.
others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County;
w•.,
and
Cassandra Lawson
Atkins, et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Rockingham County;
w.
L.
Arey and others., etc., in the Circuit Court of Albemarle County: D. F.
Anderson, et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Madison County.
It is my upderstanding, purpose and intention in making
this sworn statement, that the said Commission may, in its discretion.,
file and submit the same in support of its prayers, motions, answers
and contentions submitted in the course of all or any of the above
mentioned condemnation proceedings, including its answers to the
several motions by claimants and landowners in the several above mentioned condemnation proceedings., praying the respective courts to
decline to accept or to disapprove the respective reports and findings
of Special Inv es tiga tors and Boards of Api:r aisal Commis s ioners appointed in the course of the said condemnation proceedings:
-1-
�My name is ! .
Riverton, Virginia.
c.
Carson.
My post office address is
I am a brother of William. E. Carson, the
Chairman ·of the State Commission on Conssrvation and Development.
I am an attorney licensed to practice in the Courts of Virginia,
and one of Counsel for the Petitioner in the above mentioned
condemnation proceedings.
Due in part to the ill health and inability of Mr. Armstrong to give the matter his personal att~ntion, I personally
drafted each and every affidavit which has been executed to date
at the request of the Petitioner for use in connection with the
various exceptions filed to the reports of the various Boards of
Appraisal Commissioner s in these proceedings except only the
affidavit prepared by Mr. William
c.
Armstrong, who is the At-
torney of record for the Petitioner.
The statements set rorth in these affidavits are statements which the persons who executed these affidavits informed me
personally they could and would make under oath, with reference to
the matters mentioned in the affidavits, these statements being set
forth as precisely and succinctly as the time and conditions under
which they were made would permit.
Referring specifically to the affidavits made by the several secretaries of the various Boards, these affidavits were
drafted by me with no aid or intervention or any person whatever
except the respective secretaries and the stenographer s who typed
t he affidavits.
When these affidavits were prepared, I had only a very
slight personal acquaintance with any of these several secreta ries.
-275
�Two of them l had met, but only knew them very slightly when they
came in to make their affidavits.
The third I knew rather better,
but I had only seen him on a few occasions.
Mr. Levi, I knew better,
having attended for a short time two or three hearings of the Warren County Board, and having met him on several occasions both
before and after his appointment on the Warren County Board.
my acquaintance with him has never been extensive.
But
I have never had
any business or any other relations with him whatever, beyond those
that have arisen out of his connection with these proceedings and
my occasmnna.l contacts with him since the date of his appointment,
which were infrequent.
I did not know any of the members of these
Boards before they were appointed, and I have met none of them except perhaps Mr. Levi, more than half a dozen times since that date,
several years ago.
They came to the Park Offices in Front Royal, by invitation of counsel for the Petitioner to make affidavits as to the
proceedings had before them, in connection with the answers Counsels
expected to file to the exceptions to their reports, and -their
statements were made to me and to me alone and by me drafted without
aid, suggestion or intervention of anyone, and set out in form of
the affidavits executed by them.
I had attended altogether, not more than half a dozen of
the hearings conducted by the various Boards and at the time I
drafted their affidavits I had had neither personal or official
relations with any of them which might have made it possible for
me to exercise any undue influence over them or any of them had I
desired so to do.
-31h
�Certain it is that I had no desire to influence them or
any of them to make any false statement , or to make any statement
of fact not in exact accord with their own recollect ion of the
facts as they knew them.
My acquaintan ce and relations with the members of the
four different sets of Appraisal Commissio ners was practical ly
limited to the quite formal occasions on which, in pursuance of
a suggestio n of Judge Williams to the ~arren County Board that
the Commissio ners might or should require counsel for the petitioners to draft their reports, I undertook to do so and necessari ly
discussed .their findings with them, but only to the extent necessary
to ascertain what findings they _had made and set them out in my
draft, leaving blanks in my draft for the entry of the findings as
to value of the various tracts and of incidenta l damages which the
different Boards were careful not to disclose to me, and which in
fact, I did not desire to know until they themselve s had had these
figures inserted.
Although I took no active part in the hearings had before
the various Boards and attended only a very few of those held in
Warren County I acted as Counsel for the Chairman of the Commissio n
on Conserva tion and Developme nt throughou t the whole course of
these proceedin gs.
From the beginning I fum.pressed upon him the vital necessity of having all the proceedin gs conducted with the fullest recognition of the rights of the owners and claimants of the lands i n
the Park area .
I joined him in advice to Counsel in active charge of
the proceedin gs that no attempt to take advantage of any of the
claimants or owners should be made by the presenta tion of techni-411
�cal objectio ns to the evidence on the ground of incompe tence, immateria lity or irreleva nce.
I urged upon Counsel
that in the
course of the proceed ings, they should take pains to submit at the
public hearing s to the various Boards, the correct rules or procedu re
and correct princip les upon which condemn ation proceed ings and
apprais als in condemn ation proceed ings should be made.
I pointed out that the whole success of the undertak ing
to condemn the Nationa l Park area depended upon the absolute fairness with which the Petition er, his counsel , agents and attorney s
should conduct their part of the proceed ings.
I advised Mr. Carson that he should have all his agents
and employee s instruct ed to avoid discussi ons or referenc es to
the testimon y or to any question of value of lands sought to be
condemn ed outside the public hearing s.
I pointed out to Mr.
Carson that the entire proceedi ngs would be end.ange red by even
the appearan ce of evil.
I know that ~r.
w.
E. Carson was in en-
tire s-ympathy with my position in this regard and that he instructed his attorney s, agents and employe es along the lines
suggeste d by me.
My attentio n was called to the fact that on occasion s
the attorney s, agents and employe es of the Petition er travelle d
in the same automob ile and sometim es dined at the same hotels as
did differen t members of the Boards while engaged in the perform ance of their duties. I expresse d it as my opinion that, under
all the circums tances, occasion al instance s of this kind could
not vitiate the proceed ings, but in such cases, the attorney s
and agents and employe es of the Commiss ion should be instruct ed
-5-
�r
to exercise extreme prudence inmaking any references whatever .
to the pending proceedings.
I,myself, however, bad a personal experience which
quite clearly indicated to me the practically unavoidable nature
of such contacts.
I accompanied Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Marsh to
Stanardsville to the Court where Judge Smith was then sitting.
We went there in connection with some instructions which Judge
Smith had under consideration for the Board of Appraisal Commissioners in Greene County.
At the luncheon hour, Judge Smith
suspended the proceedings for half or three quarters of an hour,
and the Commissioners in that County, Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Marsh
and mysel:f' all repaired to the hotel where we dined in the same
ball, .and as it chanced at the same table with Judge Smith at
which there also were seated 9ne or two of the Commissioners.
It would have been necessary for either the Commissioners
or the attorneys or the Judge to have gone without their meal that
day had they not repaired practically together to the hotel and
dined at such vacant seats at the dining tables as they could find.
Neither Mr.
w.
E. Carson nor I had or have offices in
Front Royal, although, of course the office of the Supervisor of
Parks is the office of the subordinate of Mr.
w.
E. Carson who
is Chairman of the ~tate Commission on Conservation and Development.
Our offices and our business are located at Riverton,
Virginia.
However, both , of us not infrequently went to the
Park Office and the office of Messrs. Weaver and Armstrong, Attorneys foE the Petit~oner, for the purpose of following the con-
-6-
�demnation proceedings, and in that way we kept in quite close
-·
touch with the course of these proceedings.
Witness my signature this 23rd day of May, 1933.
00
�\__ '
./
STATE OF VIRGINIA
)
( ss.
COUNTY OF WARREN
)
Person ally appear ed before me, the unders igned Notary
Public in my said State and County , A.
c.
Carson , whose · name is
signed to the forego ing statem ent, and who being duly sworn,
made oath that the matter s and things set forth therein are true
to the best of his knowle dge and belief .
Witnes s my signatu re and Notari al Seal this 0
s -v'tfl--.
day o f ~ , 1933.
&~%.~SEAL)
My Commission Expires Decem ber .:1
al
�Filed in the Clerk'~ Office
Rocklngham County, Va.
JUL ?,-tJ 1933 j'-' 8 "' tv
.g
1
,,,,,,_;,
AFFIDAVIT OF Wm. E. C A R S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ k 1933.
RE. GENERAL.
This affidavit is made at the request of the State Commission on Conservation and Development of the Sta te of Virginia for
file with the record in all or any of the following Public Park
Condemnation proqeedings pending in the Circuit Courts of the Counties of Virginia in which said Commission is Petitioner and in which
the defendants are as follows:
Virginia Atwood, et als, etc., in
the Circuit Court of Warren County;
in the Circuit Court of Page County;
Ada Abbott and others, etc.,
Clifton Aylor and others, etc.,
in the Circuit Court of Rappahannock County;
Armentrout, C. E. and
others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Greene County;
Archer, A.W.
and others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County;
Cassandra
Lawson Atkins, et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Rockingham
County;
W, L. Arey and others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Albe-
marle County;
D. F. Anderson, et als, etc., in the Circuit Court
of Madison County.
It is my understanding, purpose and intention in making
this sworn statement, that the said Commission may, in its discretion, file and submit the same in support of its prayers, motions,
answers and contentions submitted in the course of all or any of the
above mentioned condemnation proceedings, including its answers to
the several motions by claimants and landowners in the several above
mentioned condemnation proceedings, praying the respective courts
to decline to accept or to dis~pprove the respective reports and
findings of Special Investigators and Boards of Appraisal Commissioners appointed in the course of the said condemnation proceedings:
-182..
�P.iverton , 7ir _;inia.
l:y nost office address is
,. Ca . tson .
m.
ry name is
I am Chairman of the State CommisRion on Con-
servation and Development of Virgh'iJ , the Petitioner in the a ove
mentionel coL~~mnation uroce~ 1 iriu" , ~na the "representat ive , a ert ,
an
attorney" of the Petitioner in thes
roce cings , duly d.ecig-
nate1 and a prove-1 un er autho ..:i ty of the nrovisions of Section 24
of the Public Pa1·k Condemnation .. ct .
As such a::;ent and representativ e of the Peti.tioner, I
the a )OVe n ,ntione . cone cr:ma-
ins ti tu tea_ anr have since maintaine
tio 1
rocee 1 ings on behal
of the State Comnission on Conservation
and i)evolopment.
I placel I~r. S. H. I'arsh (7irector of Public Par :s of
the St te of Virginia) in
ircct charge of the activities of the
Petitioner looking to the condemnation and acq_uireme-nt by the Commission of the lands described in the :petitions · ile 1. in the above
mentioned. con emnation procee lings
or use as a
ublic
ark or ·for
public parl: purposes .
Before inst ucting him 7ith this highly responsible
uty,
I carefully in uired into hi: character , e1ucation , training experience , general reputation , and ~ualification s , and satisfied myself that he is a man of excellent moral character , ana eminently
fitted by reason of his e ucation , training and urofessional q_uali fications for the
an
erformance of the
uties thus imoose1 upon him ,
I am today v1el 1 satisfied that no better selection could have
been made.
I arvised Mr •. !arsh thnt it ·e.s the
mission that he shoul
esire of "he Com-
employ as assistants none but men
- 2-
of knovn
�honesty and. integrity, of goo
moral character, and fully equip~ed
by education and experience for the work which 'rould be re ~uired of
them; that with his assistants it would be necessary for him to
make an intensive study of the area we nroposed to acquire in condemnation proceedings; to map and to classify and annraise the various
tracts of land of ~iverse ownership within the ares; to ascertain the
acreage within each of such tracts , and to ascertain and tabulate the
various types of soil in each such tract; the acreage and value of
the timber and grazing lands , agricultural lands , buildings and. other
improvements , and of the mineral bodies and mineral rights, in such
tracts, and of all the elements of Value making un the total market
value of the fee simple estate in each of such tracts.
I personally instruced Hr. Harsh and his principal
assistants , (and I directed Ur. Marsh to instruct all his assistants) to the effect tmt in preparin g and assembling such data and
tables of value, and in annraising all elements of value , and in
testifying thereto before the several Boards of Appraisal Commissioners absolute fairness and. justice to the land owners and claimants
should always be the
r ime consideration controlling their activities;
that no unfair advantage should be taken of any owner or claimant ,
i
and that on the contrary every factility should be extended to all
owners and claimants to assL3t them and to enable them to secure a
full and fair hearing upon their cle.ims; that no evidence or testimony
should be submitted by the a.gents , re:presentative-e , emnloyees , or
witnesses for the Petitioner except such as would tend to develop
the fair and honest values of the lands sought to be condemned;
and tha.t the Commiss ion , being an agency of the State, would prefer
-3B'J
�that if any error should be made in submitti ng evidence as to values ,
or in the ·finding s of the Boards of Anprais al Commiss ioners and t~
Courts as to such values , such error should be on the side of liberality to the claiman ts and owners rather than that any owner or claiman t
should be deprived of his lands without full , fair , adequate a.nd
just compens ation.
I know of no case in which these instruct ions were dis regarded or disobeye d, and I believe that the an:prais als of va.lues
. made by Mr . Marsh and his assi s tants carried out the spirit and in tention of these instruct ions, to the best of their skilled knowledge and understa nding in the performa nce of their duty in this
regard.
In like manner , I made it clear to counsel for the Peti tioner, that it was the policy and uurpose of the Commiss ion that
no technic al or legal advantag e should be taken of any claiman t or
owner, and that , on the contrary , counsel should a.t all times cooperate with the owners and cla.iman ts and the various Boards of
Anprais al Commiss ioners to the end tha.t the fair , just and adequate
value of all the lands within the Park area might be duly ascertai n ed and determin e 1 , and reported .
In giving instruct ions to Counsel and other a~ents
or represe ntatives or employe es of the Petition er , I took nains
to emphasiz e the fact that the Conserv ation Commiss ion is an
agency of the State and that the proposed condemn ation -proceed ings were being maintain ed for and on behalf of the State and
that there v1as therefor e a moral obligati on and a clear duty
on the Petition er and all its agents and represe ntatives as well
-4-
�as upon the Courts , the Boards of Appraisal Commissioner s , and other
officers of the Courts , to retognize and protect the rights of all
owners and claimants of lands within the area sought to be condemned
to have the lands owned or claimed by them justly and fairly valued;
and that whether these owners or claimants aupeared in the proceedings or not , it was the duty of the Petitioner and its Counsel and its
other agents and representativ es to procure and submit all available
evidence necessary to establish the fair market value of such lands ,
whether this evidence tended to raise or to lower their ovm estimates
of the values of these lands.
I especially emnhasized the duty on
the Petitioner and its Counsel and its agents and representativ es
to be fair and just in appraising and submitting evidence as to
lands for which no owner or claimant appeared in the proceeiings ,
and lands whose owners , by reason of poverty or ignorance , might
not be able to procure and submit all the available evidence in
support of their claims.
I insisted that in all such cases, it
was the clear duty of the Conservation Commission and its Counsel
and other agents and representativ es just as it w~s the duty of
the Courts and their officers, inc , uding the Board of Anpraisal
Commissioner s, to do everything intheir power to prevent injustice
being done , and to aid such p ~or or ignorant owners in establishing their claims to just compensation .
There ''ere a considerable
number of claimants and owners who did .not file their claims in the
time allowed by the orders of th~ resuective courts, and in every
county there are some ovmers and claimants who, through ignorance
or indifference, never have filed claims or apneared at the
- 5-
�nublic hearings to testify as to the value of the lands in
which they
01m
or c_laim some right , title , estate or interest .
I was advised in the couxseof the nroceedings thst in a limit ed number of cases where the ovmers did file claims and a-opeared at the public hearings , the testimony and the evidence sub mitted by them was so vague , or indefinite or unsatisfactory as
not to be sufficient to sustain specific findings of values
as high as Counsel f or the Petitioner was ready to ad.mi t , or to
which they were clearly entitled on a mere inspection of the
lands claimed by them, and upon learning thst such was the case ,
I reiterated the above set out instructions , and directed Counsel ,
and M1~. Harsh , who was in charge of the proce . dings , to do everything in their power to make certain that the
npraisal Comri.ission -
ers were advised as to all the facts as to the value of the lands
cla,imed by such persons , when submitting evic1ence on behalf of
the Petitioner .
I YJ1ow of no instance in 1hich any person or persons have
sought to use or have used any undue influence in an effort to
induce the Boards of Anpraisal Commissioners or their respective
members , or any of them to bring in £inrings of less than full
and adequate values s.nc1 himages; and I k:novr of no person or persons
vho have or have ha.cl either the means or desire or motive or
purpose Sott o influence or afTect the fin ings o= the various
Boards.
As an officer and part otmer of the Riverton Lime
Company, ~iverton , '.firginia , and its prec1ecessor in interest ,
- 681 ,
�the Carson and Sons Lime Comnany , for many years one of the J.a,rg-
.
est consumers of forest :products for fu~l and manufacture into
staves and straps , in Forthern Virginia, I have had wide exoerience
in buying lumber and other forest nroducts , and in buying , leasing
and cutting wood and forest lan sin , and in the vicinity of the
lorthern section of the proposed Park a~ea , an
similar lands in
lforthern Virginia.
As Chairman of the State Corvnission on Conservation and
;evelopment "Thi ch il eludes the ·:io:restr:y Di vision , I have mare extensive cxaminatio:1 an
study of the · orestry resources of the state
of Virginia , ]nd of the economic values of the forest land3 in the
Blue :1idge Jfountains , inclur ing most o-f the lands 1 ·i thin the Park
area, and of the standing timber and the pocsibility of the future
development of the timber on these lan ds.
I have also had a q_ui te extensive experience in 1 Tarren
County, Virgir:;ia , in the construction and leasing of houses _a.nd
tenements for myself and fo · the Riverton I,ime Company; the planting ,
development and management of a commercisl a.nnle anrl peach orchard;
the ~razing an
~attening of cattle in , qnd in the vicinity of the
Park area in larren and Ranpahannock Counties.
I believe the ref ore that I
~ave s sou-1d o.nd relatively
ex-~ensive experience in han'1 lin3 lan s anrl im rovements thereon
sir.r1ilarly located and in every resuect similar to those "ithin the
area :::ought to be cone ermed in the a 1ove mentioned proceeiings.
1
I
have follo 1ed ~uite closely the course of these nroce~nines and
I am "1.Uite fuJ.ly and accurately in ormed as to the J:lnasures ts.ken
by the agents of the
eti tioner in manning a.n
-7-
L
a:o---ir8.isins the var-
�ious tracts V'i thin the Park area in the sever~l counties .
I am convL. ced that the a·opraisal vaJ.uns place
lands and the ir:rnrovem Jnts the r on by
r.
farsh an
on these
his ass ista11ts
were and a.re u.ri.ifo:rmly liberal and. generous and. in most instances
substantially hi~her than the actual cash marY-et vaJ.ue as o·
or as of any time vri thin the last thre
todny ,
years , or as or any time
vi thin the future ·1hich can reasonably be anticipated.
I am , and.
have be n · of opinion that in r:11:11::.in · these relAti vcl y high ai:mraisal8
of values for submission in cviclence to the V1<rious "Boards , 1·r .
Harsh anrl his assL~tants , v1ho had wide experience in the nea.eral
orest Service verc uniformly ~iPuose1 to a nraise these land~ at
more than their actual cash nark.ct 7alue , by :rea~on nartly of PJ.y
insistence that t ey ::;ho"'.1ld be
their a pr'"'i:::als; anr
"l')Ei't
iber'"'l rat"h~r than ni~Garrlly _jn
y oy 1·ea on o-f their lon,c;
0
in tho federal service in buying lands
by
1
stun
or the U. S.
irect n-1 otiationr '·i th the o ·rrers ani clai"iants.
; t the prices .emand.ei. ani paid i·or the U. S.
v•ere narl,e ··ith the:::. o'"l
for the
1
J::p<>rienc
ore st ~ese:ri;reP ,
s I ur erore st ~ecerves
,_:c that Yast sums harl been c..n ropriate
urchase o f these lsncls in the sect ions in which the U. S .
_ orests wer"' to be establisho
anr
elseHhere; vhereas there has
not been and there is no in ic~tion that the United States has
contemplated or would contemplate the nurchase of the lands •ith in the propose'.l Park area; and in the al)sence of suc:t. a J)rosp ctive
buyer , the actual market value of the lands in the Pa·,...k a"~ea is in
my opinion much les"' than the oe,rket value for simila1· lanr s in
the areas in Irortr..c:"!1 Virginia sn
for
u. s.
else vhere sought to be acg_uired
~orest Jeserves.
- 8-
�mhe lands v•ithin the Pa·k a:rea
:re r10:r
or lesc r~-
n s ~or 9uch lan1s is
slm::.:oly ru1'l cl..ef'in i tely lir--i to
1:iy reason of th<"Jir locot ion.
1nly in s limited mmber of cases rlifl. any of the
fin
)oards
"ralues or .ar1ages less in amount than thos"' set upon th . .
s
J.911
1)y Ir. Harsh and. his assisto.nts; ,g.rnl in the grca,t rna~ority of cases
tneir fi,1r ino-s of value '."er"' more or less su st ntielly hi'"':her than
the uniformly liberal estimates of Hr. Harsh and his assistants.
I an. satisfied that the uniform tendence of all the
:3oards of .. ppr3isul CorriI icsion0rs "as to T'1ake extromcl, liberal iin
0
even gen-rous findings as to values an. 1 nages , ~nit at in m9ny
crases t~eir fb 1in~s arc subst·nti•lly in excess of the ~ctual cash
ma~ket value of ~he lands in question.
Some of the excentants to the va
U"'S
founrl by the various
,
Boards indulge in vague intirnr+,ions or alle2:atio11s to the e ·feet that
these "3oard.:s: V:'ere unduly influenced. by the P, ti ti oner, or
:1 t}1P.i:r
esir~ to see the nrouosed Public Par c establiPh0-'I, to bring in
01•rn
101_r:
and inadey_uate !"indings of value in ora_er thct t::-1e fu, s aY)nropriq,te
by the state an .
available fo ·" the · urchaf'
suf·icient to enahle the Petitioner to ac·uir
o"' t _.-, Pe la.n s ;-rii ~-·ht be
th~~ cac~Pr~ .
~
0
for ".:ihe: Park.
:;r e
entire lack of foun
q'
i
'"'1'.1
-"o '" such intiri9tions an
allegations is clesrly shown by the fact th2t the total amo1P"'t r ...
porte
+-h
v cm \• as
y a 1 the '9o r s
8.S
th'J
7
1
1
'
o
all the lan s an rn isc'1 by
,
..., , 8,..-8
..., , 7°,._, 0._, • 5,-.J, "J1creas
the v:-l'l" set 'l'1on t-ies .,
~!.r,:
and t'1 i'J as I have already indicate
many cases av
was in itself' a liber~l , n
in
y n~nerous en~r~ical.
-9qo
�So ln:::\; lv ' i
the total valu~s
-0
acJ
on trr
n s
-, isal
Cor~issioners excee
the pr liminary estimates of the valu~s o~
these lands and the liberal values as estimate
Jchc ~xperts "'IDployvs.. by ~:;he
rnl a'.J~r ise
eti tioner "or th.,.t
v..-,1ues ilace i on these land.s by the
17
by
urnosc , an
i tncsses calle
by th
the
P -ti -
tio11 J:::- , th8.t it became necessa y to procure the nassa. e of an
·Act
O.J.
Con 6 ress rcr1ucing the original acrea J·e of 326 , 000 acres
prescriber as the "'~inimurn "or the propose
acres, so thaJj t;h
furr1_E
a propriate
anc availai.Jl
poses ni ·ht . e c 1 ..!'.'icient to acq_uire th"'
ana_ det :r~'ine
values ascertaine
Fational Pa-·k to 160 , 000
resc:ribe
~o:;_·
'"'rk nur-
-;-:1inimun1 at the
by the va:m.ous Boar s of
.ppr"' is'-11 Cornr.1issioners as sho""n by their r spective ·rork sheets
submitted to the Courts in the several counties in the curse of
the proceedin 6 s.
ri.1 he lands o rit.5inall~r
SOP81
"h nan~oah national Pa:r-k are th
an oh
"ion 1
n
locate-:. i
i.:..hich
,1
t to
lan s
e condenmerl. :for the
eC!(
ribe
in the c-hen-
-r ___ ct containin; a)proximat ly 326 , 00
part in
ch o
the eight above nentioned counti
in
C<
conder:-.u1.---.tion proceedings are pe1 'ling and more narticula""ly
escribe
in the respective p~t _itions -1.iled in these
roceed_in'""s.
It i., the purpose of the Peti ti0n0r to secure
of not less than 160,000 acres of .these 1 nd
0
ismiss the oroceedings
war s
as and rhen their
fair market val ue has be"n .Linally ascertained "n
and to
ac:r"'
d.et ··:,ninecl ,
s to the various tra.cts 7i thin
the ai~ea origi:iall;r sought to be condemne · .for "hich con
-10-
fill"
ti ".:ln
�aParrid may not be desire1 , because of the lack o
'
for
1 'hich
av"'il. ble fun s
to purchase them.
itness my signature this 24th
ay
OL
pril , 1933.
_ff)~~
illism ~- Jarson.
-11-
�STA"'":;
YIRS-INIA
'( ss .
)
_ersonally app~are
Public in rriy said State an
be~or
me , the undersi~ne
County, '·m.
rotary
~- Carson , '1.7hose neme is
signed to the foregoing statement , and. vrho being duly sworn , mad.e
oath that the matters and things set f'orth therein ai~e true to the
best of his knovledge and belief.
·i tness my signature and rotari al Seal
day o.f ---'~u_r_i,;;;;;;l___l'J33.
f.·h Commission Expires December 3rd, L .:i3
-12 -
this
24th
�-·
AFFIDAVIT OF S . H. HARSH , , DJ... TED }, IBCH 1 , 1933 .
Thi s affidavi t is made at the request of the State Commission on Conserv ation and Developm ent of the State of Virginia
for file with the record in all or any of the followin g Public Park
Condemn ation proceedi ngs pending in the Circuit Courts of the
Counties of Virginia in which said Comrniss ion is petition er and in
which the defenda nts are as follows :
Virginia Atwood , et als , etc .,
in the Circuit Court af Uarren County ; Ada Abbo,tt and others , etc ., in
the Circuit Court of Page County; Clifton Aylor and others , etc ., in
the Circuit Court of Raprio.ha nnock County ; Armentr out , C. E. and others ,
etc ., in the Circuit Court of Greene County; Archer ,
A.
\1 ., and
others , etc ., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County; Cassand ra
Lawson Atkins , et als , etc ., in the Circuit court of Rockingh am county ;
1 . L • .Arey and others , etc ., in the Circuit Court of Albemar le County ;
D. F •
.1'•... nderson ,
et als , etc ., in the Circuit court of Madison county .
It is my understa ndi ng , purpose and intentio n in making
this sworn statemen t , the.t the said Commiss ion may , in its discreti on ,
file and submit the same in support of its prayers , motions , answers
and contenti ons
sutraitte d in the course of all or any of the above
mentione d condemn ation proceed ings, includin g its answers to the
severa 1 motions by claiman ts and landown ers in the sever al above
mention ed condemn ation proceedi ngs , praying the respecti ve courts to
decline to accept or to disappro ve the re spec ti ve reports and findings
of Special Investig ators and Boards of Apprais al Co~.miss ioners appointe d
in the course of the said condemn ation proceed ings :
TRAINING 1.ND EXPERIENCE :
My name is
s.
H. n•
h
...ars _{_ I am forty - seven years of age ,
�and reside in Rockin gham County , Virgin ia .
I was educa ted at Berea
Colleg e , Kentuc ky , ·and at Yale Unive rsity and am a gradu ate of the
Yale Schoo l of Fores try .
Follow ing my gradu ation , I was employ ed by the United States
Fores t Servic e , Depar tment of Agric ulture , for a peiiod of eighte en
years , betwee n the years of 1911 and 1929 inclus ive .
ment with the U.
MY first assign -
s . Fores t Servic e vras with the Divis ion of Acqui si -
tion and I was engage d in the exami nation of lands in North Carol ina
,
South Carolj_ na and Georg ia, in the Savan nah Purch ase area , now included in the Nanta hala and Pisgah Natio nal Fores ts .
My duties consis ted of appra ising the value of prope rties
offere d for sale to the u. s . Fores t Servic e and includ ed ; the
class ificat ion of the soil by types and the valua tion thereo f; an
estim ation by specie s of the quant ity of the standi ng timbe r and the
calcu lation of a fair stumpa ge value of the same after a calcu lation
of the loggin g , millin g and opera ting costs , and the deduc tion thereof from the sale price of the variou s grades of lumbe r and other
fores t produ cts into which it was capab le of being manuf acture d ; the
valua tion of any improv ements on the variou s prope rties examin ed;
the prepa ration of maps showin g the 'topog raphy , area and exten t of
the
variou s soil types and the locati on of the timber ed portio ns of the
tracts examin ed; the locati on of the improv ements ; the prepa ration
of detail ed repor ts in vr.hich were itemiz ed the variou s eleme nts of
value , and c&rrie d my recom menda tions as to the price which the u.
s.
should pay for these propfi l'ties; the negot iation s with the land owner
s
- 2-
�for the purcha se of the proper ties examin ed upon the approv al of my
report£ by the Nation al Forest Reserv ation Commis sion which was compos ed
of the Secret ary of A ricul ture , the Secret ary of 7lar , the Secret ary
of the Interio r, tv<Jo United States Senato rs , and t wo United States
repres entativ es .
Appr oximat ely 150 , 000 acres were examin ed by myself and my
associ ate employ ed on this work in the area mentio ned , during my
connec tion with the projec t.
The charac ter of the land examin ed and the types of soil
and specie s of timber were very simila r to that now sought to be ac quired for Shenan doah Nation al Park . There were numero us fanns , small
orchard s and improv ements , such as buildin gs, etc ., tracts of grazing
land, and small tracts of woodla nd , attache d to the farm lands , as
well as large timbere d areas , one particu lar tract contain ing 75 , 000
acres .
In 1912 , I was transfe rred to Virgin ia , by the United States
Forest Service , to take charge of the work of acquiri ng the area
to be include d in the Shenan doah Nation al Fore st now lcnovm as the
George ~ashin gton Nation al Forest .
These lands lie in the Shenan doah
and Great North Mounta ins in Virgin ia and West Virgin ia; during the
succee ding five years my du ties consis ted largely of examin ation ,
valuati on and purcha se of lands vtlthin this area .
These lands were for the most par t acquire d by negoti ation
with the owners , and purcha sed at prices agreed upon , and consis ted
of tracts ranging in size from a few acres to as large as 60 , 000 acres ,
and include d lands and improv ements of all classes , such as farms ,
orchard s , dwellin gs , outhou ses and qther improv ements , grazing lands ,
timber lands , cut over areas
·
, virgin timber , and lands in or on
- 3-
�which it was cla ·med bodies of minerals of various lcinds could be
found .
M.y duties With respect to the acquisition of these lands
were similar to those set out above in the acquisition of the le.nds
within the Savannah Purchase area .
In 1917 , the Shenandoah , :.rassanutten and Potomac Purchase
areas in Virginia and ,/est Virginia vrere consolidated and by Presidential Proclamation g iven the name of the Shenandoah National Fm"' est ,
and I was ma.de Forest Supervisor , wh ich position I held until 1927 .
My duties as such Forest Supervisor , among others consisted of the
purchase of land within the F orest area ; the examination and valuation
of su ch lands , timber &nd improvements o
The purchases in the three
combined areas under my supervision in 1927 aggregated approximately
450 , 000 acres , all of which was exami ned under my direct supervision ,
except about 150 , 000 acres , which was added at the time of the consolidation .
In 1927 , I was transferred to '.iashington , D.
c.,
as an
Ins:r:;ector and assigned to duty in the Southeastern group of states ,
including Virginia , .lest Virginia , North Carolina , South Carolina ,
Georgia and Florida , and v1as engaged as such for a period of about
tvro ye ars , duri:ng v.lhich I vras actively engaged in duties in connection
with the administraction of the States Relations work in the Federa l
:B'orest Service throu~hout this territory .
On February 15 , 1930 , I was offered a nd accepted a position
with the State Corn.mission on Conserve_tion and :Jevelopment of the
State of Virginie. , as Supervisor of Parks , and took imrnedie.te charge
of the examination , classifi ca ti on and apprai sment of the lands with-4-
�in the propos ed Shenan doah He. ti onal Pa k area , prepar atory to the
propos ed condem nation and acquis ition of these lands by tte Conr.ni ssion .
I succeed ed as such Superv isor , I.!r .
lexand er Stuart , who
died sudden ly in Decemb er , 1929 .
U. S . GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MAPS FILED V!ITH CONDEMNATION PROCES DIEGS :
The Engine ers · and Survey ors of the
u. s .
Geolog ical survey
prepare d the maps of the origin al propos ed Shenan doah :Ja tional Pa.Ek
area in each of the above mentio ned counti es vrhich were later filed
with the petitio ns in the severa l condem nation procee dings .
The bounda ry lines indicat ed on these maps were run from
the descrip tion of the propos ed area set out in the "Shenan doah Na tional Park .Act . "
They were run with extrem e accurac y , and the lines
were blazed or marked on the ground .
Station s were establi shed at interva ls along the line .
These station s were defini tely describ ed in the survey descrip tion
prepare d as a result of survey of the periph ery of the Park area by
the U.
s.
Geolog ical Survey , and the maps and descrip tive data gave
the metes and bounds , which were therea fter set for th in the petitio n
filed in the respec tive countie s .
These maps set out the locatio n and ovmers hip of lands
on either side of the bounda ry line, and vri th these maps and the metes
and bounds descrip tion set forth in the petitio n in the respec tive
countie s , and the bounda ry line located and blazed on the ground ,
it was and is possib le for owners and c lai:m.an t s of lands vii thin and
withou t the propos ed area to identif y with ease and with accurac y ,
the locatio n of the said bounda ry lines of the propos ed Park area .
- 5-
�In or about 1886 , the U.
-·
s.
Geological survey established
numerous accurately located bench marks throughout the Blue Ridge
Mountains , a number of v1hi ch were established in Virginia in the
region in which the proposed Park area is located .
They survey of
the periphery of the Park area was tied in to these bench marks .
The survey of the periphery of the Park area was carefully
and accurately made by the
u. s .
Geological Survey in 1927 and 1928 a
Several well organized parties under capable and experienced engineers
conducted the field uork under the direction of Col . Glenn Smith,
Division Engineer in charge of the :'"tlantic Division .
The making
of the Survey and the preparation of the ma~ required about a year .
v
U.
Tl:e survey of the boundary line h9.ving been completed , the
s . G.ological Survey sent additional surveying parties into the
Park area to make an accurate topographic survey and map of the entire
area .
By this survey , the mountain tops , the streams and other topo-
graphi c features were accurately located and tied in to established
bench marlcs .
Roads , trails , houses , churches , buildings and other
improvements and landm9.rks were ac curately located and tied into
topographic features , so that they can be located with exceptional
accuracy from the topographic map .
In addition , the boundary line
of the proposed Shenandoah National Park was shown on this ~p .
Aerial photographic surveys of large sections of the Park
area were made by the United Stat es .Army at the time vrhen the engineers
of the
u.
s . Geological Survey were running the boundary line .
These
serial photographic surveys , as well as the topographic maps , and
the boundary survey data and maps prepared by the
- 6-
u. s .
Geological
�Survey , were turned over to the Petitioner , the State connnission on
Conservation and Development of Virginia , and used by me and my
associates in connection vn.th the survey and preparation of our
"County Owner ship !:!Taps" , and the mapping , survey , and examination
of the individual tracts of diverse ovrnership , plats of which were
used in compiling the ownership maps of the County , which plats
and "County Ownership Haps" were submitted to the Board of Appraisal
Corunissioner s as a part of the evidence submitted by the petitioner .
ASSENtBL.AGE OF P.ARK IBEA D.AT A :
As and when these U.
s.
Geological survey Maps of the pro -
posed Park area in each county were completed , it became my duty as
Supervisor of PBxks in charge of the proposed condemnation proceedings ,
to assemble e.11 availe.ble data in each cou nty as to the land within
the proposed Pa tk area , its division into tracts of diverse ownership ,
the e xtent of , and the various claims of ownership to or in each of
such tracts , and such other inforI!l9.tion as it was believed might serve
a useful purpose in the course of the contemplated court proceedings
for the condenmation of these lands .
My predec essor , Mr . _lexander Stuart, deceased , was engaged
in preliminary work of this kind at the time of his death , and I
have been charged vtith this v10rk since the date of my appointment
as Supervisor of Parks in February , 1930; and under the joint
direction of myself and Hr . Stonebtu"'ner , my principal assistant ,
"County Owner ship Haps 11 were prepared showing all the tracts or
parcels of land of diverse ownership within the proposed Park area ,
numbered consecutively , and plats of each of these nurabered tracts
- 7/00
�were prepared showi ng the location , adjoining owners , topographic
features and the general character of each of such tracts as to
location , soil , timber , orchards , buildings , and other improvements
constituting the different elements from wh i ch eoch tract derives
its value .
The fair market value of the fee simple estate in each
of these tracts was estimated and appraised by Mr . Stoneburner ani
myself.
Some of the consecutive numbers identifying the tracts
of div erse ownership on the County Ownership Map filed by the various
Boards , are missing , due to the fact th?. t since the numbers were
fir st assigned to the various tracts , it was found that these tracts
should properly be included with other adjoining tracts , it not
appearing that there was any real claim of diverse ownership with
regard thereto .
All this work was done by and under the joint and immediate
direction of myself and 1[:r . Stoneburner , aided by competent and re li~ble foresters , surveyors, engineers , realtors , timber estimators
and operators , geologists , and experts in the var ious matters as to
which we asked for their assistance and advice ;
the values thus
ascertained were determined and decided in each instance jointly by
t[r . Stoneburner and myself from our own judgment of the values of
these various tracts or parcels of land , formulated as herein indicat ed , af t er consultation with the experts employed by us to assist us as
above set forth in the survey and appraisal of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the area .
Ue devoted more than twenty months to the field work and
took every precaution and exercised the utmost care in an effort to
insure the accuracy of the Coµn ty Ownership ,Japs and Plats of the
- 8JOI
�tracts of diverse ownership prepared by us , and in the tabulation
and appcaisal of the elements of value entering into the total value
of th e fee simple estate in each tract of diverse ownfil' ship shown
on the Col,inty Ownership Map .
PR-'-'P.ARATION OF COUNTY OWNERSHIP l.L\P :
Vle , that is , Mr . Stoneburner and myself , prepared ovrnership
maps of that portion of eo_ch County lying ·within the proposed
Shenandoah National Park area , on which we showed the topographic
features , such as mountain
tops , streams , principal roads and tra ils,
making use for this purpose of the data furnished by the topographic
maps furnished by the
u.
s . Geological survey , and adding to the
topographic features upon that map such additional topographic
features as we ourselves had located and deemed useful or necessary .
\le
ran base lines and traverses along the principal toads
and streams and mountain tops for the purpose of tying in property
lines and corners with reference to stations on these base lines , and
to the exterior boundary lines as set out on the
u. s.
Geological
Survey M:ap , which lines are located and blazed on the ground.
·;re
made plats of each individual tract of diverse ownership and located
these plc.ts on the map with respect to known topographic features
and base line stations .
In the preparation of these plats showing the various
tracts owned or claimed by diverse owners , we sought and obtained
all available information from the owners or claimants themselves ,
and from the county record s and _the descriptions arid surveys set out
in deeds to or from ch1-imants or owners , end in cases where the re -
- 9-
�corded surveys were incomplete or ina dequate , as occurred in many
instances , we made such additional partial or complete surveys as
were necessary in the proper locati on and delineation of the land
thus surveyed on the County Owner ship Haps .
Two survey parties
were engaged in this war k alrn.os t exclusivel y duri ng the period
devoted to the pr epar a tion of thes e maps.
t very tra ct l yi ng Within the pro posed Park area in each
county claimed by diverse owners, was thus platted and fitted into
the map, properly located and tied in to other adjointng propertie s ,
and numbered consecutively an d checked .and veri fied by reference .to
the answers of the claimants and ovmers to the petition as and when
the i r claims were filed Jith the record .
In many instances we found that the claim of different
ovmer s or cla imant s lapped , expe ci a lly v1here no rrell defined fences
or natural boundary lines divided the different p roperties .
In all
such cases we showed such overlapping claims as separate and specially
nUI!lbered tracts on the proper County Owner ship Map which are referred to as "laps" in our descriptive data and tables .
These ;taps
vrere shown on our maps (and they are also shown on the maps filed
by the various Boards of Appraisal Commis sioners ) usua lly under the
number given to the larger tract claimed by one of the parties ,
followed by the Roman nu..inberals I , if there was only one lap on tlE
tract claimed by him , or the Rom&n nu..inber, ls , II , III , IV , etc ., if
tllere vrere several laps on such tract .
Where a single individual
a~pears to own or claim an interest in nore than one non- contigous
tract , one of these tracts was g iven a nu..inber , and the others were
- 10-
�identified with the sa~e number, followed by a letter of the alphabet,
a, b, c, d, etc .
PREPARATION OF PLATS OF INDIVIDUAL TRACTS, SHOWN ON COUNTY OWNERSHIP MAPS:
Upon the completion of the rough draft of the county ownership Map we began making a detailed examination of each of the individual tracts shown thereon .
In examining these lands, we followed the standard procedure
used by the
u. s.
Forest Service in its acquisition of land for the
National Forests in this section of Virginia and throughout the eastern
part of the United States.
The system generally employed practicularly on tracts of
any size and on which a variety of soil and timber types occur is
commonly known as the "Strip Survey System" .
It is so named on ac -
cmunt of the fact that compass lines or strips are run across the
property at regular intervals , and close enough together so that
practically all of the land can be seen and accurately mapped .
In
running these strips across a property a crew of two or more men is
used, one of whom runs the compass line and carries the chain .
He
is accompanied by tbe land examiner and timb er estimator, who stops
at the end of each chain run, maps the area covered, and if the strip
is being run through timber, he tallies the timber by species for a
distance of one-half to one chain on eitherside of the line.
In
heavy brush it is generally impracticable for the examiner to see
and estimate the timber accurately for a distance of more than onehalf chain on ei the.r side of the center line so that the strip of
timber estimated is only one chain in width.
Where the forest is
- 11lo
�-·
open and the visibility
good, a strip one chain in width on either
side of the center line or two chains wide is used.
The wooded area encountere d on this strip was classified
and mapped in three general soil types, "cove", "slope", and nridge".
The condition and the character of the growth on these various types
was also indicated on the plats , i.e., "timbered n, "cut overu, "brush",
and "burned".
If a stand of merchanta ble timber was found a known
percentag e of the quantity of this was estimated by the examiner,
as he progresse d along his strip.
The location of the strips was so
planned that depending upon the size of the tract and the quality
of the timber, the estimate of the timber included an actual view
and count of from 10 to 30% on the trees on the timbered area.
We also covered the open or tillable land by the
11
sttip
Survey" and these types were classified according to cover, condition
and quality .
Orchards were located on the map end their condition
examined and noted.
The grazing lands were v_e cy carefully examined
and when such areas were extensive , we classified them according to
quality sites, I, II', and III, based on their carrying capacity.
The field data secured by these detailed examinatio ns was worked up
in the office immediate ly after the
the immediate direction of
Mr .
examinatio n of each tract, under
Stoneburn er and myself, and with the
aid of the assistant s who were engaged on the work under our direction.
During the course of this field examinatio n we carefully
checked the rough draft of the ownership map for any errors or dd:screpancie s that might have been made in compiling the ownership data.
Discoveri es of errors in the location or extent of the individua l
-12-
�tracts frequently resulted in the making of a partial or complete
.•
survey.
TABULATION OF DATA AS TO INDIVIDUAL TRACTS :
From the data collected in the field we prepared reports
and corrected when necessary , the boundary lines of the tracts shown
on the ownership maps, and tabulated pertinent data such as; the
acreage of the various types of soil, -and the values we assigned there to ;
The extent of timbered area, cut over area, brush land; estimates
of the quantity and quality of standing timber and the value per one
thousand feet on the stu:mp; the estimated value of any improvements
on the tract in question; and a summary of all the elements of value
entering into our appraisal of the fee simple estate in each tract.
Each of the maps or plats and reports prepared in the fieJd
was carefully checked in the office, and rechecked on the ground
wherever that seemed advisable, in order to avoid any errors in our
appraisal of the property.
Wherever there appeared to be any dis-
crepancy in the data secured in the field, or in the appraisals and
estimates of the value, or amount of timber, detailed check estimates
were made under our direction by expert timber estimators and foresters
who carefully checked over the work in any case where question or
doubt arose as to the accuracy a nd correctne s s of the data assembled
in the first instance .
In arriving at our appraisals of values we took into
consideration the nature and character of the soil, its adaptability
§O the growth of crops of all kinds and fruit trees and timber; its
value for grazing purposes; the revenue which the land is capable
of producing for its owner; its location and relative accessibility
- 13-
�to nearby markets; the supply of available water; the value of minerals and mineral rights claimed or appearing in or under the surface,
and any and all elements entering into the market valuation which
should be placed upon it, including its adaptability for use for
residential or business purposes.
We also had in mind the going
prices of lands of similar character and of the improvements thereon
which in recent years had changed hands within and in the vicinity
of the Park area.
And also , the average prices demanded, and accepted by
owners of lands of simila r character purchased by negotiation with
the owners by the U.
s.
Forest Service for inclusion in the National
Forests in Northern Virginia, some of which is located within from
five to ten miles distance from the proposed Park area, and a large
part of which is strikingly similar to the lands sought to be condemned in the above mentioned proceedings.
We secured from the County
records of each County lists of all transfers of land within and adjacent to the National Park area covering a five year period preceding
the date of our appraisal of the value of the lands of the Park area .
The soil values and other elements of value were finally decided upon
by M.r . Stoneburner and me, only after careful comparison with the
pricesat which in recent years, similar lands had been acquired by
direct purchase for the National Forests in North ern Virginia, and
local sales, leases, and transfers of properties, both large and small,
had been made within or in the immediate vicinity of the Park area.
In making these appraisal of values we based our estimates and figures
on the estimated average market values of the lands sought to be condemned and the prices paid for similar lands for a period of from
-14to7
�three to five years prior to the date of our appraisal~ .
In estimating the value of the standing timber or stumpage
value of the different species, we took into consideration the value
of the manufactured product, such as lumber, locust posts, stavewood, and cordwood, having in mind the usual or standard deductions
which should be made therein for the c cost of manufacture.
I
These
valuations were earefully checked with prices which had been paid for
stumpage in the immediate locality insofar as we were able to ascertain
them, during a period of same three years prior to the d'.ate of our
appraisal.
As an illustration of the "Strip survey Methodn, or its
modifications, used by us in examining and appraising these lands, I
Will describe the procedure adopted by us in examining what is known
as one of the so-called Overall tracts in Page county:
Under our direction, one of the land examiners located himself at Station 6, a point on the base line extending up the Dry Run
Road .
At this point he ran a compass line and chained the distance
across the tract in a northerly direction until he intersected the
northern boundary of ·the tract.
Upon reaching the northern boundary
of the tract, an -offset was made to the east, and a line run across
the tract on a south course, and parallel with the line previously
run, to the southern boundary of the tract.
This procedure was
continued and parallel lines run back and forth across the tract at
regular intervals until the entire tracts was covered.
The purpose of running these lines at regular or known
intervals across the tract, was to enable the land examiners, under
our direction, to classify and to map the various soil types encount-15loll
�ered on the tract under examination, and to make careful estimates of
timber wherever it occurred on strips of one to two chains in width
along the compass line .
HElillINGS BY THE BOARDS OF APPRAISAL COMMISSIONERS:
The County Ownership Maps and the plats prepared and the
data acquired as above set out, were submitted in evidence to the
various Boards of Appraisal Commissioners at the public hearings by
myself and
iu- .
Stoneburner in connection with our evidence as to the
location and values of the tracts shown on the County Ownership Map
in the respective Counties; and some or all of the individual experts ,
appraisers and surveyors who had assisted under our direction in the
preparation of these maps, and in the assembling of the data as to
the various elements of Vtdue as above set out, wer e a lso called as
witnesses for the Petitioner .
These County Ownership Maps were corrected from time to
time under the direction of the respective Boards of Appraisal commissioners, as and when they found it necessary to make such corrections,
as a result of their findings from the evidence submitted at the
m arings and in the course of the personal inspection and views of each
tract .
:w.n preparing these maps a nd tables and in submitting our
evidence we continually kept in mind the necessity for the filing
of reports by the Commissioners as re quired by law , which would be
responsive to the orders appointing t hem , and set forth the necessary
findings upon which judgment of award might be entered as contemplated
under the provisions of the Public Par k Condemna tion Law .
- 16-.
IO"j
�. The Board of Apprai sal Commi s sione rs in Warre n County
having been the first to compl ete its work , we prepa red, under the
advice of couns el a form of repor t in which the speci fic findin gs as
to value s a nd incide ntal damag es were left blank , and after this form
had been submi tted to and approv ed by the Hon. Philip Willia ms, Judge
of the Circu it Court of- Warre n County , it was submi tted to the warren
County Board and used by that Board in prepa ring and submi tting its
repor t .
Simil ar repor t farms were prepa red in each of the other
count ies and used by the Board s in the differ ent count ies, in pre paring and submi tting their repor ts :-
all of these repor ts being
subst antial ly uni f orm excep t as to the findin gs of value s and damages
and other matte rs pecul iar to the respe ctive areas in the respe ctive
coµnti es .
TIMBER JI.ND TIMBER RIGHI'S :
In appra ising the fee simple value of the var ious trac~s
of divers e owner ship, it was the practi ce of myself and my assoc iates
to treat the standi ng timbe r on ea ch tract as a separa te eleme nt of
value , and to repor t it as such to the Board of Appra isal Commi s sione
rs.
If such standi ng timbe r could be fairly consid ered merch antabl e, i.e.,
of suffic ient quant ity and qualit y to justif y a manuf acturi ng opera tion, it was estima ted and valued .
Where the stand was compo sed of
scatte red tre es or clump s of trees even of merch antabl e size, but
insuf ficien t in amoun t to justif y an opera tion , or where such a stand
was composed of young or immat ure timber , the value of such timbe r
was includ ed in the land value and not repor ted as a separ ate eleme nt
of value in the fee simple estate .
- 17110
�An exami:q.ation of the "Work Sheets" of the various Boards
clearly indicates that the several Boo.rds adopted a similar practice
in appraising and determining the value of the fee simple esta te in
the various tracts of diverse ownership within the Park area.
The original st and of timber on the l ands within the Park
area consisted of approximately 40% chestnut on the eastern, and
approximately 30% on the western slopes of tba, Blue Ridge.
In many
pla ces and over extensive areas, chestnut occurred in almost pure
stands.
About twenty years ago the chestnut blight attached the
chestnut timber, a nd the destruction of practically all the chestnut
timber within the Park area followed.
The ravages of this disease
are more easily distinguishable on the eastern than on the western
slope of the Blue Ridge because of the fact that the stand of chestnut was heavier on the eastern slope, and also because available
markets for the dying and dead chestnut on the ea stern slope were
lar gely lacking .
On the eastern slope of the Blue Ridge, because of
the lack of accessible extract plants, and the dista nce frcm railroads a nd lack of good roads, it was impracticable and unprofitable
to cut and remove the chestnut timber before, a nd still more so
since the bli ght ha s killed it.
On the we s tern slope, due to the
proximity to extract plants which utilized practically all ch e stnut
not suitable far other purposes, most of the blighted chestnut has
be en cut and removed, and in fact most of it was cut before it wa s
attacked by the blight.
On the ea stern side of the Blue Ridge the re are now many
thousands of l a rge chestnut trees standing within the area , stripped
-18111
�of thetr bark, and bleached vmit e by the action of the element s.
some
of these trees might still be used for extract wood, but the cost of
operatio n and transpo rtation seems to have barred the use of this
dead timber for extract and other merchan ta ble use in the sections
where it is still standing .
There a re a few scattere d tre es which
have Withstoo d the blight more success fully than the_ others, and which
have retained a few green branches·, but their time is limited, and in
the course of a few years, they too Will be bleached .
blightha s spared none of this species .
The chestnut
Viewed from vantage points
along the top of the Blue Ridge, some of the forest lands at various
points on the eastern slope have the appearan ce of gigantic boneyard s .
Except in a few cases in which there was a market for some
of t his dead chestnut for extract wood at nearby shipping poings , w~
made no attempt to appraise the quantity of this blighted chestnu t,
because it is consider ed of no value whatsoe ver .
Some of the blighted
chestnu t trees, although they may have been dead for many years, may
still contain sufficie nt tannic acid for use as extract wood, but in
most cases such blighted chestnut timber is so located With rel a tion
to t he railroad s , roads, markets and extract plants as to deprive them
of a ny real value .
The value of the fee simple estate in all the timbered lands
within the Park area on which there is a stand of merchan table timber,
ha s been adverse ly af f ected by the ravages of the chestnu t bli ght, not
only by the loss of chestnu t, but a reductio n of from 30-40% in the
amount of stumpage , and a conseque nt reductio n in footage on which to
prorate more or less fixed operatin g costs.
-ih9-
�MINERAIB: AND MINERAL RIGHTS :
In the performance of my duties as ab ove set out , in connection with the appraisal and purchase of extensive areas of mountain
l ands in Vir ginia a nd other eastern a nd southern states for inclusion
in the National Forests , I was fre~uently ca lled upon to consider and
to appraise the value of tracts and parcels of mount ain lands on
which the owners cla imed or a sserted the existence of va luable bodies
of mi nerals or valuable mineral rig hts .
VJe were confr onted With many similar cla i ms by owners a n9claimants in the Shenandoah National Pa rk ar ea , and by persons clai ming mineral ri gh t s in va rious tracts Within the are a .
I ha ve therefor e gi ven very especia l attention during the
past tbree ye a rs to a study of the question of values of miner a ls and
mineral rights claimed or asserted in the l ands within the proposed
Shenandoah Na tional Park a rea , and described in the several petitions
filed in the a bove mentioned condemnation proceedings; and in this
connection I consulted at length with and procee ded largeln unde r the
advice of the Sta te Geologist of Virginia , an d the Assistant sta te
Geologist of Vir g inia who were re quested by the state Commission on
Conserva tion and Development to make a very thorough s~udy of the
geology of the entire Park area, and of the existence of deposits
of miner als and mine ral ri ghts ther e in, and were ca lled a s witne s ses
at the public he arings by the several Boards in the ab ove mentioned
condemna tion proceedings .
My inquiries s oon developed t he fac t that outcroppi ngs t hroughout a co nsider able section of this area ha ve given evidence s of the
occurrence of iron, co ppe r , managnese a nd other minerals a t va riou s
- 2 0-
�points throughou t the area.
It is common knowledge throughou t the are a, confirmed by
wr.i tten records and official and semi - official reports and bulleting s ,
that the ex istence a t various points thro ughout the proposed Pa rk
area , a nd in the Piedmont and Northern sections of Vir ginia , of iron
and co pper bear ing ore has been known a nd exploited for more than
seventy yea rs, of manganese ores for more than fifty years , a nd that
many attempts to explore a n d develope
outcro pping s carrying indi -
cations of the s e and ot her minerals ha ve been made in the course of
the l a st fifty years , especially during the closihg ye a rs of the l a st
century , a nd to some ex tent during the early ye a rs of the pr e sent
century .
Duri ng , and far some time after the world war, when wa r -
time prices prevaile d for manganese , iron , copper a nd other mi neral~,
great activity was shown by owners of lands in this ar ea and others
in an effort to explore a nd develop the possibili ties for the
commerci al exploita tion of land supposed to conta in de posits of these
minerals in the northern section of Vir g inia , an d in t h e proposed Pnrk
area .
Specula tors secured op tions or purcha s ed mi neral ri gh ts
on roya lty ba ses a nd similar ter ms , an d undertook to f loa t stock in
mining companies for their exploita tion , wh ic h in some instance s , were
ca pita lized a t l arge and i mposing fi gur es , running up into t he
millions of do lla rs .
In many ins t a nc e s , s elected s ampl es of ore wer e
Bubmitted to different chemists and l ab ora tories, and bold cla i ms
ba sed on these a na lyses stirred up fur ths r activiti es throughou t the
area wherever the ou tcro ppings di s closed a ny tra ces of evidence of
s
- 21!11:1
�such mineral ores.
Many crude and some more skilled attempts were
made at different points within the proposed Park area to explore and
to "prove" the existence of bodies of ore of sufficien t extent to
justify the expenditu re of time and money in continued and further
exploitat ion and developme nt.
But despite the high prices to which these various minerals
rose during the war, and the relatively higher prices than normal
which have pr mvailed from time to time during the long period of years
during which the existence of indication s of the presence of mineral
ores in this area has been known and exploited , there is no record
or evidence of any successfu l exploratio ns or developme nts of mineral
bodies or mineral rights within the area described in the petition;
and in every case where exploratio n work has been undertake n, such
work has failed to "prove" the existence of a commercia lly valuable
body of ore, or has conclusiv ely negatived the existence of any ore
or mine.1:al deposits in such quan ttty or of sufficien tly high grade to
justify its commercia l developme nt.
The complete failure of useful or profitabl e results accruing
from the vdde spread activitie s and attempts to exploit and develope
the minerals and mineral rights within the proposed Park area during
the last fifty years, and especi a lly while prices of minerals were
soaring during and after the war , put a n end to all such attempts
since war-time prices began to recede some years after the armistice ,
and there is no evidence or indication of any serious attempts to
exploit or develop these minerals s.nd mineral rights since prices returned to normal and finally receded to the present low level within
the last eight or ten years .
Furthermo re , the widesprea d , ge neral,
and common knowledge throughou t the Northern Vir g inia of the tota l
- 22115
�failure of all such attempts a t exploita tion and developm ent has de -·
prived all claims of mineral deposits and mineral rights on land
within the Park area of any market or even spec ulative value .
Officia l and publishe d reports of the Geologi cal survey of
Virginia , and opinions rendered by the State Geologi st , a nd the
Assistan t State Geologi st , and the repeated a nd uniform adverse history
of all such attempts at exploita tion and developm ent , disclose that the
geologic al formatio n of the lands within the proposed Park area is
such as to negative any claims of the existenc e of mineral deposits
of any market
value in any of these lands, so that in the absence of
explora tions or developm ents disclosi ng the existenc e of ore bodies
of sufficie nt extent a nd of a grade which would justify some expendi ture
of time and money in their commerc ial developm ent ~ claims of the exi s tence of valuable mineral deposits and of mineral rights in or on
lands within the Park area add nothing to the mineral value of the
fee simple estate in such lands .
Togethe r with my associa tes I made ca r eful inquiry and search
f or indicati ons or evidence s of all explora tions a nd attempts at
developm ent of mineral deposits on any of the -lands sought to be condemned, and especia lly on any of these lands in which the owners or
others set up any claim as to the existenc e of valuable mineral s or
mineral rights , and while we l ocated many points within the Park area
a t which explora tions and prospec ting work had been conducte d , and
some instance s of abandone d attempts a t more extended developm ent, we
discover ed nothing to indicate that such attempts had proven profitable in the past or that they might beexpec ted to be profitab le in the
future ;
and no evidence was submitte d at the hearings before the
- 23fl(,
�Apprai sal Boards which would justify or sustain any finding that
claims as to the e;istence of mineral deposits and mineral rights based
upon the results of such explorations , prospecting work , or attempts
at development add anything to the f a ir maI'lfet value of any of the
lands within the several areas descri bed in the petitions filed in the
above mentioned condemnation proceedings .
The evidence submitted to
the different Boards of Appraisal Commis s ioners in support of claims
of valuable mineral deposits or mineral rights was limited in most
cases to vague , indefinite and wholly unsupported assertions or expressions of the owners belief that copper , iron , manganese , gold or
other valuable minerals might _be found on the lands of the claimants ;
a nd, in some cases , that analyses of outcr oppings on or near the land
of the claimant had disclosed the presence of one or other of these
minerals in samples taken f r om these outcroppings .
In a very limited number of cases , reports to owners and
other inter e sted parties , were submitted at the hearings , some of
these reports purporting to be submitted by mining experts , in which
the writers gave expression to favor a ble opinions as to the possibility
of commerci a l exploration of ~ifferent properties within the Park area .
All of these r epor ts, however , were based on the suppos iti on or the
possibility tha t large bodies of ore mi ght or would be found of a grade
and mineral content approximating samples of outcroppings found by or
submitted to the writers of the reports .
Most of these reports were prepared during or long prior to
t he per iod of the World War and h i gh prices, and the furth er study of
the geology of the l ands to wh ich they refer , and
subsequent ex-
plorations and developments of the areas in which these lands are
located have demonstrated the entire laclf of grounds for bel ief tha t
- 24Ill
�valuable mineral deposits exist or can be developed in the properties
reported upon .
In no case was evidence submitted which would sustain a find ing of the existence of minerals or mineral deposits or mineral rights
of any market value , without the assumption of unproved facts
as
to
the possibility or probability of the existence of deposits beneath
the surface of the ground , and such assumptions of facts were in every
case wholly speculative , and in direct conflict with the universal
experience of prospectors and explorers within the sa~e district , and
with the reports and opinions of disinterested geologists , and experts
who have carefully studied the geology of the area.
GENERJ.L CO!.f.TENT :
I have carefuly examined the reports and the findings as to
values filed by the different Boards of Appraisal commissioners and
from my knowledge of the values of the lands within the entire area ,
I am of opinion that the general tendency of all of these Boards was
to be over generous and liberal in assessing values and damages in
favor of the owners and claimants; and that in many instances, their
findings are substantially greater than the fair market value of the
lands to which they refer .
In most cases the differe nt Boards more or less substantially
increased the values as estimated by Mr . Stoneburner and me , although
if we erred in apprc.ieingthe elements of value and damages I believe
that our error was always on the side of liberality in our estimates ,
in line with the instructi on s received from the Chair~an of the State
Commission on Conserva tion and Development , the Petitioner in these
proceedings .
- 25-
llll
�In a very limited number of casas the Board found values
somewhat lower than our estimates .
Upon the advfc e of counsel, I instruc(ted all my assistants
and the various experts and other persons in our employ to refrain from
any expression of opinion, and to submit no testimony or evidence to
the various Boards of Appraisal Commissioners or their members, as
to the value of any of the various tracts of land sought to be condemned; except when called as wittnesses at the public hearings .
The market value of lands similar to those in the proposed
Park area , and of the lands within the Park area has fallen substan tially in the United States and Virginia and within the area soµgh.t
to be condemned in these proceedings since Mr . Stoneburner and myself
made our appraisal of these lands, and since the respective dates of
the ascertainment of their value by the Boards of
and of the filing of their reports in each county .
ppraisal commissioners
So also the pri ce
of lumber, cordwood, ties, apples , and fruits of all kinds , as well as
.hay, corn, cattle and farm products generally and the values of minerals
such as copper,iron, manganese and simiar ores, and the rental values
of farm and grazing lands have been declining more or less steadily in
recent years , and especially since the date of the filing of the re ports of the various Boards of Appra isal Commissioners .
Upon entering upon the duties of my office, I was informed
by Mr . ·J . E.Carson , Chairman of the State CoITLinission on Conservation and
Development of the State of Virginia, that it VIas the wish and desire
of the Commission that all claimants and land owners should be treated
fairly and justly and that no advantage , technical or otherwise, should
be taken of any of them; that all elements of value, as well as the
incidental damages resulting from the taking of these lands should be
-26-
�care ~'ully consider ed , and a f a ir , just and adq_uate allowanc e for such
value and _damages should be ascertai ned by me and my assista nts in a
uniform and scientif ic manner and submitte d to the Boa rds of Apprais al
Commissi oners by competen t a nd tr a i ned expert witnesse s ; and that land
owners a nd cla ima nts whether repr e sented by counsel or not , should be
allowed every opportu nity to pre s ent evidence in support of their re s pective claims , and that our records should be open a t a ll times for
their inspecti on for the purpose of aiding t h em in ascerta ining the
loca tion and are a of the r e spective tracts within the ar ea soug ht to
be ac quired a nd any other informa tion which mi gh t aid them in present ing their cla i ms .
I.~r . Ci:.rson a lso empha si zed the fact tha t the petition -
er is an a gency of the sta te a nd tha t v1hile it desired to a c quire these
lands a t the i r f a ir narket value, it would prefer th at the findings a s
to value ascertai ned and determin ed b y the Boards of ppr aisa l commission ers should err on the side of liberali ty tather than tha t any
owner should have ,Jell founded ground for compla int that his property
had been t aken without just compens ation .
Under advice of counsel
when appr aising these l a nds , a nd in pre senting our evidence a s · to
va lues to the va rious Boards , we always undertoo k to establis h as the
fair market value , the price which would be pa id under normal conditio ns
if the owner desired to sell , a nd the purchase r desired to buy the
tract in que s tion .
I cha rged each employee v1hose services were engaged by me ,
and every other person engaged for the purpose of preparin g estimate s
and maps , a nd collecti ng a nd r eporting data , and testifyi ne:; before tre
r e spective Boards of ppraisa l Commiss ioners a s to the lands a nd improveme nts thereon within the Park area , to be fair , just and imparti al;
- 27 1'2..0
�and , looking back over the proceedings I am satisfied that my instructions were faithfully and conscientiou sly carr ied out o
I know
of no person whetbe r connected with or employed by the Petitioner or
not , who had any purpose , motive , or desire to induce the various
County Boards , or any of them , to bring in findings
of value lower
than the fair market value of the lands appraised by these Boards ; and
I do not believe thnt any person whatever had either the desire or the
me cns to do so .
ASSISTANTS , EXPERTS .AND WITNESSES CALLED BY THE PETITT ONER -JID THEIR
Q,UALIFICATIONS :
The following informa tion as to the assistants , examiners ,
appraisers , geologists , and other experts employed by the p e titioner
under my dire c tion in the course of the preparation of the above de scribed maps , and the assembly of data with reg1:-,rd to the values of
the various tracts of di verse owner ship within the area , was procured
by me after careful investigation s , and I believe is correct .
I en-
deavored to empl py only competent , and experienced , reputable and wholly
disinterested persons in connection with the work done by me and my
assistant , !Tr . Stoneburner, in apprai sinr.; the lands within the Park
area , and preparing the evidence with regard thereto which we submitted
to the various Boards of Appraisal Commissioner s .
; • H. Stonebu~ner, soon after my induction into office, I
employed as my Chief Assistant , Ur .
w.
H. Stoneburner .
is a man of about forty- seven years of age .
Mr . Stoneburner
I had known Mr o Stone-
burner personally and worked with him for many years prior to engagi'ng
his services , and knew of 11i s qualification s for the duties that would
devolve upon him .
- 28I'll
�As my princip al assistan t and adviser , Mr . Stonebu rner joined
with me in the supervis ion and directio n of all the work done by me
in the entire P&rk area in the eight counties in Virginia in which
it is located , and in the prepara tion of all maps , and the assembli ng
of all data , and in the determin ation of all elements of value of the
various tracts of diverse uwnersh ip within the area treated and appraise d
within the Park area .
Between the years 1907 and 1913 , he had been engaged ir\buy.ing
and selling , loading and shipping lumber , railr oad ties
from points in the Shenando ah Valley .
he was employed by the Forest Service
and tan bark
During the ensuing fourteen yeaTs
u.
S oDepartm ent of Agricul ture ,
first as Forest Ranger and later as Deputy Forest supervis or of the
Shenando ah Nationa l Forest of vrhich I was Supervi sor and later -,;ras made
Supervi sor of the Unaka Nationa l Forest by the Forest service of the
U.
s.
Departm ent of Agricul ture, and in the course of such employm ent
much of his time was devoted to the examina tion and apprais al of tracts
of timber and mountain lands offered for sale to the Governm ent for
Nationa l Forest purposes .
This required cruising of the timber and
appraisi ng the value of the s&~e , classify ing the soil and appraisi ng
the value of the same , and the va luation of the building s and improve ments on the land ; the scaling and measurin g of logs , poles, posts ,
ties, fuel wood , stave wood , and other forest and timber products .
Between April 1 , 1926 and March 15 , 1930 , he vms employed by the State
Commiss ion on Conserv ation and Developm ent of the state of Virginia ,
as Distric t Foreste r for the Northern Distric t of Virginia , and engaged
in the work inciden t to this employm ent until March 15 , 1930 .
-29 -
11.1-
�It was o~ especial importance to ascertain correctly the
amount of timber growing on many of the tracts within the area
sought to be acquired, and for this purpose it became necessary to
make a careful estimate of the quantity of timber, by species and
the value per thousand feet on the stump of the same.
To assist
us in estimating the timber within the area I employed the best
qualified available men that I could find.
I was of course cognizant of the fact that upon the
soundness and accuracy of our appraisals depended our ability to
present to the Commissioner s ,appointed by the Court, a true and dependable picture of the properties included within the Park area.
I realized that there were great numbers and various kinds of tracts,
that some were unimp~oved, rough mountain land sup~orting stands
ran ging from cut over to heavily timbered.
That there were great
numbers and various kinds of improved lands ranging from the small
worn-out mounts.in farms to highly improved properties in a high state
of cultivation.
I appreciated the fact that the examination and
valuation of these properties would be a difficult one, demanding
skill, and specialized knowledge, and in selecting my personnel I
employed the best qualified and most experienced men I could find.
Below are the names of the principal members of our field
parties, with a brief history of each showing his experience along
the lines for which he was employed, and his qualification s:
Clarence H. Burrage:
Mr. Burrage is thirty-six years of
age, and is a resident of the State of Georgia.
He is a graduate
of the School of Forestry of the University af Georgia, having
-30-
�graduated in 1915, with the degree of B.
s.
From September 1916
to April 1922, he was in the employ of the Forest Service of the
U. S. Departmen t of Agricultu re as an examiner of lands and as a
timber cruiser, in connection with the acquisitio n of lands on the
Alabama, Nantahala , Pisgah, Shenandoa h and Alleghany National Forests.
His duties required an examina.tio n and appraisal. of the lands being
acquired for national forest purposes.
During the :years 1919-1920 , he had general charge of all
the acquisitio n work on the Nantahala Forest in North Carolina; during
1921 and 1922, he had cha:rge of the acquisitio n work on the Shenand.oa.h
National Forest and he was required in the discharge of those duties,
to examine lands prior to the acquisitio n thereof by the governmen t,
which examinatio n required the estimating the kinds and amounts of
standing timber, the working out of the costs of logging and manufactu ring timber into lumber and ~lacing the same on the market; the classification of soil into types both forest and. open or agricultu ral lands
and to acquire informatio n with regard. to the value of said lands.
In the year 1922 he was employed by the State of North Carolim as
District Forester for the Western District of that State, including
the entire mountaino us section of the State.
During the year 1923, he
resigned and accepted a position with James D. Lacey
&
Comoany, timber
land factors, with whom he worked until 1924, cruising iimber, assisting in sales of timber lands, reporting on logging condition s, timber, types of soil, the values of lands contempla ted for purchase by
this company.
In 1924, he became a Forester for the Universit y of
Kentucky and was oh the staff of the Robinson Agricultu ral Experimen t
Station, engaged in work for the State of Kentucky similar to tha.t
-3112-'l
�described above.
Mr. Burrage was in my employ nineteen and one-half
months.
Wingate I. Stevens:
years old.
Mr. Stevens is a man about thirty-two
He is a graduate of the University of Maine, having
received his degree of Bachelor of Science in 1920.
He entered the
Harvard Forestry School of Harvard University and received from that
institution the degree of Master of Forestry in 1922.
He was employed at intervals as a timber estimator and
engineer by the International Paper Company, Oxford Paper Compa,ny and
the .New England Box Company.
In l923, he was appointed as forest assistant in the
u. s.
Forest Service , and assigned to the examinationand appraisal of
lands in connection with the acquisition program on the National Forests
under the direction of the Forest Service ,
u.s.
Depa,rtment of Agri-
culture.
Mr. Stevens ' assignments included the examination and
appraisal of lands and timber on the Monongahela National Forest in
Pennsylvania; on the
lle.ghany National Forest in West Virginia,
and on the Pisgah and Nantahala National Forests in North Carolina,
and the Cherokee Na tional Forest in Tennessee and Georgia.
His duties in connection with the examination and appraisal
of lands for the
u. s.
Forest Service included the estimating of
the kinds and quantities of standing timber; the estima.ting of the
costs of manufacturing the timber into lumber, and other marketable
products; the classification of the soil into types, both forest and
open land, including grazing land
tillable land, and land restocking
to young timber growth , and the valuation of improvements such as
buildings, orchards, etc.
-32Q-
125
�In complian ce with my request to the
u.
s. Forest Service
for an experien ced land examine r, Mr. Stevens was loaned to me for
a short period to assist in the examina tion, and apprais al of the
lands within the proposed Park area.
James L. Eaton:
Mr. Eaton is thirty-f ive years old.
He
lived on a farm until he was twenty years of age· and is the owner
and operato r of a farm.
He is a graduate of the school of Forestry
of the Univers ity of Georgia , received the degree of B. s. in 1926.
From June 1926 to Septemb er 1926, he was employed by the Forest Service,
U.
s.
Departm ent of Agricul ture, as an examine r of lands and as a tim-
ber cruiser, on the Cherokee Nationa l Forests in Georgia , Tenness ee,
and North Carolina .
As
such he was engaged in the examina tion and
apprais al of lands offered for sale and included in said nationa l
forests, and his duties in that connecti on re quired estimati ng the
kinds and quantiti es of standing timber, the estimati ng of costs of
cutting that timber into lumber and putting it on ·the market; the
classifi cation of soil into types, both forest and open land includin g
grazing land, tillable land and land restocki ng to young timber grovth,
the valuatio n of improvem ents such as building s, orchards , etc; from
Septemb er 1926 to March 1928, he was employed by the United states
Forest Service in the acuqisi tion of lands for Ozark N~tiona l Forest
in Arkansa s, and the Cherokee Nationa l ?orest in Tennesse e end Georgia ,
dividing his time about equally between the two project s.
From March 1928 to January 1930, he was employed by the
Tennesse e Park Commiss ion in exactly the same kind of work for the
ac quisitio n of lands within the @reat Smoky Nationa l Park area in
Tenness ee.
-3312.b
�His work under me was identical with the work that he had
done on the other prqjects above named.
Mr. Eaton was in my employ
for a period of twenty and one-half months.
T. R. Jones:
llr. Jones is twenty-eight years of age, a
resident of Trucksville, Pennsylvania, and a graduate of the School
of Forestry of Pennsylvania State College, receiving the degree of
B.
s.
in 1927.
In 1928, he attended the School of Forestry at Yale
University; he was employed five
Department of the Lehigh
&
months in the Mining Engineering
Wilkesbarre Coal Company as an engineer
in their mines; then for three months as a timber cruiser on the
lands of the S~perior Pine Products Company, at Fargo, Georgia, where
his work consisted of cruising timbe½ preparation of the estimates
by logging units, soil classifications and timber type maps.
He was a timber cruiser of the Forestry Department af the
State of Connecticut, where his duties were practically the same
as when he was with the last named company; he next took a ~osition
with James D. Lacy and Company, a firm of timber :factors, and cruised
timber in the State of Maine , and later worked :for the suncrest
Lumber Company in the Smoky Mountains of North Carolina, doing the
same class of work.
Oscar
o.
Mr. Jones was in my employ for twenty months.
Witt :
Mr. ~itt is forty-eight years of age, e
resident of Tennessee, was raised on a fa.rm, and worked. on a farm
and on logging operations until 1924.
In March 1924, he entered the
u. s.
Forest Service and was
assigned to acquisition work on the Cherokee National Forest in
Tennessee.
Later he was assigned to the same type af work on the
Pisgah National Forest in North Carolina, and on these two assignments was employed until March 1928, or a period of approximately
four years.
-34/·q
�From March 1928 until August 1928 he was loaned by the
u. s.
Forest Service to the Tennessee Park Commission to assist in the
examination of lands within the proposed Gi-eat Smoky National Park
area.
At the end of this assignment he returned to the
u. s.
Forest
Service and was assigned to work on the Unaka National Forest in
Southwest Virginia, and the Natural Bridge and the Shenandoah Na,tional Forests.
During his connecti. an with the U. S. Forest service and with
the Tennessee Park Commission he was engaged in the estimating of
timber and the appraisal of stumpage on the lands examined.
His
other duties were to make an examination and classificatio n of the
various types of soil and place a valuation thereon, together with
the preparation af detailed maps and reports describing the properties examined.
On November 26, 1930, I arranged with the
u. s.
Forest
Service to ioan Mr. Witt to our organization until we completed the
examination of the Pam. area.
I desired to secure the services of
Mr. Witt on account of the experience he
md
in the
u. s.
Forest
Service in this line of work and on account of his general knowledge
of timber and stumpage values, as well as land values.
Mr. Witt
was in my employ for twelve months.
Mr. J. A. Shifflett:
Mr. Shifflett is fifty-nine years of
age, and a resident of Dayton, Rockingham County, Virginia, and had
been engaged in the business of buying and selling timber and timber
lands, manufacturin g and selling timber on the market, superintendin g
large timber operations; he had been in some form of the lumber industry forpracti cally thirty-nine years, except for about two years
-351ig
�from 1901 to 1903.
Between the years 1893 and 1900 he had been
employed in West Virginia by the J. L. Rumberger Company; The
Wilson Lumber Company, and the Black Water Lumber CoIIll)any, all of
the State of West Virginia, and was engaged in cutting, logging and
general woods work for these companies.
From 1904 to 1911 inclusive, he was employed as Woods
Superintende nt for the Stiegel Lumber Corporation and the Houck Tannery
Company of Stokesville, Vi~ginia, while these companies were engaged
in operations on a tract of timber land of about 100,000 acres in
Augusta and Rockingham Counties.
His _duties consisted of running a
band mill with a daily capacity of 50,000 feet, and of supnlying an
extract plant with an annual capacity of 10,000 cords of extra.ct wood;
his duties required among other things (1), the planning of all woods
operations; (2), the supervision of construction of railroads into
the woods for the removal of the timber; (3}, the cruising and estimating of the timber on the lands of the said companies and the
planning of all woods operations in order that the properties might
be profitably and economically handled; (4}, the supervision of contradtors who were operating on the lands of said companies; and (5),
the estimating and cruising of timber on tracts of land being pm:-chased by the com-panies.
In 1912-1913, he was Wood Superintende nt
for the Virginia Lumber and Extract Company of Arcadia, in Botetourt
County.
As such he was required to oversee the entire woods operations
of the company on about 22,000 acres, consisting of logging af a
50,000 foot capacity band mill, supervising and directing the work of
logging contractors.
In 1913, he entered the United states Forest
Service as a forest ranger and continued in such capacity until 1917.
-36-
�He was ·a~signed to the North River District , Shena.ndoah Neti onal Forests
( now the George Washington National Fat" est) and had ful.l-,-Oharge of all
operations on an area of approximately 200 , 000 acres.
His duties
as such required him to cruise , or o·therw-ise to estimate the standing
timber on t r acts of land, ascertain the coots of manufacturing timber
into lumber and lumber products such as ties , tan bark, extract wood ,
poles, posts, etc; to estimate the value of the land and young growth ,
as well as the improvements on the land; to assist in making sales
of stumpage to purchasers of same; to build roads, trails, telephone
lines, look-out stations; to handle fire control activities in his
district; to determine the capacity of various areas for grazing purposes; to investiga§e and ascertain the rental value of farm properties acquired by the Government and to secure suitable tenants
therefor.
In 1917, he accepted a position with the Augusta Wood
Products Corporation of Deerfield, Virginia, which owned a tract of
47000 acres of wood.land in Augusta County.
He was Woods superintend-
ent with this C_ompany until 1922 and his duties were very simila.r to
the duties re~uired of him when he was in the employ of the other
operating companies above referred to.
Between the years 1922 and
1930, he was in business for himself , being engaged in the manufacture
of lumber for market, operating saw mills of his own and buying and
selling the output of other mills in Highland , Augusta and Bath
Counties , Virginia.
I knew of no man who had had greater experience in the
handling of forest properties in this region than Mr. Shifflett and
further knew him to be a man of marked business capacity and in~elligence •
Mr. Shifflett was in my employ for about twenty months .
-37 -
130
�u
J.
c.
Smith:
Mr. Smith is thirty years old, a resident
of Tennessee, was raised on a farm and lived and worked on a farm until
he was twenty-two years old.
From Janua:cy 1924 until March 1925 he was employed by the
Thomas Hall Lumber Company as assistant engineer and timber cruiser.
His duties in this connection were the location of a logging railroad,
the estimating of timber and logging costs, the scaling of logs, and
work on an engineering party.
From April 1928 to December 1930, he was employed by the
States of North Carolina and Tennesee in estimating timber on land
being acquired. for the Great Smoky Mountain Park.
His duties consist-
ed of estimating timber, classificatio n of land, mapping and the preparation of reports covering the lands examined.
The work was similar
in all respects to the work he subsequently performed on the proposed
Shenandoah National Park area in Virginia.
He was in my employ for
eleven and one-half months.
w.
N. Sloan:
To assist in the preparation of the maps
above referred to, I employed Mr.
w.
N. Sloan as Chief Engineer.
Mr. Sloan graduated from the University of North Carolina in 1911,
went into the service of the Forest Service of the U. S. Department
of Agriculture , as an engineer and was so employed until 1927; he
then resigned and went into private work on his own account and so
continued until accepting a position with the state Park Commission
o:f the State of North Carolina as Chief Engineer and was engaged as
such when he accepted a position with the Virginia State Commission
on Conservation and Development , in connection with the engineering
work for the ~cquisition of the Shenandoah National Park area.
Mr .
Sloan was in my employ for twenty months.
-38 -
13t
�E. R. Conrad:
and was employed by the
Mr. Conrad is a resident of West Virginie, ,
u. s.
Forest Service aoout 1915 as a land sur-
veyor in connection with the acquisition program of the
u. s.
Forest
Servfu e, which included the purchase of land in the eastern part cr.f'
the United States for National Forest purposes.
Mr. Conrad has had a wide and varied experience as an
engineer.
Before entering the Forest Service he was a consulting
engineer in West Virginia.
Since entering the Forest Service he has
been assigned. to the survey of lands on practically every National
Forest in the eastern region of the United states , including the
'White Mounain National Forest in New Hampshire; the Alleghany National Forest in Pennsylvania; the George Washingtion, Natural Bridge ,
and Unaka National Forests in Virginia; the Monongahela National
Forest in West Virginia; the Cherokee National Forest in Tennessee
and Georgia; the Pisgah and Nantahala National Forests in North
Carolina.
Mr. Conrad has also had a wide experience in the compilation
of data for the preparation of gra.nt and ownership maps which have
been made for practically aJ.l of the National Forests on which he
has been eilllJloyed in survey work.
A man with this specialized training was urgently needed
in the early stages of the work on the proposed Shena.ndoah National
Park, and at my request , Mr. Conrad wqs detailed for a short period
to assist me in this work within the Park area .
F. T. Amiss :
Mr. Amiss was likewise employed to assist in
mak ing the maps referred to above.
Mr. Amiss was a graduate of the
Virginia Military Institute, receiving bhe degree af B•
s.
in the
School of Engineering in 1886 , and had been actively engaged. in the
-39-
\32.-_
�practice of his profession for a period of thirty-five years, within
which period he had
occupied. the position of County surveyor of
Page County for a period of twenty-seven~ ars.
Mr. Amiss was in my
employ for twenty months.
M. M. Van Doren:
Cm rlottesville, Virginia.
Mr. Van Doren is a resident of
He is fifty-four years of age ; was educated
in the public schools of tm City cf. Richmond, and is a graduate or
the Richmond High School.
In 1897, he j o inea. a Survey :party of the Southern Rail ·ayCompany in Alabama, acting in the capacity of rod.man, and was engaged my this Company from 1897 to 1901, and held the position successively of rod.man, level-man, draftsman, topographer and transitman.
While engaged by this Company his work consisted of the making of' preliminary and location surveys and of the supervision of railroad construction.
In September 1901, he resigned an.d took charge of his
father's fa.rm in Albemarle County, on which he remained until 1912.
· In 1908, he was appoints
Deputy County Surveyor of
which position he held for a period of four years.
lbemarle County,
In 1912, he was
appointed County Surveyor of Albemarle County, together with_H . F.
Sims , and held this position until 1920.
During the years 1921-1922,
he was employed as assistant engineer of Albemarle County on road construction.
This work consisted of surveying, setting slope stakes,
computing the quantities of material to be moved by contractors, making
estimates, and supervision of construction.
In 1923, he acquired an interest in a contracting firm
and executed contracts with the Virgin:ia St(lte Highway Department
from 1923 to 1927.
-40-
J33
�_In September 1927, he accepted a position with the A. H·
Callegar Construction Company of Cincinnati, Ohio, e s
ssistant Super-
intendent, and remained with that Company until December 1929, on
the construction of '3-pproaches of a railroad bridge across the Ohio
River.
He has also been engaged in engineering and construction work
for the City of Richmond, being connected with the finn of Van Doren
Brothers.
He is a certified land surveyor in the State of Virginia ,
and during the course of his work during past years which has taken
him into much of the area included within the proposed Shenandoah National Park, and on account of his familiarity with the mountain surveys and a knowledge of the region in general, he was selected by me
as an engineer for the State Conservation and Development Commission
within the proposed Shenandoah National Park area.
He was appointed
to this position in November , 1930 , and continued with me until
November 1931, a period of about a year,
He has, since th.at time ,
been employed by me from time to time in checking up on disputed
boundary lines of property owners within the proposed Shenandoah
National Park area.
R. R. Brown:
Mr. Brown is Pbout fifty-three ~ars old,
and a resident of Harrisonburg , Virginia, who conducted a real
esta§e business in Harrisonburg from 1912 to 1927.
Part of this
time he operated as a member of the firm of Garber, Masters and
Brown, then as a member of the firm of Masters and Brown, and later
conducted the business in his own name.
During this period he had a
very wide e:x:perience as a real estate broker in handling properties
through the Shenandoah Valley
and adjoining State.
Many af the pro -
perties which he handled during his experience as a real estate
- 41-
�broker were either included within the proposed Shena.ndoah National
Park area, or were adjacent to it.
I employed him on account of his
ability as a judge of res:t estate values, and on account of his
familiarity with the values of properties in the vicinity of the area
which was being examined.
Mr. Brown was empl'oyed by me for a period
of two months.
We secured the services of Mr. Wilbur E. Cather, a
resident of Winchester, Virginia, an experienced orchardist, to aid
us in estimating and appraising the value of a number of the commercial orchards within the Park area , and his testimony was submitted in
a number of cases where values of such orchards were submitted to
the Boards of Appraisal Commissioners for ascertainment and determination.
We secured the services of the State Geologist, Mr.
Arthur
w.
Bevan, and the Assistant State Geologist, Mr. Wm. M. McGill
to aid us with their expert advice in estimating and appraising the
value of mineral bodies or mineral rights in lands within the Park
area, and the testimony of either or both of these scientists was
submitted in cases where claims of mineral bodies, rights or values
were filed with the record or set up at the public hearings.
Among the assistants employed by my predecessor and myself,
in preparing the maps and assembling information as to the location
of the various tracts of diverse ownership within the Park area
more especially in searching the records and preparing the lists of
deeds of transfer of property within the Park area were J.E. Sutphin,
County Surveyor of Rappahannock County, Virginia , Fred T. Amiss ,
County Surveyor and Ex- County Treasurer of Page County, Virginia,
T.
w.
Avery, Civil Engineer, and Engineer for the Town of Elkton,
-42 13S-
�Virginia, . Bradley T. Johnson, Civil Engineer, Cha rlottesville,
Virginia,
w.
C. Williams, Attorney at Law, Cmrlottesvi lle, Virginia,
Lynn Lucas, Attorney at law, Luray, Virginia, N. G. Payne, Attorney
at law, Madison,Virg inia,
w.
C. Armstrong, Jr., Attorney at law,
Front Royal, Virginia and K. C. Moore, Attorney at law, Harrisonburg ,
Virginia.
The services of these surveyors and attorneys were directed
more especially to the securing of the descriptions and the identifying of the tracts of diverse ownership within the proposed Park area,
from the variou~ county records and other information with relation
thereto furnished by the owners and claimants which aft er being
checked by Mr. Stoneburner and myself, was used by us in connection
with the ot:te r material secured by us in the preparation and assembling of the data from which we prepared our maps and made our
appraisals.
Witness my signa ture this first da y of March , 1933.
-43-
�STATE OF VIRGINIA)
COUNTY OF WARREN
( ss.
)
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in my said State and County,
s.
H. Marsh whose name is
signed to the foregoing statement, and who being duly sworn,
made oath that the matters and things set forth therein are true
to the best of his knowledge and belief.
Witness my signature and Notarial Seal this 24th day
of April, 1933.
8et-14ck-kq< ~ (
SEAL J
-44rn
�Q
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY,
VIRGjiifj~- - - - -
State Commissio n on c·onservat ion and
Developme nt of the State of Virginia
r,
1nr
££6\
· 'I/\ 'A1uno~ wu4~tt!~JO!J
vs.
e:>YtO i 1>iJ018 a4l u1 P0i!.:l
Cassandra Lawson Atkins and others, and
52,501 acres of land in Rockingham County, Virginia.
The answer of the Petitione r, the State Commissio n
on Conservat ion and Developme nt of the State of Virginia, to the
several objection s and exception s to the Report of the Board of
Appraisal Commissio ners filed herein, and to the several motions
filed in contempla tion or in pursuance of
the provision s of the
last paragraph of Section 33 of the Public Park Condemnat ion
prayi ng the Coul','t to
0 decline
Act,
to accept" or to "disa pprove 0 the
findings of fact as to values and incidenta l damages set forth in
said report, which objection s, exception s and motions have been
made and filed by the following named persons: (A) Sallie A.
Kite, represente d by Georges. Harnsberg er_
(B) J. T. Heard,
represente d by Georges. Harnsberg er and David A. Conrad,
Counsel. (C) Vernon
w.
Foltz, represente d by Robert
Counsel. (D) Wesley A. Dean, represente d bys.
Counsel.
(E)
w.
w.
w.
Keyser,
Earman,
F. Dean, Jr., represente d by Georges. Harns-
berger, Counsel. (F)
Annie Laurie Baugher, represente d by
Ralph H. Bader, Counsel.
Earman, Counsel. (H) E.
(G) John K. Haney, represente d by D.w.
c.
Lam and E. E. Lam, represente d by
E. D. Ott, Counsel. (I) Maude M. Shipp, represente d by Chas.
A. Hammer, Counsel. (J) A. L. Moubray and J. F. Moubray, represented by Chas. A. Hannner, Counsel. (K) Annie R. Begoon,
represente d by Geo.
s.
Harnsberg er, Counsel. (L) J.
w.
Hinkle,
represente d by Georges. Harnsberg er, Counsel. (M) John J. Mace,
James G. Mace, Elizabeth Mace Via, R.H. Mace, Julia Mace Spit-
zer, Charles M. Mace, represente d by Georges. Harnsberg er,
Counsel. (N) Robert T. Miller, represente d by Hamilton Haas,
LAW OFFICES
WEAVER 8c ARMSTRONG
FRONT ROYAL 1 VA.
�Counsel. (0) Herbert G. Patterson, represented by Georges.
Harnsberger, Counsel. (P) H. G. Patterson, H. H. Patterson,
and
D. H. Patterson, represented by Georges. Harnsberger,
Counsel. (Q) Elijah Catterton, represented by Georges. Harnsberger, Counsel. (R) E.
Counsel. (S)
c.
Lam, represented by E. D. Ott,
Margaret Mundy, represented by D.
Counsel. (T) G. Luther Kite, represented by
c.
o. Nizer, represented by Georges.
(V) c. G. Harnsberger, represented by
w.
Earman,
A. Hammer, Coun-
sel. (U) R.
Harnsberger,
Counsel.
Georges. Harns-
berger, Counsel. (W) W. F. Dean, Jr., represented by George
Harnsberger, Counsel. (X) John A. Hensley, and Layton
w.
s.
Hensley,
represented by Georges. Harnsberger, Counsel. Luther J. Strickler, represented by Georges. Harnsberger, Counsel. (Y) Cassie
M. Naylor, represented by Georges. Harnsberger, Counsel. (Z)
J.
o.
Harnsberger, A. L. Harnsberger, Nannie T. Harnsberger,
Clinton T. Harnsberger, Kate
w.
Snapp, J.
c.
Bishop, A.
c.
(AA)
Davis and A. Florrence Forrer, represented by Counsel.
Sarah L. Upp, represented by Georges. Harnsberger, Counsel.
(BB) Julia L. Comer, represented by Ethel Irwin, Counsel. (CC)
w.
Edward Herring,
T. Herring, represented by Georges. Harns-
berger, Counsel. (DD) M. H. Long, represented by Ralph H. Bader,
Counsel. (EE) Hosea Shifflett, represented by Ralph H. Bader,
Thomas L. Yancey, Ennna
Counsel. (FF)
Nettie I. Mauzy, Julia Estes, A.
s.
V. Gibbons, F. M. Yancey,
Yancey, and Frank
w.
Yancey,
represented by Counsel, Hunter M. Gibbons, Mary Gtbbons Snapp.
(GG) Mary E. Wyant, represented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel.
(HH) Mrs. E.
w.
Harrison, represented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel.
(II) Mrs. E.
w.
Harrison, represented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel.
(JJ) Jos. E. Carickhoff, represented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel.
(KK) M. H. Harrison, represented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel.
(LL)
LAW OFFICES
WEAVER
&
ARMSTRONG
FRONT ROYAL, VA.
Thos. L. Yancey, represented by Counsel.
Hedrick, represented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel.
(MM) Annie E.
(NN) J. H.
�Lewin, represented by Georges. Harnsberger, Counsel. (00)
A.
s.
Kemper, represented by Hamilton Haas, Attorney. (PP)
D. M. Clark, represented by Hamilton Haas, Attorney. (QQ)
John Roadcap, represented by Hamilton Haas, Attorney. (RR)
T. L. Yancey, represented by
c.
A. Hammer.
Petitioner avers that all the steps taken in the prosecution of the above styled proceeding, have been taken in strict
conformity with the several provisions of the Public Park Condemnation Act; that all landowners, claimants, and other parties
in any wise interested in the lands sought to be condemned, or
in the proceeds arising from the condemnation thereof, or in
dam.ages resulting from such condemnation, have
been afforded
ample and adequate opportunity to be heard, and
all such as
responded to the opportunity so offered, were heard;
and all
testimony and other evidence offered by such claimants, owners,
or other interested persons, was heard and considered by said
Board of Appraisal Commissioners; that no claimant, owner, or
other person interested, was
to be heard;
denied a hearing or an opportunity
that the rights of no person have been violated,
but on the contrary they have been fully and amply protected;
and that the claim of ~very such person, together with all the
evidence submitted with respect thereto, has received proper
and fair consideration.
Petitioner, in fulfillment of its duty in this re~
gard, employed experienced, competent and qualified men who
went upon the lands set out in the petition, and made an intensive and comprehens ive study of the same with reference to
the location and topography of th~ various tracts therein of
diverse ownership, and the vari ous elements of value of the
same, including the various types of soil, the
acreage of such
types, the timber gr owing thereon, the adaptability of the l a nds
LAW OFFICES
wEAVER &ARMSTRONG
FRONT ROYAL, VA.
for grazing, for cul tive. tion, the improvements on· same, includ-
�ing ouildings, fruit trees, commercial orchards, and indications of mineral deposits; thereby ascertaining by the application of scientific, systematic, and approved methods, what
was thought to be a fair and just compensation upon the condemnation of said respective tracts, and the amount of the incidental damages that would arise out of the taking thereof.
Petitioner caused these experienced men to lay before
the Board of Appraisal Commissioners, their appraisal of the
values of said lands, and of the amount of such incidental damages, and to testify with respect thereto, at the public hearings
held by said Board at times and places designated, as provided
for
by said Act and
the orders of the Court, at which times
andplaces all the said respective claimants, owners and other persons had
been fully notified to attend:
Petitioner further avers that the said Board of Apprais-
al Commissioners, in the strict performance of its duty, and in
the pursuance of the directions of this Honora ble Court, and i n
accord with the law, and specifically with the provisions of
the Public Park Condemnation Act, ascertained and determined and
set out in its report,its findings as to the value of the fee
simple estate of each of the several tracts of diverse ownership
within the area described in the petition, in which the said
movants or exceptants have any claim of right, title, esta te or
interest, and as to the
amount of the alleged incidenta l damages
to which the said movants or exceptants or any of them have
any
claim by reason of the proposed condemnation of the lands described in the petition herein:
Petit i oner further avers that the above mentioned
movants and exceptants were given full, f air and ample opportunity to be heard as to the value of any of the l a nds described
in the petition,
LAW OFFICES
WEAVER &ARMSTRONG
it
which they have any claim of right, ti t le,
estate or interest, a nd as to the amount of incidental damages
FRONT ROYAL, VA.
l'-11
�claimed by them or any of them; and, Petitioner
and every allegation
denies each
to the contrary set forth in their several
exceptions, objections and motions.
Petitioner further avers that the findings in the .said
report of the said Board as to the location, description, and
acreage of the various tracts of diverse ownership in which
these exceptants and movants, or any of them, set up any claim
of right, title, estate or interest in their answers to the
petition filed herein, and at
the public hearings by the said
Board, are fair, correct, and accurate;
and, Petitioner
denies
each and every allegation to the contrary set forth in the said
exceptions, objections,or motions.
Petitioner further avers that the findings in the
said report as to the value of each and every tract of diverse
ownership within the area described in the petition, in which
these exceptants and movants have
any right, title, estate or
interest, are in each instance not less in amount than the fair
market value thereof; and that the amount of incidental dam.ages
to which these exceptants or movants, or any of them would
entitled
be
by reason of the proposed condemnation of the lands
described in the petition, is not greater than the amount found
by the said Board and set forth in its report;
and, Petition-
er denies each and every allegation to the contrary set forth
in the said objections, exceptions, and motions., or any of them.
Petitioner further avers that in some of the cases referred to in the said objections, exceptions and motions, the
values reported by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners are in
excess of the fair market value of the tracts to which they
refer; but Petitioner admits that it was afforded ample op~or•
tunity to be heard as to such values; that it was afforded a
fair hearing;
LAW OFFICES
WEAVER & ARMSTRONG
FRONT ROYAL. VA.
evidence was
that a careful and thorough consideration of its
made by the Board; and that the findings of the
IY 2
�Board were based on a careful and thorough consideration of
all the evidence, both of the Petitioner and of the claimants,
and owners, examined together with an intensive and comprehensive inspection or view of the lands in question.
Petitioner denies that the said movants or exceptants
are
entitled to a trial by jury in this proceeding for the de-
termination of the value of the lands
them, or of the
claimed by them or any of
amount of incidental damages claimed
by them or
any of them; or that they or any of them have shown any graund
for the granting of such a trial by jury in their respective
exceptions and motions, or in any affidavit or affidavits in
support thereof.
Petitioner further denies that the provisions of the
Public Park Condemnation Act, under which this proceeding has
been instituted and is being maintained, or any of them, are invalid, or have
the effect or have had the effect of denying due
process of law, or any right, under the Constitution of the
United States, or the Constitution of the State of Virginia, to
these exceptants, or movants, or any of them.
Petitioner further denies that any evidence was improperly or unlawfully taken, heard, procured or considered by
the Board in ascertaining and determining the value of any of
the lands as to which these exeeptants and movants, or any of
them, have any claim of right, title, estate or interest.
Petitioner further denies that these exceptants and
movants, or any of them, have been prejudiced by any improper
taking, hearing, procuring or consideration by the Board of any
information or evidence of any kind whatsoever.
Petitioner further denies that the findings of the
Board of Appraisal Commiss i oners as to the value of any of the
LAW OFFICES
WEAVER
8c
tracts within the area described in the petition in which these
ARMSTRONG
FRONT ROYAL, VA.
exceptants and movants, or any of them, have
any claim of right,
�title, estate or interest, or as to the amount of incidental
damages which will result from their condemnation, were in any
wise .affected or influenced by fraud, corruption, partiality,
or mist~ke of ract or of law.
Petitioner neither avers nor denies the correctness
of any findings of the Board as to the ownership or apparent
ownership of the various tracts shown on the County Ownership
Map filed with its report, whose value is ascertained and determined in the report;
but Petitioner does aver that the re-
port of the Board of Appraisal Connnissioners sets forth correctly, the various tracts of diverse ownership within the area
described in the petition, as to which these exceptants and
movants respectively set up any claim of right, title, estate
or interest in their answers to the petition filed with the record in this proceeding, and at the public hearings and views
by the Board of the lands claimed by them, and, Petitioner de•
nies each and every allegation to the contrary set forth in
the said exceptions and motions, or any of them.
Petitioner shows to the Court that the exceptants and
movants have not been pr-ejudiced by any of the matters alleged
in their respective motions and exceptions, and supported by
the accompanying affidavits, read together with the record, this
answer, and the accompanying affidavits; and, that in the absence of prejudicial error in the proceedings, their respective
motions and exceptions should be dismissed.
Petitioner further shows to the Court that the said
exceptions and motions are not supported
by accompanying affi-
davits, which, read together with the record, this answer, and
the affidavits in support thereof, are sufficient to sustain a
ruling granting the said motions, or to establish any of the
LAW OFFICES
WEAVER 8c ARMSTRONG
FRONT ROYAL, VA.
grounds for the granting of such motions or sustaining such exceptions under the provisions of Section 35 of the Public Park
�Condenmat ion A~t.
Petitione r further shows to the Court that under the
provision s ot Sections 33 and 35 of the Public Park Condemnat inn
Act, these exception s and objection s and motions have been im•
provident ly submitted insofar as they, or any -of them, seek the
disapprov al of any of the findings of the Board as to the right,
title, estate, or interest of these exceptant s or movants in or
to the lands described in the petition, or the disapprov al of
any finding set forth in the said report as to any matter other
than the ascertainm ent and determina tion of the value of the
fee simple estate in the numbered tracts of land shown on the
County Ownership Map filed with the report, and the amount of
incidenta l damages which will result from the condemnat ion
thereof;
and Petitione r prays that said exception s, objection s,
and motions
be denied or overruled to the extent in which they
have been thus improvide ntly submitted , but without prejudice
to the right of the exceptant s and movants to renew the same or
to seek such other and further relief as they may be advised,
after this Court shall have ruled upon the various motions
praying the Court to decline to accept or to disapprov e the
findings of the Board as to said values and the amount of said
incidenta l damages.
Petitione r prays that the several exception s, objections and motions mentioned in the first
paragraph hereof,
be heard on the respectiv e exception s, objection s, and motions,
and this answer thereto, and the accompany ing supporting affidavits, and thereafte r overruled and dismissed .
Petitione r herewith submits and asks to be read in
support of this answer, the following affidavit s, captioned as
follows: "Affidavi t of
LAW OFFICES
WEAVER &ARMSTRONG
s.
H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re.
General;" "Affidavi t of William E. Carson, dated April 24, 1933,
FRONT ROYAL. VA.
l4J
�filed in the C\erk'~ Office
Rockingham County, Va,
Q,
JUL /J--O 19 33 'f,' ~ 0 c:v . ,,,,,uJ,
RE:
AFFIDA VIT OF WM. C. · ARMSTR
APRIL 24, 1933 . GENERAL.
This affida vit is made at the reques t of the State Commissio n on Conser vation and Develop ment of the State of Virgin ia for
file with the record in all or any of the follow ing Public Park Condemnat ion procee dings pendin g in the Circui t Courts of the Counti es
of Virgin ia in which said Commis sion is petitio ner and in which the
defend ants are as follow s: 1irgin ia Atwood , et als, etc., in the
Circui t Court of Warren County ; Ada Abbott and others , etc., in the
Circui t Court of Page County ; Clifton Aylor and others , etc., in the
Circui t Court of Rappah annock County ; Armen trout, C. E. and others ,
etc., in the Circui t Court of Greene County ; Archer , A. W., and others, etc., in the Circui t Court of August a County ; Cassan dra Lawson
Atkins , et als, etc., in the Circui t Court of Rocking ham County ;
w.
L. Arey and others , e tc., in the Circui t Court of Albema rle County ;
D. F. Anders on, et als, etc., in the Circui t Court of Madison County .
It is my under·s tandin g, purpose and intenti on in making this
sworn statem ent, that the said Commis sion may, in its discre tion,
file and submit the same in suppor t of its prayer s, motion s, answer s,
and conten tions submit ted in the course of all or any of the above
mentio ned cond emnatio n procee dings, includi ng its answer s to the
severa l motion s by claima nts and landow ners in the seve ral above mantioned condem nation procee dings, prayin g the respec tive courts to
decline to accept or to disappr ove the respec tive report s and findings of Specia l Invest igators and Boards of Apprai sal Commi ssioner s
appoin ted in the course of the said condem nation procee dings:
-1-
�M'Y name is W. C. Armstrong.
and by profession an attorney at law.
I am fifty-four years of age,
I am a member of the firm of
Weaver & Armstrong , Attorneys, Front Royal, Virginia, Counsel for the
State Commission on Conservation and Development in the matter of the
proposed condemnation of the lands described in the petition in each
of the above mentioned proceedings for use as a public park, to be
known as the Shenandoah ~ational Park.
In this capacity I attended a large number of the hearings
of the various Boards of Appraisal Commissioners appointed in the
said pr oceedings, \\herein testimony and evidence was submitted in
behalf of the petitioner and claimants and owners, as to the value of
the various tracts sought to be acquired and damages resulting from
the taking thereof.
'vJ ith the approval of our client, the s a id State Commission
on Conservation and Development, I employed other attorneys, Wm.
c.
Armstrong, Jr., of Front Royal, and Curry C. Carter of Staunton,
Virginia, to appear at the hearings of these var ious Boards which I
was unable to attend.
When employed, we were informed by the Hon. Wm. E. Carson,
Chairman of the State Commiss i on on Conse r vation and Development,
that it was the desire a n d purpose of said Commission, to acquire
the lands in the Park Area at their fair cash market value; but that
Petitioner being an a gency of the State, it was not its de s ire to
acquire any l and at less th~n its true value, and that if any mis take
or error should be made by the Boards of Apprais a l Commissioners it
wfould be the desire of the Petitioner that they shoudl err on the side
of liberality, rather than that any owner should be deprived of his
-2-
�lands without just compensation.
1Tr. Carson further advised us that
it was the desire of ·the Commission that the owners and claimants
_should be given the fullest and most ample opportunity to present
their claims and their evidence in support thereof, and that no technical or legal or other obstacles should be thrown in the way of any
owner or claimant in the presentation of his claims whether represented by Counsel or not, whereby such claimant or owner might suffer or
be hindered in securing a full, fair and impartial hearing on his claims,
and his evidence in support thereof.
In a statement made by 1/fr. carson, he correctly set forth
certain further instructions given by him to me as Counsel, in the
following language:"In ~iving instructions to counsel and other agents or representatives or employees of the Petitioner, I took pains to emphasize
the fact that the Conservation commission is an agency of the state and
that the proposed condemnation proceedings were being maintained for
and on behalf of the State and that there was therefore a moral obligation and a clear duty on the Petitioner and all its agents and representatives as well as upon the courts, the Boards of ..Al)praisal Commissioners and other officers of the Courts, to recognize and protect
the rights of all owners and claimants of lands within the area sought
to be condemned to have the lands owned or claimed by them justly and
fairly valued; and that whether these owners or claimants appeared in
the proceedings or not, it was the duty of the petitioner and its
.
Counsel and its other agents and representatives to procure and submit
all available evidence necessary to establish the fair market value
of such lands, whether this evidence tended to raise or to lower their
own estimates of the values of these lands,
I especial ly emphasized
-3llf<I
�.
the duty on the Petitioner and its Counsel and its agents and representatives to be fair and just in appraising and submitting evidence
as to lands for which no owner or claimant appeared in the proceedings,
and lands whose owners, by reason of poverty or ignorance, might not
be able to procure and submit all the available evidence in support of
their claims.
I insisted that in all such cases, it was the clear duty
of the Conservation Commission and its Counsel and other agents and
representatives just as it was the duty of the Courts and their officers,
including the Boards of Appraisal commissioners, to do everything in
their power to prevent injustice being done, and to aid such poor or
ignorant owners in establishing their claims to just compensation.
There were a considerable number of claimants and owners who did not file
their claims in the time allowed by the orders of the respective courts,
and in every county there are some owners and claimants, who, through
ignorance or indifference, never have filed claims or appeared at the
public heaDings to testify as to the value of the lands in whi ch they
own or claim some right, title, estate or interest.
I was advised
in the course of the proceedings that in a limited number of cases
where the owners did file. claims and appeared at the public hearings,
the testimony and the evidence submitted by them was so vague, or
indefinite or unsatisfactory as not to be sufficient to sustain specific
findings of values as high as counsel for the petitioner was ready to
admit, or to which they were clearly entitled on a mere inspection
of the lands claimed by them, and upon learning that such was the
case, I reiterated the above set out instructions, and directed counsel,
and lfil'. Marsh, who was in charge of the proceedings, to do everything
-4-
lsr>
�in their power to make certain that the Appraisal commissioners
were advised as to all the facts as to the value of the lands claimed by such persons, when submitting evidence on behalf of the Petitioner."
In pursuance of these instructions, we advised the various Boards in the various Counties as to the attitude thus taken
and announced by the Petitioner, and no technical objections were
in~erposed to the testimony and other evidence submitted by any claimant or owner on the grounds of incompetence, irrelevance, immateriality, or the like, and every effort was made by counsel for the petitioner to give all owners and claimants full, free and ample opportunity to submit their testimony and evidence freely and without any
attempt by the Petitioner to exclude or to prevent the submission
by owners or claimants of any matters which they deemed advantageous
to themselves, or useful in the presentation of their claims before
the several Boards of Appraisal Commissioners.
Counsel for the Petitioner further advised the several
Boards that in pursuance of the above mentioned policy of the petitioner, no objections would be interposed by the petitioner to requests by claimants or owners for continuances or adjournments of
the hearings and the proceedings generally before the various Boards
to such times or places as might best suit the convenience of the
claimants on owners .
-5[51
�Counsel further advised the various Boards that v.hile Petitioner did not purpose to attend, and would not make it a practice to
be present by Counsel
OP
by its othe r agents or representatives at
the inspections or vie ws of ~the lands in question by the several
Boards, nevertheless, no objection would be made by or on behalf
of the Petitioner to the attendance at these inspections or views
of the claimants o~ owners, or to the submission of testimony and
other evidence by such owners and claimants in the course of such
inspections or views, and in the absence of the Petitioner, as to the
location, extent, and the different elements of value of the lands
in which they claimed an interest:- and this whether or not such
claimant or owners had theretofore filed their respective claims with
the record, but with the understanding that where no such claims had
been filed, the claimant or owner would forthwith submit such claims
in the form and manner prescribed by law.
But while Petitioner and its Counsel d i d not make it a practice to attend the said inspections or views, nevertheless, Counsel
never offered any objection and uniformly acceded to any suggestion
at the public hearings, either of the Boards themselves, or of the
owners or claimants to the adjournment or continuance of the hearings
to the land itself, and in such cases , Counsel and the agents and
witnesses of the Petitioner attended the adjourned hearing, when
practicable , a t the time and place to which it had been adjourned,
and as above indicated, waived its right to object to the taking of
the testimony and evidence of the claimants or owner in the absence of
the Petitioner, if for
any reason Counsel or the agents or witnesses
to fht ~etitioner were unable to attend at th e time and place fixed
for the adjourned hearing .
- 6/5'2-
�Although -·there is respectable precedent and authority in condemnation cases for the taking of testimony and evidence as to the
value of the land sought to be condemned, and for the adoption of the
appraisal measures set forth in Section 29 of the Public Park Condemnation Act, by Appraisal Commissioners, in the absence of the parties to the proceedings or of either of them, when authorized or when
not expressly prohibited by the statutes:- nevertheless, I was of
opinion from the outset of these proceedings that the Courts of Virginia might construe the proviso set forth in the said Section 29
of the Act, securing the opportunity and the right to be heard after
due notice, as to values and damages, to all owners and claimants who
had filed their claims with the record as prov~ded in Section 7 of
I
I
the Act , as an express grant of the right to such owners and claimants, not merely to present their own evidence as to values and damages, but also to be present and to hear any other testimony and evidence taken or considered by the Board as to such values and damages,
and to cross examine the witnesses by whom such testimony and evidence is submitted, and to offer evidence in rebuttal, or explanation
of such evidence.
Accordingly , and as a matter of sound precaution, I advised
my associate counsel and the various Boards of Appraisal Commissioners in these proceedings, that in any case in which any claimant or
owner had filed his claim with the record, and appeared at the public hearings in response to the published order setting the date for
such hearing, the Pet itioner would submit no testimony or evidence
other than the testimony and evidence submitted at such public
hearings or adjournments, or continuances thereof, with due notice
.-;/.-
53
�to such owners and claimants .
At the same time I expressed the opin-
ion that while we had no power to control the action of the various
Boards, they should not take or consider or procure any evidence,
or take any of the measures a3t out in the said Section 29 of the
Act, without giving such owners or claimants an opportunity to be
present and to cross-examine the witnesses and to offer evidence in
rebuttal .
My understanding is that the various Boards adopted this
view in most cases, though they considered that under authority of the
said Section 29 of the Act, they could and should take the measures
and hear and pr'OCure the testimony and evidence in the form and manner therein set out , if that seemed necessary "in the interest of
just ice II and for the :tr otection of poor and ignorant owners and
claimants who had not been able to submit evidence which would sustain a finding of values or damages as high as they themselves would
set on the lands in question in their own personal inspection or view,
and without considering any of the evidence submitted by the Petitioner and such ovvners or claimants.
So important did I and my associate counsel, regard these
hearings and the protection of the rig..~t of owners and claimants
who had filed their claims with tbe record, to have the testimony
and evidence as to their claims submitted after due notice at public hearings, that with the approval of the various Boards, to whom
we explained our views in this regard, we sought and secured from
the respective Courts in the various Counties above mentioned, orders providing for additional public hearings at which owners and
clainants, whether or not they had appeared at the former hearings,
�could appear and submit testimony and evidence as to their claims,
and any additional testimony or evidence to that already submitted,
in cases where they had appeared at the former public hearings.
The Public Park Condemnation Act does not prescribe or require
the holding of such additional hearings, but it was our view that in
order to correct or supply and failure or omission by any owner or
claimant, to appear and submit his testimony or evidence at the various
hearings, or to secure the attendance of all his witnesses, or to
offer evidence in rebuttal or in explanation of any evidence, documentary or oral that might have been introduced at the former hearing
or at the various inspections or views of the lands in question, it
would be adv is able and e xpe dien t that new and ~dldi tional hearings
should be had by order of the Court, upon newspaper publication as
to the time and place of such hearings, and personal notice mailed
to all owners or claim.ants who had filed their claims with the record.
These new and additional hearings were had after the respective Boards bad completed tbeir inspections and views of the lands
sought to be condemned, and notwithstanding the fact that the Petitioner and the owners and claimants had been afforded full opportunity
to be heard at the former hearings, for the purpose of giving all
owners and claimants an additional opportunity, before the reports
of the respective Boards as to values and damages were finally submitted, to appear and assert and defend their rights and to correct
any failure on their part totake full advantage of the opportunity
so to do, afforded them at the former hearings, without considering whether' such failure could or could not properly be attributed
·- .9-155
�From my observation and knowledge of the proceedings had
before the respective Boards, I am entirely satisfied that the claims
of every claimant and land owner within the proposed Park area were
given full and careful consideration by the respective Boards to
which they were submitted; and I know of no case ~n which any objector
or excepta.nt to the findings of the various Boards filed his claim
with the record and appeared at the public hearings in response to
the published notices thereof and submitted testimony or evidence in
support of his claims; and in vhich such testimony and evidence was
sufficient in itself to sustain a specific finding of values or incidental damages as large as or larger than that actually found by
the Board to whom it was submitted; in which such objector or exceptant was not in fact granted a hearing by such Board, at which he
had full and ample opportunity not merely to submit his own testimony and evidence as to such values and damages, but to hear and rebuttal other testimony, evidence, or information in that regard heard or
considered by such Board.
And so far as my knowledge or information
enables me to si,:eak in this connection, no testimony or evidence was .
submitted, taken, heard, or considered by the Board in such cases
other than the testimony and evidence submitted by the Petitioner
and the claimant or owner at the public hearings and by the claimant
or
0V1ner
in the couse of the inspection or view of the lands in
question by the Board charged with the ascertainment and determination of such values, considered together with the opinions formed
by such Board as a result of its own inspection or view.
A considerable nu.nil:)er of owners or claimants of lands
or interest in lands, within the area sought to be condemned,
-l<J15{,
�failed, or neglected, or declined to file with the re cord their
claims or answers to the petition under the provisions of Section
7 of the Public Park Condemnation Act, and although many of these
owners or claimants have . since filed their answers or claims (without objection by the Petitioner in all cases wherein such claims
were filed at the hearings or views by the several Boards of Appraisal Commissioner s, or prior to the filing of the reports of
the said Boards), nevertheless , a substantial number of such owners
or claimants have not yet submitted or filed their claims as
011m-
ers, or asserted their respective rights to be heard as to the
value of the lands owned or claimed by them, although full and
ample opportunity so to do has been extended to them and each of
them, after due notice as prescribed by the said Act.
In all such cases the Petitioner submitted evidence as
to the value of the lands in which such owners or claimants appeared to have an interest, and offered no objection to the taking of .
such additional evidence or the adoption of such further measures
as the respective Boards of Appraisal Commissioner s deemed proper
in ascertaining , determining and making findings as to the facts
of value of any tract of land within the area, and the amount of
incidental damages which vould result from its condemnation , with
reference to which no owner or claimant had asserted his right to be
heard in the course of the public hearings by uhe Board of Appraisal
Commissioner s in the county in w.hich such land is located.
All of the witnesses, agents, and employees of the Petitioner were instructed by counsel not to submit to any of the said
Boards or the members thereof, any evidence as to values or damages nor
�to discuss or express any opinion in that regard with any of
said Boards except v.hen called as witnesses at the public hearings,
and so far as I am informed or advised, these instructions were
scrupulously and faithfully carried out.
I know of no instance
in vhich any person or persons attempted to exercise, or did in
fact exercise any undue or improper influence over any of the -said
Boards or any members thereof; and I know of no person or persons
who had either the means or the desire so to do, in an attempt
to induce the said Boards or any of them or any of the members
thereof, to make findings of value or of incidental damages less
in amount than it was their respective duty to find in the performance of the duties imposed upon them.
As Clerk of the Court of Rappahannock County for a number
of years, and as an attorney in active practice in Virginia and
especially in the various Counties in which the lands sought to
be condemned in these several proceedings, I have acqUired a wide
and I believe a fair knowle.d ge of land value generally throughout the area sought to be condemned for the Shenandoah National
Park, and I am of the opinion that the uniform tendency of all
of the said Boards was to b e extremely liberal in making their
findings as to the value of the lands within the area and of the
improvements thereon, and that in many instances, their findings
were substantially in excess of the cash market value thereof;
I am of opinion, nevertheless, that the Petitioner and its Counsel
were given full and ample opportunity to be heard in this regard
--12-.......
~
)58
�and that testimony and evidence submitted by the Petitioner as
sell as that submitted by the claimants and owners was given
full and careful consideration by the respective Boards, and
the Petitioner, under my advice, has accepted the findings of
the various Boards as to such values and damages, without interposing any objection or exception thereto.
Witness my signature this 24th day of April, 1933.
- 13-
�J
\
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF .WARREN
)
( ss.
)
Perso nally appea red befor e me, the under signe d Notar y
Publi c in rrry said State and Coun ty, W. C. Arms trong , whose
name is signe d to the foreg oing statem ent, and who being duly
sworn , made oath that the matte rs and thing s set forth there
in
are true to the best of his know ledge and belie f.
Witne ss my signa ture and Nota rial Seal this 24th day
of Apr 11 1933.
My Commission Expire$ December 3rd, 193J
- 14-
�Filed in the Clerk's Office
Rockingham County, Va.
f' ~ a
JUL ?---" 1933
a/,~•
. !erk
i.L _
.:_.r...,
ID...VI ·.,_'
1'7, 1933 .
_..., _
r.J.1his af:i:idavi t is nade c.t the rec:uest of ti:1e
Co :mission on Conservation c.nd Devolopr1ont oi' the StD.te
t te
"ffircinia
0.1..'
fo1~ :ilo \ii th the record in all or :. ny of t:10 followin..; l ubli c Pai~:.
Conde-·,mc).ti on proceedinc;s l)endin: in tl:e Circuit Coul'ts of t::e
Counties of ',rir..;inia in .:_ich se.id Co. 1ission is petitioner c.nd in
nhich the defendants
Ll'8 8.S
follorrs :
Yirginin .t,1ood , et
in t:w Circt'.i t Court of .. arren County ;
in the Circuit Court of Pa e County ;
ls , etc .,
_ da _ bbott o.nd otherE> , etc .,
Clifton .. _ylor and others , etc .,
in t:1e Circuit Court of _ ap:r:iahannoc2~ Count:.r ;
__rm.entrout , ..,
others , etc ., in t~e Circuit Court o~ ~ee~o county ;
nd o·~hcrs ir.. t . .:.e Circuit ,.,ourt o_ . u. ,ustc., C01.,nty;
.
:...nd
.;_J •
..'
_ cher ,
r
c_,ssa11drq Lauson
.... tl<.:ins ct o.ls , cJcc ., in the CircL1.i t CotTt of ..,oc.:ini:._::1, :n county ;
·. • L.
re7
County ;
r:.C:. o·~hers , etc ., in the Ci1·cui t Court of ..__lbe110.1~1e
D. _, . ... nderson et -..ls , etc ., in t·1e Circ1.1.i t Cor;.rt of -'--_di son
County.,
It is 1y unde ..-stc.ndinc , ::_mr2:)ose 0.nd intention in :.m:~~:inc
t~_is suorn state:ne .. t , ti1L-t tho so.ic.t cor.lission '"lC:' , in its di:.:,cre tion. , file und subv1it t:10 so.ne in Sl:.pport of its pro.yel~r: , r:iotions ,
e.ns·.rn1~s , · r.C::. co ... tenti01.s sub-.1i ttod in tJ:,e course
o:::
_,ll o:~
n:·
t:.e '- 'Jove .w .tion ;cl conde-·J110.tion :procoedin~ s , includin0 its
to the s8ve1° 1 1...otions by cl~.i:L.~1ts
nd lanclo :ners in
-~:rn
c
or
nS'twrs
sevcr~.l
..... bove 1entio:ed corde.n__ tion ::;i:r·oceecin__:s , iir :inc: the res:;iective
courts to decline to .... cccpt or to Qj_s .... pp:'ove t:_
..i
S Si O:lLl'::,
ceeC L1
rcspecti7e reports
ointcG. in
s:
- 1-
'"'
�Hy name is __rthur Bevan.
::y post office address is
University , Virginia .
'U•.1.LIFI c..TI ons
DUC-~TIOJT
I run. the 3tate Geolo 6 ist of Virsinia .
lor of Science decree
&t
I took my _..,ache -
Ohio .IesleJan 'Cni ver·si ty , specializing in
geoloc;y , and received the degree of Ph . D. , mc.gna cur:1 laude , in
e;eoloc;y from the tTni versi ty oi' Cl1icago .
I was em.ployed as a geolo -
cist in the cap~cities of teacher , research investieator and field
geologist by the Ohi o ~sleyan University , tLe · Chio State University ,
the ~niversity
o:
:~ntana , the ~niversity of Chicago , t~e University
of Illinois , the United States Geolocical Survey , the Ohio Geolo gical uu:i. ve7;
0
0 ,
the
~ont na
ureau of :ines , end the Illinois State
Geolosical .JUrve:r , c.. t v1:.rious tines betueen the years 1913 and 1929 ,
I have doiie nore or less geolo~ical uork in thirty- five
inclusive o
states in the Union , nnd I have carried on extensive geoloe:;ical investi~ations in so~e of then .
I .ms c.ppointed State Geolosist o:L' 7ir;:;i1iia as o::.' June l ,
1929, end since that tine I ·1c.ve been enGaced in ·.,orl: 11ore especiL-i.lly
directed to tho study of the c;eolo~y and t:~e 11ine2' 1 recources of
Vir iniu .
have ha.d
In t~1is .. or~c I :w.ve been in direct cmisultation '.,it~---., __ n
-1,
G11e
• +
o.ss1s
vo.nce of , a group of e:::1)e:.'tly t:i.'~_ined L'.eolo j_sts
v~o have been and ere criticQlly investi~eting the geoloey cnd ~iner-al resources t..nd e.llie- ref,ources of -econo ic Vc..lue in the Stc.te
of 'Tirt;inic... , SO'?J.e of t_ is ·,ro::·~= being under ;:ny 1· 1'1ed.iate G.:ld direct
su~18l'Vis j_on .
- c-
�at ,cinno 1 ts
c.
....JLri c n Ce!'a.J 1i c 0oci et:r ,
nC. ..,echn ico.l quo.li fic ... ti ons :
_2:·ieri can Instit ute of
_ssoc iation
n:;inee r-s ,
rir.in__; end >-et~l lur ;ic&l
of _r11eri can St .te Geolo ~ists , r•eolo..;ic<-.1 Socie ty of __rncric c , G-eolo
log i s t s ,
c;icc.l Socie ty of Uashi ngton , Si g:ia Xi, So ci ety of ...::conomic Geo
and .ashi ngton __ cademy of Sci enc es .
Toge t her with f:I' . ·.!ill i am
Geolog i s t of Vi r6i n i a , I have g i ven
I:. IrcGi ll , ~ .. ssist ant s t a te
_e cia l attent ion and study for
Nathe lest three years to the ge ology of the pro posed Shenan doah
of
t ional Park area , and we hav e made a ca r eful and thorough s tudy
for .utio!"!.s throu 1~out th'"'t r·.1'e. , L .vin.::; espec L.lly in Eind the
tL.e
i ts
I'GT>orted cl,._,i•.1.:.. , 1y v rious la.ndo· ,i.crs , o:' v lu ble :.iner .1 de:pos
re .. inc:.·l des :p&rts
and rie;ht s in or on 1 ....1.1cls ii... t:_ t r:;-e •
reono , : ... disoL ,
of the . lue ..~idc;;;e lyin · in the countir ..:f' of •. lbe- ·""·Tle ,
c.c:..'1·e n ,
-
._,, '
.
nc1
.uU US t~.
J
, '-·s s:
01.;n
on the
v rious .....:)s =1repcTeQ by the :J:::~i tee. States Geclo[ :ic 1 .__u:i..·ve:' , :::'ilcd
in Cc..c·~ o:Z' the .bove ne:1tio ned count ies v:i th t;.1e reti tion in the
above nontio ned conde-: in tion ;_1roce edL1 ·s .
'.l1:1i;.:
re& is t:.c s
th t B1loun on tho preli~ 1ir:::...ry sheets of tLE..: to}_)o.._;r ....p· ic
1
u
n..s
=> of the
• S . Geo lo-
)ropos erl drnr: ....ndo h ~.,.. ti on:.l -'- r:. , c.lso prep rec: 'uy tl·.c
0
1.e
ic .1 ~n:,:vey .
'::he ,::eolo uic conc.i tions in t:,is _-.. ea '.1·e set fo1. . th on
the "Geolo __;icf 1
.... = of li::c· ).ni:.:, ,
cical Surve y· ivisio n o-:..: -~
v
1
)nb:.:..i s:ied in 1928 by the Geolo -
'Ji:.. . j_r..L utcto Co..-nissio n
,,
01.
C01.se rvc.-
eolo- ic l uu:...·vey has :...lso
·:.ic:1 des er ibos
nc1 rl:i. scusse s
- d -
nose de-
lLL__;
lon., c.n-.:1 r.e r ti_o ueste rn borde r of t:_c propo sed
)U1J -
r..,.
I •'r
--
�the field ·.rnr~: on · .:_i ch ,;as do· .e durinc__, nnd coon -=~fte:i.: t:ie
.... t
ti -:e ~1:1e __ , ,Jee use of
Jorld .
"Y>
... ....
'
.dv.... nced · 1·ice s , interest both ca~ ierical
~nd scientific , ~-;as sh r:)ly .... roused in :11anci...nese cnu otl1er mineri.. l
deDosi ts in :rorthern Vir ___:inio. .
The fo!-- __...tions c _.d ,.,ineri.:,l de:._ osi ts of tLe P ,r:: L,rea. ~tnd
e.djoinins territory in i-m:.-t wrn 7i:: i1.i::.. , L .ve been e::tonsi vely investi ,e.ted by scientists , econo:11.ic '-~eolo 0 ists and Jai:~in_:
fi(;L ,
_nd
.
subst Ltic.l nu:1ber of ::_; ~)ers a.Le.. tre:J.tises h .... ve been pu"ulis_rnd dec..linc
·itL the econCT1ic es1ects of these deposits , includinc ~1onc oth-
ers , _1ublications discussin
the .,..1--::.n...;c..Eese , i:.~on , copper , cl(.:r , <-,nd
limestone de,osits ~nd resources .
s0~11e
of t_.ese technic:.l re1Jorts hcve been p1~eparerl ___ r:.d
~,ubli sLed by the "U . S . Geo loci c~ 1 0urvey , L.r d det.l
. i th for:u:... t ions
~.nd deposits alon:, -~he ·e,.__stc.,rn side of tLs obenandoeJ1 Vc,lley , c..t the
foot of t:,e 1Jlue • id...;e , .. ~ i ch c.djoins -~hs _:ro:posed - .rk c.Xec. on the
·:rest .
_he s;.1ovrin('.:s of · ineral c.e:posi ts in t:1e nort:_u"n
~
lue
id__:e
in Vir ·inic. have c,lso been discussed L.t lenc;th in :._;ublicc. tions by
fo::~1er ...,tc.te Geolo ist , .u:' . ':'llo:-w.s L • .. c.tson , . . . nd oth,j_:s .
It is ca:.on knowledce , supported by records ·nd of_icial
and technicc.l repo:r·ts , th t the e~:::istence o:' copper , iron , ::ic.rrs,.nese ,
li:1estone and. clays 1~vsemblin:-__; kl'..olin , in tLe nort:iern section o::'
Vi rE.;inL. . , -...nd in the vici1ci ty of the I~a tioncl P:::.rl-: are, , 11£.s been
q__ui te generally :.nO\iil f OI' the C:C'ea ter pi..-rt Of
<--,
century ; Lnd th e1 e
1
are ntu-rierous indi cations of exiJlorL.. tions and efforts to develo:9
miner1..:.l deposits at vo.rj_ous !)Oints ui thin nnd ;,itl out the l'::...rl: , rea
in : ·orthern 7ir ·iniL..
u:1ile u_r - ti
1e
u:.,in~; u1d :,:o:c· so: 18 ti .e
r
-
-".J. ->-+1.,-"·r -:-:110
....,
v
0·~1d
.l..
••
L.r ,
prices p1°ev'-'-iled for t·ie a,Jov•·. . , ·.1e11"t,i
. . oned :niner ..... ls ,
f(,11
�there was great ectivity in t~ese Ltte~pts to exploit ~nd develop all
lands supposed to contain deposits of _1anganese and copper in the Park
area , Lnd in the adjoininc territory in :·orthe:i.~n Virginia o
Substantial deposits of valuaole manganese
01
es o.re to
be found e.nd l1ave been developed corn.rnorci&lly in t:1e . limestone c..re&
along the eastern side of the ,.::,henandoah Vc.lley at t·
nest slope of the Blue
idge Park area .
foot of the
One of the :no st productive
of these is located at Grimora iri. ~ ..u 6 usta County , o. very short dis tance outside of t:e Park :ound ry in that section of
ugusta County.
So , ulso , substantial o.nd ve.luablo developments of iron
ore have been 1.1ade at various points in the limestone belt on the
eastern side of the Shenandoah 7alley , c,ncl
boundary of the Pari: area in t:1e
~
lue
l
p.9roaching the ·.ms tern
,idGe ; but no evidences of sub-
stantial or valuable deposits of iron or !J.anc neso ore ho.ve been discovered \Ii thin the Parl:: area itself .
The line
01·
derno.rkation between the lir.1-estone belt , cL.rry-
ing 110re or less e::tensi ve ancl valuaole deposits of these minerc.ls ,
in the lonlands outside the Parl: area. , t...nd at the foot and uest of the
Blue LidGe , and the sandstone and crystalline rocks in the e l eva t e d
section of the Blue RidGe included nithin the P·rk aree , is clear
and distinct , &nd can be traced \Tith reasonable ease ~nd certeinty .
:~o evidences of the e:~i stenc e of substo.ntial bodies of
iron , manse.nose or copper or o"vher oro are to be found ui thin the 1.""'ark
arec.. , and the explorations and developnent 1:1ade ui thin the
a.rl: area
disclose either that nll the deposits of iron, manganese , and copper
.1i t _in tlli s e.rea 0.re so lou in ere de E.nd vc1l ue , or in sucl~ lini ted
1
extent , as r:ot to justify e.ny fu:... t:1er e. tte:1pt at co: 11ercial develop :nent .
- 5-
�In recent years motallure;ical processes for the vrLinning
o·f copper fro::n its ores have been developed uhereby dei)osi ts of cop per of relatively 1O ,r- ~,rade ho..vo been ninec1 and treated . . . t a profit ,
1
but such co~IBrciGl operations have been possible on a profitable
scale only uhere deposits of lou- ~rade ore have been found in enor 1110us bodies of virtually unlini ted tonna ·e , ,lhi ch justify mining op eretions on a very larJe scale to produce ore concentrates of constant value .
In such operations tllrJ ore deposits nust be located at
points accessible to co~venient uater , fuel , railroad transportation
and mar';:ets •
. .;.11 the known copper cleposi ts in the Jlue _.idce Pc.rk area
occur in narrou stringers , ·chin veins , end s:-rn.11 poc~:ets uhich toeether
constitute only
c:
very s:null fraction of the rocl: mass , a fraction so
sn&ll ~s to pro~ibit any possibility of their being developed and concontro..ted o.nd shipped at a profit ,
Further--ilore , ~11 l:.:no·an evidences
indic.:.te tho.t these striLgerf.:, , veins und pocl:ets _are li:ui ted to the
upper part of the e:c!)Osed rock and do not exte d to any conside::cable
deu·ch .
It should be clearly understood o.nd emphasized that the
occurrence , distribution , a:1ota1ts , a.nd tenors of ::my 2.nd ull l:noun
and accessible nineral deposits in t~e northerL ~lue _idce in 7ir ginia and in the adjacent Shenandoah 7alley on the west , ~nd the
adjacent
i ecl'J.on t :;:egion on tile eCLst are intirn:.. tely dependent Ul)On
the_ geologic conditions iL those are&s , J xticularly as to the kinds
of rocl: i'or111ations present , the st1'uc t ure or 2.ttitude of t:~ose
formatior;.s , and t 1e erosione.l history of those rccions
ro c~s have ~ec~1e exposed
\I
ere by tlle
and the prese1.t surface of the land has
/bC.
�been developed .
-·
These facts explain decisively vrhy deposits of clt y ,
mangunese , iron and other materials of corimerciQ l value in the past
have been mined and quarried in the eastern part of the Shenando~ h
Valley .
They lil:eui se demonstre:. te the absence of' importLnt mineral
deposits of any kind in the adjacent ~lue .. idge , and explain the
lack of any successfu l co~.1.1ercie.l ::iineral developme nts in the Park
area in northern pLrt of the Blue 3idge in Vir 5 inia , even in ti~es
of 0 re£..t deI?1ancl. , and therefore tb1es of developme nt of L.11 lcnm:m
deposits nhich gcve promise of beins i'Iorl:aole at '-'- profit .
.i.1
hey
likeui se ex:pL•. in uhy the copper deposits in "Lho :.,1ue ... id 0 e Par:;: o.rea ,
unlit:e those found in the Pied..ruont
.egion of Vir ini'--. , he..ve not been
found to have any co· iercicl value .
I have done extensive e;eolo;icG. l ·.rork over the len_;th
e.nd .)read th of the P: rl: arec. , tnd I have examined the 3lue Ridge
in every county .
·rr . !IcGill , ._ssistant State Geoloc;ist c.nd I ,
sepvcrately or tocetilf r· i1ave visited c~ll propertie s ui tL.in the ,rea
on ·.Ihich any substanti al
L
\:no· m to hcve been 11ad.e .
tteLl.pt at e:z::plon.tti on or developme nt u.re
IL not one o:.i.' tl1cse instc.nces Lave r!e
found evidences of t.ny ·1iner2.l u.eposi te ir. sue'
quu ti ty or
O.i.
such
grade as uould justify co- r iercial uevelopr11En:.-~ even U1.dUl' the sti:•mlus
existed in the last century , or 1hic~ r1ay be expected to prev~il
at any re:....sonabl e time L
-~he future .
Jecc..use of tht., ezistence of valuable depo.si ts of
gt..ncse o.nd iron in tl1
10 .rle.nds in t:1e minero.liz ed li nest one belt
no -c "'·-' r distant fro :1 tl1c
tll:ro1..,.uhout -~he P
:i:';:
-..re
riian-
1
.....::::~
rL0. ,
nG. ' e ce-usc here o.na_ tLoi·e
there Lre s:j.orri1 cs of 1:mn a.ncse, , cop:9er
0
- 7/1.1
�and iron in tl1e outcropp ing roe:: ui thin the area , owners
o:2 lands ui thin the area. he.vo laid cl&in at various tines
to the existe1£ e of valuable ore~ and :nineral 7iGhts in
the i r lands ·rr:i. thin the o.rer , but t:10 com1;lete fni lure of
ell -~Le :n~.n:7 a t-cempts to exploit suci: clo.i rJ.s , even ul1on
the hit..,:10s t prices :prevaile d f
Ol'
these mineral s , Lnd the
o..bsence of ::..ny evidcnce:c :, of proven "bodies of co21erci G.l
value 'ri thin t~ie ar8 , ,
c..
tl1e. t ceoloc..:i c co11di tions
t:m t I
c:::.n
m.a.
I
nd tho ::no·.;n .. :i.1u.. est bli shed 'act
\Ii t
i11 tl o : r·
do assert thP.t th
j.'C
>w
ar04-.~
c
1~e sucl1
is no reasonab le
ground to Lnticipa tc "che e:.:istcnc e of cuch uineral de :posi ts of co 1crcial Vc,lue ·.1it:~in tLo PEL: area .
I do :i.10t hesi t· te to ex:9res .. ny 1cturcd opinion
Il deed
nd con-
clusion th' t no ninon.. l rich ts in L.ny of the lo.nds \'i thin the Per:.
c
rca liavc o:i: coulc.. h,.,_ve c ny .1~:. :::et v ,luo ,
0
_ nd t:::.e.t t:1ere are no nir.. eral dci)osi ts i .
,ny of these
lc.nds uh i cl adu. to theil' ..1 rLet Value .
I cc.1. und clo further express :,1y ·ns.-~u:. ed
O~)iriion · nd conclusi on ti :...t ir1 view of illH.,t is set out
above , no cl&L1 of _1j_nerc.l rich ts iL or to c...r:.7- of tlle
lnnds ui tl1in the Park arcc. c~1.:1 or· d.oes add m:ything to
the 1.1erket value of any 1£1.nds vri thin the Pt:.rl: area as
to ·w hich such claims are made , in the absenc e of a proven
body of mi ner a l or e sufficie nt to justify either f u r ther
- 8-
�exploration or
ttempt at commercial development, and that
there are no evidences of the existence of any such proven
bodies of ore within the Park area .
Witness my signature
-9 -
�STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF WARREN
)
( ss.
)
Personally ap:IBared before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in my said State and County,
Dr. Arthur Bevan, whose name
is signed to the foregoing statement, and who being dµly sworn,
made oath that the matters and things set forth therein are true
to the best of his knowledge and belief.
Witness my signature and Notarial Seal this l2_
day o f ~ 1933,
y om mission Expires December 3.rd, 1933
It
�Filed in the Clerk's Office
Rockingham County, Va.,
.J
JUL 'J-- 0 1933.f-' ..:1, 4-/, -?n.l,
~~
AFFIDAVIT OF WILLIAM
MAH~ ~ '
lerk
DATED APRIL 22, 1933. Re • . GENERAL
MINERAL CLAIMS.
This affidav it is made at the request of the State Commission on Conserv ation and Developm ent of the State of Virginia for
file with the record in all or any of the followin g Public t'ark Condemnatio n proceed ings pending in the Circuit Courts of · the Counties
of Virginia in which said Commiss ion is petition er and in which the
defenda nts are as follows: Virginia Atwood, et als, etc., in the
Circuit Gour> t of Warren County; .h.da Abb.ot t and other, etc., in the
Circuit Court of Page County; Clifton Aylor and others, etc., in the
Circuit Court of Rappahan nock County; Armentr out, C. E. and others,
etc., in the Circuit Court of Greene County; Archer, A.
w.,
and
others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County; Cassand ra Lawson Atkins, et als, etc., in the Circuit court of Rockingh am County;
W. L. Arey and others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Albemar le County;
D. F. Anderso n, et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Madison County.
It is my understa nding, Purpose and intentio n in making
this sworn stateme nt, that the said Commiss ion may, in its discreti on,
file and submit the same in support of its prayers , motions , answers ,
and contenti ons submitte d in the course of all or any
of the .a bove
mention ed condemn ation proceed ings, includin g its answers to the
several motions by claiman ts and landown ers in the several above mentioned condemn ation proceed ings, praying the respecti ve courts to
decline to accept or to disappro ve the respect ive reports and findings of Special Investig ators and Boards of Apprais al Commiss ioners
appointe d in the course of the said condemn ation proceed ings:
-1-
�My name is Willia m Mahone
addre ss is Unive rsity,
cGill , and my post office
1Y1
Virgi nia.
The follow ing is a summa ry statem ent of my educa tion,
experi ence and quali fic ations as a geolo gist and mining engin eer:
1914-1 917:
Virgin ia..
Virgin ia Milita ry Instit ute, Lexin gton,
Gradu ate in Civil Engin eering , 1918. 1917-1 919:
First
Lieute nant, United States Army (Infan try and Adjut ant Gener als Departm ent.) Company Offic er, Company Commander. Batal lion, Regimenta l and Camp tieadq uarter s, Staff Offic er.
Schoo l of mines , Golden Colora do.
Geolog y 1922.
1922-1 924:
1920-1 922:
Colora do
E. M. in Mining Engin eering and
Fellow , Instru ctor and Assis tant Pro-
fesso r, and also post gradu ate stude nt, Colora do Schoo l of Mines .
1924-1 928: Field inves tigati ons and profe ssiona l consu lting (mining and oil) work in Califo rnia, Colora do, J.~ew Mexic o, Ol{lahoma,
Texas , Utah, Virgi nia, Wyoming and Ontar io, Canada (Canad a, Virgi
nia,
and 7 other states )~ 1929- to date: Assis tant State Geolo gist,
Virgi nia Geolo gical Surve y.
Ontar io, Canad a,"
Virgin ia.,"
Autho r of ''Gold and Silve r Mining in
"Expl oratio ns for Oil and Gas in South wester n
"Cave rns of Virgi nia,"
"Natu ral Wonde rs of Virgin ia"
( in prepa ration ), short articl es and review s, and many priva te
(unpu blishe d) repor ts. Member Ameri can Assoc iation of Petrol eum
Geolo gists, Ameri can Instit ute of Mining and Metal lurgic al Enginee rs, Virgi nia Academy of Scien ce.
Since my appoin tment as Assis tant State Geolo gist
of Virgi nia in 1929, I have made a carefu l study of the geolog y,
and of the possi biliti es of comm ercial develo pment of miner als
and miner al depos its in the area known as the propos ed Shenan doah
-2112.
�National Park, being the lands described in the petitions in the
above mentioned condemnat ion pro_ceedings.
LOCATION AND TOPOGRAPHY OF AREA:
The proposed Shenandoa h National Park comprises a
relatively narrow elongate strip, roughly eighty miles in length
and from one to ten miles in width, extending northeast erly along
the Blu e Ridge mountains from the vicinity of Waynesboro in Augusta
County to Front Royal in Warren County.
The greater part of the
land within the proposed boundarie s (practica lly the entire area)
is mountain land, lying mainly along the crest of the Blue Ridge
and extending down the slopes of the main central ridge and numerous short spur ridges, extending out from it on the southeast and
northwest wides, to the base of the spur ridges.
The surface is
rough, rocky and hilly, the topo graphy b eing largely that of mountainous country.
Some of the land is quite heavily timbered.
Elevation s range from about 1,000 feet above sea-level along the
southeast ern bouniary (eastern base of the Blue Ridge) to 2,5003,000 feet along the crest of the central (main) ridges.
A few flattish areas of relatively small extent occur
locally along the peneplaine d tops of the Blue Ridge which may be
classed as (considere d) grazing or farm land and similar small
tillable areas occur along the lower courses of the streams which
drain the area, mainly along the flanks of the ridges along or
just outside the proposed Park boundary.
GEOLOGY:
Throughou t its northeastw ard extent across the proposed Park area the core or backbone of the Blue Ridge is composed of
-3-
173
�crystalline or igneous rocks, principally dense and dark basaltic
rocks (gran;te, granite-gnei ss and greenstone) flanked by relatively narrow belts of greenstone-s chist, serricite-sc hist and
similar altered crystalline rocks.
The east slope of the Blue
Ridge is composed of crystalline rocks varying from weathered
gray metamorphose d schist (Catoctin Schist) to dense dark basaltic
(massive) igneous rocks.
Syenite, Granite and other igneous rocks
flank the metamorphose d and basaltic types.
The more massive
basaltic and schist have been, in places, changed into epidote
and chlorite-sch ists.
Belts of folded sedimentary rocks, mainly
sandstone, slate and quartzite, which rest against or overlie
the crystalline rocks along the west slope of the Blue Ridge.
The foothill ridges which roughly parallel the main mountain
mass and many of the spur ridges on the west side of the Blue
Ridge are composed of the hard sandstone and quartzite formations.
These forn:ations are known as (1) Unicoi sandstone,
(2) Hampton shale (slate) and (3) Erwin quartzite.
ihe sand-
stone and quartzite beds in places form cliffs or ledges.
Over-
lying and west of the quartzite along the western base of the
foothills on the east side of the Valley are the Shady dolomite
(limestone) and Watauga shale formations.
'r he character and extent of the known and reported
occurrences of mineral along the northern pa.rt of the Blue Ridge
are definitely related to the geology - the kind, character extent and structure of the rocks - of the region.
The
geology of
the northern part of the Blue Ri dge region, particularly in the
area in which it is proposed to establish the Shenandoah National
Park, as herein indicated and as described in several bulletins
of the United States and Virginia G8 ological Surveys, is not con-4-
�sidered favorable tp the occurrenc e of commercia l quantitie s of
mineral.
Scattered occurrenc es of iron, manganese , and copper
are known to occur and others have been reported locally throughout the general region.
But there are no proved deposits within
the proposed Park area which are commercia lly workable, the known
deposits being very limited in extent and of low grade.
MINERAL DEPOSITS:
The crystallin e rocks along the backbone and east
slope of the Blue Ridge have been fractured or broken and contain
numerous fissures and fractured zones.
The fissured and fractur-
ed zones in the epidote area contain small lenses and veinle ts
of quartz which carry small amounts of copper.
The copper occurs
as small irregular lenses in the quartz and as scattered grains
in the epidote.
The copper occurs as native copper, cuprite or
copper oxide, bornite and chalcopyr ite or copper sulphides , and
rarely as malachite or green copper carbonate and azurite or blue
copper carbonate .
Slight and scattered showings of iron, chiefly
as iron oxide, also occur.
Copper has been known to occur along
the east slope of the Blue Ridge for more than fitty years and
much prospectin g has been done but there are no indication s of the
existence of deposits vv:t thin the area of any commercia l value.
The sandstone , quartzite and limestone formation s
which formerly covered the west slope of the Blue Ridge even
above its present summit have through the ages past been subjected to weatherin g and erosion.
They have gradually been broken,
worn down and carried SNay by streams leaving the present mountains and ridges composed of underlying harder rocks {greensto ne,
granite, schist, sandstone and quartzite ) and forming valleys in
-5-
175
�areas underiain by limestones and shales of the weaker rocks.
The limestone (Shady dolomite) and the upper part of
the quartzite (E~win quartzite) formations have decayed and disintegrated into clay and sandstone.
The clay and sandstone have
been washed down the mountain . slopes and accumulated in valley
or trough-like areas between the foothill ridges and along the
outer flanks of the ridges forming residual clay and gravel (sand)
deposits, many occurring as terraces or benches.
Accumulations of brown iron ore (iron oxides) and
deposits of manganese (manganese oxide), of variable size but
usually of limited extent and impure in quality, were formed
locally in a relatively narrow belt along the western base of
the B1ue Ridge in Virginia, (but outside the Park area) between
the Potomac on the north and Roanoke on the south.
These deposits
occur chiefly as pockets and lenses in the residual clays in a
zone about 500-700 feet thick ranging from the upper p:1rt of the
Erwin quartzite through the Shady dolomite to the lower part of
the overlying (westwru.•d) Watauga shale.
The majority of the
deposits, however, occur in a zone of weathered (residual.) clay
in the lower 300 feet of the Shady dolomite.
Rarely manganese
occurs as vein-like fillings in fissures in sandstone and quartzite
beds.
Such fissure fillings are very impure, containing variable
amounts of silica.
Many local areas have been prospected within
the past 60 years or more and some slight production of iron and
manganese has been obtained in the past from a few of the more favorably located deposits i .n the above described belt, but there
are no indications of successful commercial development of iron
or manganese or copper ore within the Park area.
�There are no developed mines within the proposed Park
area at this time nor is there available any record of the connnercial production of any minerals within this area.
The largest
mine which has been developed in this i;::art of the Blue Ridge region
is the Crimora (manganese) mine, located about 2-1/2 miles east
of
Crimora in Augusta County, and in the above mentioned mineral-
ized belt along the western base of the Blue Ridge and outside the
Park area.
This :rroperty is outside of the proposed Park boundary
and is the largest proved and developed property in this general
region.
On p.1.ge 83 of Bulletin 17 of the Virginia Geological Sur-
vey, prepared and published in 1919 under the direction of the late
Dr. Thomas L. Watson, former State Geologist of Virginia, the following statement concerning the Crimora mine is made by Dr. D. F.
Hewett, geologist of the United States Geological Survey, one of
the authors.
"The Crimora mine has long attracted unusual interest
because it has the nistinction of having yielded more manganese ore
than any other mine in the United States.
It was discovered before
the need for manganese alloys in modern steel-making practice was
fully realized, and for several years it contributed a large part
of the ore required by the domestic steel industry. Since about
1895, however, the domestic heeds have been supplied largely from
rich deposits in Russia, India, and Brazil, and, like many other
domestic deposits wmse product had to be concentrated to yield
a marketable material, it has been unable to successfully compete
for the market at prevailing prices and has been operated intermittently only.
As the war brought~ period of high prices for
manganese ore, an attempt was recently made to reopen the mine
on a larger sea.le than ever before".
-7177
�.•
Despite its history, and high state of developme nt
this property is not now in operation and available records do
not show productio n from it for the pas t twelve years or more.
FINDI NGS:
A.
(1).
Eas.tern slope of the Blue Ridge.
(Copper).
The copper found in this general area is in lean
and shallow deposits, genera l ly not over 30 to 50 feet in depth.
(2).
~t occurs in fissures and as irregular lenses in
sheared or fractured zones in the chlorite schist and epidote
rocks.
(3).
The deposits are irregular and not continuou s.
Few, if any, ture veins occur.
(4).
The history of prospectin g and attempted opera-
tions in this area has not been encouragi ng.
No deposits of com-
mercial importance at the present time have been proved.
There are no prospectin g or developme nt operation s in progress
at this time and as far as known none have been a ttempted within
the past several years.
(5).
There is no showing (or proved deposit) of suffi-
cient importance in any of the tracts investiga ted to warrant the
expenditu re of any add itional time or money in furth er prospectin g.
B.
Western elope of the Blue Ridge.
(Iron and
manganese • )
(1).
The brown iron ore in the clay was mined for
limited local demand several decades ago.
-8-
118
�There are no indications that these occurrences have any commercial
value.
(2).
Manganese was extensively prospected and mined
the west foot of
along
the Blue Ric.ge during the World War in the mineral
belt above mentioned, and outside the Park area.
Under the stimu-
lation of abnormally high prices all known deposits of commercial
value probably were mined to some extent.
There are no indications
of the discovery or development of commercial deposits of manganese
within the present boundary of the Shenandoah National Park.
( 3).
·r he scattered fragmental material found along
the hillsides and valley slopes does not indicate the presence
of any occurrences of any probable value.
Such fragments ·a re
transported or float material derived from the decay and breakdown of rocks higher on the mountain slopes.
(4).
There are no indications that the portion of the
Blue Ridge and the foothill ridges embraced within the boundaries
of the proposed Shenandoah National Park contains deposits of iron
which would prove of commercial value even within the remote future.
Unless deposits of iron are of large extent and of relatively high
grade, they can not be considered as reserves of probable future
value in view of the enormous tonnages available in the Lake Superior and Birmingham districts.
The fact that mining of iron
has never been attempted in the northern Blue Ridge, exclusive of
the deposits mentioned in (1) above, even under the stimulus of
favorable markets, also suggests strongly that these deposits are
not commercially important.
-91-fi
�CONCLUSIONS~ ·
I am, personally, familiar with the proposed Shenandoah National Park area in the Bloo Ridge region of Virginia,
both from a study of available literature on the geology and
history of attempted mineral development of the area and from
personal examination of numerous properties within or situated
near the proposed Park boundaries.
From my personal knowledge
of the area and the results of detailed studies throughout the
same, I do not believe that, under prevailing economic conditions,
any of the known deposits of iron, manganese, or copper occurring within the present boundaries of the proposed Shenandoah
National Park are of co:rmrercial development value, or will be of
any commercial value even under greatly improved market (and
economic) conditions, or within the reasonably remote future.
Among the publications bearing on the geology, geological history and history of mining explorations of this area, are:
Rogers, W. B., Geology of the Virginias; D. Appleton & Company,
New York, 1884;
ginia;
Watson, T. L., Mineral Resources of Vir-
Virginia Jamestown Exposition Commission, 1907, pp.235-
259 and 491-518, especially pp. 235-238 and 244-253, and pp.
491-492 and 503-511;
Weed, W. H., Copper Deposits of the Ap-
palachian States:
s.
U.
Geological Survey Bulletin, 455, 1911,
pp. 9-16, and 65-121, especially pp. 93-115;
als.;
Stose, G. W., et
Manganese Deposits of the West Front of the Blue Ridge,
Virginia, 1919, 166 pp., especially pp. 27-34, 41-46, 48-56,
57-112;
Harder, E. C., Manganese Deposits of the United States;
-10Jee
�)
u. s.
Geolog icar · Survey Bull et in, 42'7, 1910;
the Appala chian region in Virgin ia:
Bullet in 380-e, 1908;
U.
s.
als.;
u. s.
The ±ron Ores or
Geolog ical Survey
Mangan ese Deposi ts of' the United States :
Geolog ical Survey Bullet in 380-4, 1908;
Hewett , D. F., et
Possib ilities for Mangan ese ure on Certain Undeve loped
Tracts in Shenan doah Valley , Virgin ia, U.
s.
Geolog ical Survey
Bullet in 660-j, 1918, pp. 2'71-29 6, especi ally pp. 2'71-28 2.
In respons e to a direct questio n as to whethe r in my
opinion the minera l ores and deposi ts, or the minera l rights in
any of the various tracts include d in the area describ ed in tm
severa l petitio ns in the above mentio ned condem nation procee dings,
have any comme rcial or market value, I give it as my mature d
opinio n, based on my study of the geology and upon my person al
observ ation and study of practi cally all the knovm prospe cts
and explor ations within the area, that there are no minera l deposits of any comme rcial or market value within the area;
and
that no claim or claims to minera l rights in any of such tracts
have, or could have, any cash market value in the absenc e of an
explor ation or develop ment demon strating proved bodies of ore of
suffic ient extent and purity , and of high enough grade, to justify
either furthe r explor ations or an attemp t at comme rcial develo pment.
I also give it as my mature d opinio n that the geology and the history of former explor ations or attemp ts at develo pment of any of the lands within the Park area clearly and definitel y indica te that there is no sound or suffic ient reason
-11181
�•y
to anticipate the discovery of any bodies of mineral ore
which would justify commercia l developme nt of any of the
tracts within the Park area.
It is further my matured opinion that no unproved
mineral claim or claim of mineral rights in or to any of the
lands within the Park boundary, adds anything to the market
value of such lands, and that there are no indicatio ns of the
existence of any such proved bodies of mineral or mineral ore
of sufficien t extent or quality as to be of any market value,
within the Park area.
Witness my signature this 22nd day of April, 1933.
0
l~
-12- - - ~ ~ - - - - - - -)81
�STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF WARREN
)
( ss.
)
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary
~ublic in my said State and County, William M. McGill whose name
is signed to the foregoing statement, and who being duly sworn,
made oath that the matters and things set forth therein are true
to the best of his knowledge and belief.
Witness my signature and Notarial Seal this 22nd day of
April, 1933.
11 iiss1011 txp11 es Oecember 3rd, l ~.:JJ
18'?>
�-
Filed in the C\erk's Office
Rockingham County, Va,
....
JUL J--"D 1933
f :~ p
.
p,/ .,,,?fl,
u
1
•
RE. GENERAL
This affidavit is ma.de at the Dequest of the State Commis sion on Conservation and Development of the State of Virginia
for file with the record in all or any of the following Public Park
Condemnation proceedings pending in the Circuit Courts of the Counties of Virginia 1n which said Commission is Petitioner and in which
the defendants are as follows:
Virginia Atwood, et als, etc.,
in the Circuit Court of Warren County;
in the Circuit Court of Page County;
Ada Abbott and others, etc.,
Clifton Aylor and others, etc.,
in the Circuit Court of Rappahannock County:
Armentrout, C.E., and
others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Greene County; Archer, A.
and others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County;
w.,
Cassandra
Lawson Atkins, et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Rockingham
County;
w.
L. Arey and others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Albe-
marle County;
D. F'. Anderson, et ala, etc., in the Circuit Court
of Madison County.
It is my understanding, purpose and intention in making this
sworn statement, that the said Commission may, in its discre ,t ion,
file and submit the same in support of its prayers, motions, answers
and contentions submitted in the course of all or any of the above
mentioned condemnation proceedings, including its answers to the
several motions by claimants and landowners in the several above mentioned condemnation proceedings, praying the res pective courts to
decline to accept or to disapprove the respective reports and findings of Special Investigators and Boards of Appraisal Commissioners
appointed in the course of the s a id condemnation proceedings:
-1-
�My name is
w.
H. Stoneburn er.
My post office address 1s
Charlotte sville, Virginia.
A statement as to my training, and experienc e as a forester and as an expert appraiser of lands and improveme nts similar
to those described in the several petitious in the above mentioned
proceedin gs is set out correctly and at length in an affidavit
captioned "Affidavi t of s. H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re.
General," to which reference is made to avoid repetition .
Since March 15, 1~30, I have been Mr. Marsh's principal
assistant in the performan ce of the duties imposed upon him by
the State Commissio n on Conservat ion and Developme nt in connection with the proposed condemnat ion of the Shenandoa h National
Park area, as set forth in the above mentioned affidavit captioned "Affidavi t of S. H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re. General."
Witness my signa ture this 24" day of
April 1933 •
11>5
�u
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF WARREN
)
( ss.
)
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in my said State and County,
w.
H. Stoneburner, whose
name is signed to the foregoing statement, and who being duly
sworn, made oath that the matters and thi ugs set forth therein
are true to the best of his knowledge and belief.
Witness my signature and Notarial Seal this 2411day of
April 1933.
My Commission Expires D
ecember 3rd,
�filed in the Clerkii Offioo
ffgckingham County, Va,
JUL '?-b 1933
1·' .ii
C
O
_,_
,n,v,
AFFIDAVIT OF GEORGE H. LE
This affidavit is made at the request of the State Commission on Conservation and Development of the State of Virginia for
file with the record in all or any of the following Public Park Condemnation proceedings pending in the Circuit Courts of the Counties
of Virginia in which said Commission is petitioner and in which the
defendants are as follows:
Virginia Atwood, et als, etc., in the
Circuit Court of Warren County; Ada Abbott and others, etc., in the
Circuit Court of Page County; Clifton Aylor and others, etc., in the
Circuit Court of Rappahannock County; Armentrout,
c.
E. and others,
etc., in the Circuit Court of Greene County; Archer, A.
w.'
and others,
etc., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County; Cassandra Lawson Atkins,
et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Rockingham County; W. L. Arey
and oth ers, etc., in the Circuit Court of Albemarle County; D. F. Anderson et als, etc., in the Circui.t Court of Madison County.
It is my understandin g, purpose and intention in making
this swarm statement, that the said Commission may, in its discretion,
file and submit the same in support of its prayers, motions, answers,
and contentions submitted in the oo urse of all or any of the above
mentioned condemnation proceedings, including its answers to the
several motions by claimants and landowners in the several above mentioned condemnation proceedings, praying the respective courts to
decline to accept or to disapprove the respective reports and findings of Special Investigator s and Boards of Appraisal Commissioner s
appointed in the course of the said condemnation proceedings:
My name is George H. Levi.
Berryville, Virginia.
My post office address is
I am a farmer by occupa tion, and from time
-1-
�to time in the last twenty years I have owned , operated, managed ,
bought , so l d and leased farm lands including grazing lands, orchards,
vegetable and fruit gardens and the like .
I was appointed a Special Investigator and a member of
the different Boards of Appraisal Commissioners appointed in the
course of the above mentioned Shenandoah National Park Condemnation
proceedings in the counties of Warren, Rappahannock, Page and Rockingham, and as such I joined in the preparation of the respective
reports of said Boards filed with the record in the above mentioned
condemnation proceedings in the respective Clerks' offices .
I was elected as Secretary of each of the said Boards,
and acted as such Secretary in the preparation and filing of their
reports .
GENERAL PROCEDURE:
The general procedure adopted by each of the said Boards
of Appraisal Commissioners in these counties was substantially as
follows: Promptly after our appointment in each county we made
frequent Yisits to the proposed park area therein, as set forth in
the petitions and the maps prepared by the U. S. Geological Survey
filed therewith in the respective Clerks' offices , for the purpose
of acquainting ourselves generally with the location and boundary
lines of this area;
the general character of the lands and improve-
ments within the area;
the claimants and owners of these lands who
filed with the record their claims for the value thereof or for
damages arising out of the proposed condemnation thereof;
- 2-
the
�claimants and owners of lands within the area who had failed or
neglected or wilfully declined to file claims in the record; the
lands in which infants and other incompetent persons appeared to
have an interest; and the location, general topography and character of the various tracts, and the improvements thereon, within
the area, claimed by different owners, or in which different persons appeared to have any right, title, estate or interest .
Thereafter at the time and places named in the various
orders of the respective Courts we conducted public hearings and
took the testimony and evidence submitted by the petitioner and
the claimants and owners who appeared in response to said orders,
as to th e value of the lands sought to be condemned and incidental
dam.ages claimed by reason of their condemnation, having first
satisfied ourselves that notices of said orders had been duly published in the local newspapers, posted at the door of the courthouse in each county, and mailed to all addresses of claimants and
owners filed with the record in the manner and form prescribed in
the Public Park Condemnation Act.
These hearings were adjourned from time to time to suit
the convenience of the various claimants and owners, and ample
opportunity was allowed all and every claimant to procure and submit the testimony of himself and his witnesses and such other
evidence as he desired to submit; and in no case was any claimant
or owner denied an opportunity to submit his claims and his testimony
and other evidence at these hearings.
At the outset of these public hearings in each county,
the attorneys appearing for the Petitioner, announced that they were
instructed to advise the members of the various Boards of Appraisal
-3-
�Comm issione rs that the Petiti oner desire d that the fulles t and most
ample oppor tunity should be given every claim ant of any right , title,
estate or intere st in any lands within the area, or of incide ntal
damag es arisin g out of the condem nation of such lands , to submi t
testim ony and other eviden ce in suppo rt of his claim s; and that no
attem pt would be made to offer techn ical objec tions to such testim ony
or eviden ce on the ground of incom petenc e, imma terial ity or inadm issibility or the like; or on the ground of any failur e of any owner or
claim ant to file his claim of record within the time presc ribed by
the statut e and the order of public ation of the petiti on; or to any
reque st for adjour nment to anoth er time or place to suit the conve nience
of any owner or claim ant or to enable him to procu re and prese nt hi.s
eviden ce and his witne sses.
Couns el for Petiti oner furthe r advise d ~he respe ctive
Board s that if in the course of our perso nal inspe ctions or views of
the variou s tracts of lands of divers e owner ship within the Park area
after the termin ation of the public hearin gs, any person claim ing
an intere st in any of said lands should desire to make any statem ent
or to offer eviden ce as to the locati on or values of the lands
claime d by him, and wheth er or not such person had theret ofore filed
his claim of record , or appea red at the hearin gs, no ob.jec tion would
be submi tted to the receiv ing of such eviden ce on the ground of the
absenc e of the Petiti oner, it being under stood howev er that all such
claim ants would there and then submi t their claim s for file with the
record in the manne r and form prescr ibed in the Public Park Condemnation Act, if they had not done so theret ofore .
As soon as practi cable after the public hearin gs in pursuance of the respe ctive orders of the courts in each county had been
-4-
I'JO
�concluded, and in cases in which the public hearings were not concluded
but adjourned, with no~ice to both parties, to be continued on the particular tract in question, we made intensive and careful inspections
or views of each and every tract of land within the Park area in the
county in which such hearings were had, as to which evidence wqs submitted by the owners or claimants at the public hearings, the value of
which is set forth in the findings in our reports.
We also intensively examined , inspected and viewed all the
various tracts as to which no evidence had been submitted at the hearings, other than that submitted by the Petitioner, or as to which no
claims in writing had been filed with the record of the proceedings
in the Clerks' office, the value of which is set forth in our reports;
and as to such tracts we sought and gained such information from outside sources, including the statements and testimony of adjoining
landowners, court records, deeds, etc., as we deemed useful or necessary
in arriving at a fair and just conclusion as to their value, in any
case wherein we deemed such information necessary or useful in
connection with the evidence submitted by the Petitioner and our own
personal view and inspection of the tract in qu~stion .
During and after the period occupied in making these inspections or views of the various tracts of diverse ownership sought
to be condemned, we, the members of the said Boards, regularly met
together, discussed at length the evidence and the information developed at these inspections and views, and the various elements entering
into the value of these lands, and after full consideration and
discussion filled out the "work sheets" which were later filed with
our reports in each county.
-5I 'll
�In a number of instances, including all cases in which doubt
or question arose in our minds as to all or any of the various items
or elements of value of the various tracts or as to any matter arising
out of our personal inspections and views thereof, we returned to the
tracts in question and made such further and additional personal
inspections or views as we deemed necessary or useful.
Although our understanding was that in making these personal
inspections and views of the different tracts of diverse ownership it
was not a legal requisite that either the Petitioner or claimants
should be present and take part therein; nevertheless we advised the
Petitioner and all owners or claimants who appeared at the public hearings that if they so desired they might attend the said inspections
and views, at the same time advising them as to the time when we proposed to make such inspectfons and views of the lands in which they
claimed an interest.
Only in a very limited number of instances was the Petitioner
or its counsel, or its witnesses in attendance at any of these inspections or views; but in most cases the owners or claimants who had
filed claims in the record were present in person, or by their counsel
or agents, at some time or other in the course of our inspections or
views of the lands in which they claimed an interest.
After we had completed all or substantially all of these
personal inspections or views of the lands sought to be condemned in
each county, and on motion of the Petitioner, a second order was
entered by the court in each County directing that after publication
in a local newspaper and posting and mailing of notices as prescribed
in the order, additional and further public hearings should be granted
all persons owning or claiming an interest in the lands sought to be
-6-
�condemned in each county (whether or not they had appeared at the
former hearings) at which additional hearings all such owners or
claimants would be given a further opportunity to submit evidence in
support of their claims, a nd to submit such further evidence in
addition to any evidence they might ha ve submitted at the former
hearings as they might desire to present.
Public hearings were held
in each county in pursuance of these orders in substantially the
same manner as at the former or original hea rings.
At these additional public hearings, held after we had
inspected or viewed the various tracts in the park area of diverse
ownership in each county, and after we had taken and heard all the
evidence claimants or owners desired to submit in the course of our
personal inspection or views of the lands claimed by them, all owners
and claimants had ample opportunity to examine and review any written
evidence theretofore submitted, to submit any additional evidence
they might desire to submit, and to offer objections to, or amplify,
modify, meet or rebut any statement or other evidence theretofore
submitted with reference to the lands in which they owned or claimed
an interest.
No evidence was submitted, taken, or heard thereafter
as to the value of any land with reference to which any owner or
claimant had appeared at the . public hearings or at our personal inspections or views, and at the conclusion of these additional public
hearings we proceeded to check and complete our Work Sheets on the
evidence theretofore submitted, considered together with the opinions
we had formed as to values as a result of our personal inspections
or views of the various tracts claimed by such owners or claimants.
After we had completed the hearings, inspections and views
in each county, and filled out our work sheets, we prepared and
-9-
�submitted our reports to the Judges of the Circuit Courts by whom we
were directed and instructed to file these reports with the record
of the proceedings in each county in the manner and form endorsed on
the various reports, and these reports were filed in aecord with the
instructions endorsed thereon.
PUBLIC HEARINGS, EVIDENCE, AND VIEWS:
At the outset of the public hearings in each county, Counsel
for the Petitioner submitted in evidence a "County Ownership Map",
purporting to show all the tracts of diverse ownership within the area
sought to be condemned in that county, numbered consecutively, and
inserted upon a duplicate of the large map of that area prepared by
the U.
s.
Geological Survey and filed with the petition in the
condemnation proceedings in that county, accompanied by separate plats
of each of said numbered tracts s e tting forth the names of the owners
and claimants and of the adjoining landowners, and indicating the
topographical features and improvements thereof and the various classes
of land contained therein, all in such form and detail as to render
practicable and certain the identification and location thereof.
These "County Ownership Maps" are the same "County Ownership Maps"
filed with our reports in each county., but with such corrections and
modifications of the boundary lines and location of the various tracts
of diverse ownership made thereon under the direction of the different
County Boards, as were necessary to bring them into accord with the
findings of the respective Boards, after hearing the evidence and
personally inspecting and viewing the various tracts of diverse ownership found or claimed by diverse owners Within the respective counties.
Counsel for the Petitioner advised the various Boards that
although the Public Park Condemnation Act appeared to give us notably
-8-
�wide powers in hearing and taking evidence upon which to base our
findings as to values and incidental damages, nevertheless, since the
Act also expressly provides that all owners and claimants of lands
within the area sought to be condemned were entitled to an opportunity
to be heard as to the value of their lands and the amount of incidental
damages claimed by them: - neither the petitioner nor its counsel,
agents or representatives desired to submit or would submit any evidence
as to the value of any of the tracts of lands of diverse ownership
within the area or as to alleged incidental damages arising from the
proposed condemnation thereof, except at the public hearings at the time
and place designated by order of the court, or at the time and place
to which any of such hearings might be adjourned and continued, in any
case in which the owner or claimant had filed his claim with the record,
and thus established his right to an opportunity to be heard, and had
appeared in response to the order of the court at the public hearings
and asserted his right to be heard; and throughout the course of the
proceedings in each county in which I was appointed a member of the
County Board, neither the Petitioner, nor its counsel, its agents,
representatives, or witnesses, did in fact submit any such evidence
as to values or incidental damages relating to any tract the owner or
claimant of which has filed his claim in the record and appeared and
asserted his right to be heard in response to the publica tion of
notice of the order for such hearings, except at the public hearings
or continuances thereof.
Counsel for the petitioner further expressed their opinion
that in such cases no evidence should be taken, heard or considered
in the absence of such owners or claimants, though counsel expressly
waived any right they might have to be present at the taking of any
-9_ _ _ _ _ _ _ l'l~
�evidence in ~he course of our inspections or views of the lands.
Having in mind the waiver of objections by the Petitioner
and its Counsel, the various Boards of which I was a member, freely
extended to all owners and claimants who attended our inspections or
views of the lands claimed by them, an opportunity to identify the
lands claimed by them and to point out the elements of value thereof,
and to submit evidence, and if they so desired, to call on adjoining
landowners and neighbors and other witnesses to testify as to the
location, identity, and value of the lands claimed by them, and the
amount of incidental dam.ages claimed by reason of its proposed condemnation.
The Petitioner and all claimants and owners who attended
the public hearings held in response to the orders of the Court, were
personally advised by µs as to the time at which we expected to make
our personal inspecti ons or views of the lands in which they claimed
an interest, and nearly all such owners or claimants were in fact
present in person or by their agents or representatives, at some time
or other during those inspections or views, and took advantage of
the opportunity given them to point out the location and boundary
lines of the lands in which they cl aimed an interest, and to call
witnesses including adjoining landowners and neighbors, and to submit other evidence in support of their claims in this regard. Furthermore, we made diligent, and in most instances, successful efforts
prior to and in the course of these inspections and views, to procure
the presence of all the owners or claimants of all the tracts shown
on the respective County Ownership Maps inspected or viewed by us,
whether or not they had theretofore filed their claims With the
record or appeared at the public hearings, in order tha t they also
-10-
l'U,
�might have an opportunity to point out the lands claimed by them and
.•
the elements of value entering into the total value of the fee simple
estate therein.
Notwithstanding the position taken by the Petitioner and
its Counsel, under which no evidence as to the value of any tract within
the park area or the amount of incidental damages arising out of the
condemnation thereof, was submitted by or on behalf of the Petitioner
except at the public hearings and continuances thereof, 1n any case in
which any owner or claimant had filed his claim with the record and
appeared at the public hearings to assert his right to be heard:-
all
of the Boards of Appraisal Connnissioners of which I was a member were
of the opinion that in ascertaining and determining the value of the
lands sought to be condemned, and the amount of damages arising out of
their condemnation, we had in some cases not only the right but the
duty, under authority of Section 29 of the Public Park Condemnation
Act to hear, take, examine, and procure evidence and to take the
measures authorized under Section 29 of the Act whether the petiti oner
and the owner or claimant thereof, or either of them, were or were
not present when such measures were taken or such evidence heard,
taken, examined, or procured.
We adopted this course in ascertaining and determining the
values of some of the tracts and the improvements thereon as to which
the owners or claimants filed no claims with the record in the clerks
offices, or as to which having filed such claims the owners or
claimants failed to appear at the public hearings and submit evidence
as to values or damages; and, wherein we were of opinion that the
consideration of no evidence other than that submitted by the
petitioner at the public hearings and that arising out of our personal
inspections and views of the tract in question, might result in
-11-
�findings as to values other than the facts would justify and require,
if all the facts had been developed which might have been developed
had the owner or claimant appeared and offered evidence as to such
facts.
Only a limited number of owners or claimants who filed
their claims with the record were represented by counsel, and some of
them were poor and ignorant persons who di d not seem to be able to
take the necessary measures to procure and submit all the available
evidence in support of their claims.
On the other hand the Petitioner was represented in every
case by Counsel and skilled and experienced agents, real estate experts,
engineers and surveyors.
We did not therefore consider that any duty or obligation
rested upon us to "help out" the Petitioner or its Counsel, in the
presentation of its evidence by taking any measures to procure or
to bring before us, or to hear, examine, or consider any evidence
other than tha t submitted by the Petitioner at the public hearings,
in an effort to supply or to cor rect possible omissions or failures
by the petitioner to submit all the evidence it could have submitted
which, if submitted, might tend to support its contentions opposing
findings of values or damages higher than those set by the petitioner
and its witnesses.
But in a limited number of cases in which the evidence
submitted by owners or claimants was so vague, indefinite, uncertain,
inconclusive, or incredible that, considered by itself, this evidence
would not justify or sustain specific findings as to values or
damages as high in amount as those which would be allowed if we considered only the results of our own personal inspections or views of
-:J.2-
�the tract or tracts in question without considering any of the evidence
submitted by either party; we deemed it our duty to hear, examine, and
if necessary to call for or procure additional evidence, and to take
any or all the measures authorized under Section 29 of the Act, whether
in or beyond the presence of the petitioner, and the owner or claimant,
as the circumstance s in each case made necessary in order to "help out"
the owner or claimant by developing any available facts which the claimant or owner appeared to have inadvertentl y failed or neglected to submit in support of the higher values or damages claimed by him.
But we did not consider that any such duty or obligation
rested upon us to "help out" owners or claimants in this way, whether
represented by counsel or not, who were able to su.b mit their claims
and their evidence in such form and with such effect that considered
by itself it would sustain and justify a specific finding of values
as high or higher than that which we ourselves would place on the lands
claimed by them, upon our own personal inspection or view of these
lands and without considering any of the eVidence submitted by either
party.
In some cases also in which questions arose at the Public
Hearings as to the precise location or acreage of lands in which
owners or claimants asserted an interest, we directed the petitioner,
or the owner or claimant, or both, to secure and submit surveys of the
land in question prepared by competent surveyors, or other documentary
evidence in support of their claims or contentions, and in such cases
we received these surveys as and when submitted after the original
Public Hearings had been concluded.
But in all such cases the parties
had an opportunity at the later hearings if they so desired, to
examine such surveys or documentary evidence and to be heard as to
their correctness, and to call such witnesses and to submit such
-13-
l'l'f
�evidence with reference thereto as they might desire.
In most cases, however, in which the owners or claimants filed
their claims with the record and appeared in person or were represented
by Counsel or other agents or representatives at the public hearings,
our findings as to the value of the various tracts in question were
based wholly upon the evidence submitted by the petitioner and the
owners or claimants at the public hearings, and the evidence submitted
by the owners or claimants at our personal inspections or views of
their respective tracts, considered together with the opinions formed by
us as a result of our personal inspections or views of the tracts in
question.
I have before me copies of the motions filed with the record
in the different counties, praying the court to disapprove the findings
of the different Boards of which I was a member, and a list of the
various tracts to which they refer, as shown on the County Ownership
Maps filed with our reports.
With few exceptions the owners or claimants of these tracts
appeared in person or by Counsel or by their agents or representatives
at the public hearings and in the course of our personal inspections
or views of these tracts, and made vigorous efforts to establish the
values cla imed by them, with the result that we ha d before us in such
cases, full and ample evidence submitted by the respective parties at
t he public hearings and by the owners or claimants in the course of
our personal inspections and views, when considered together with the
results of our personal inspecti ons and views, to enable us to make
our findi ngs as to values and incidental damages, without hearing,
examining or considering any other evidence and without taking any
other measures to procure additional evidence or information with
-14200
�regard thereto .
With refe r ence specific ally t~the followin g list of some
of the numbered tracts sgown on the Rockingh am County Ownersh ip Map
filed with our report as to which motions to disappro ve, or exceptio ns
to, our findings as to values or inciden tal damages h:l.ve been filed
with the record, no evidence as to values or inciden tal damages was taken or conside red by the Rockingh am County Board or the members thereof, other than the evidence submitte d by the Petition er and its witnesses at the Public Heari ngs or the continua nces thereof, and the evidence submitte d by the owners or claiman ts at the public hearing s or
in the course of our pe r sonal inspecti ons or views of the particu lar
tract or tracts in question .
ROCKINGHAM COUNTY: Tracts Number 3 and 372-I, (Except ant, Sallie A.
Kite, by George s. Harnsbe rger, Counsel) Tract Number 41-a, (-Except ant,
J. T. Heard, by George S. Harnsbe rger, and David A. Conrad, Counsel)
Tract Number 48,(Exc eptant, Vernon W. Foltz, by Rober t W. Keyser,
Counsel) Tract Number 53,(Exc eptant,
w.
F. Dean,Jr ., by George s.
Harnsbe rger, Counsel) Tra ct Number 70,(Exc eptant, Annie Laurie Baugher ,
by Ra lph H. Bader, Counsel) Tract Number 76,(Exc eptant, John K. Haney,
by D.
w.
Earman, Counsel) Tract Number 81,(Exc eptants, E. C. Lam and
E. E. Lam, by E. D. Ott, Counsel) Tract Number 84,(Exc eptant, Maude M.
Shipp) Tract Number 166, (Except ants, A. L. Moubrey and J. F. Moubrey)
Tract Number 242,(Ex ceptant, Annie R. Begoon, by George s. Harnsbe rger,
Counsel) Tracts Number 244 and 326-III, (Except ant, J. w. Hinkle, by
George s. Harnsbe rger, Counsel) Tracts Number 312-a and 312-b,(E xceptm ts,
John J. Mace, James G. Mace, Elizabe th Mace Via, R.H. Mace, Julia
Mace Spitzer , Charles M. Mace, and for the heirs at law of Ben F. Mace,
by George s. Harnsbe rger,Cou nsel) Tract Number 325,(Ex ceptant, R. T.
-15UJ
�Miller, by Hamilton Haas, Counsel) Tract Number 335 (Exceptant,
Herbert G. Patterson, by Georges. Harnsberger, Counsel) Tract Number
337 (Exceptants, Herbert G. Patterson, Howard H. Patterson, David H.
Patterson, by Georges. Harnsberger, Counsel) Tract Number 371
(Exceptant, Margaret Mundy, by D. W. Earman, Attorney.)
WORK SHEETS .AND REPORTS:
At the outset of the Public Hearings in each County, the
Petitioner through its Counsel and witnesses, explained to the
respective County Boards the procedure by which it had assembled
its data as to the values of the various tracts sought to be condemned, and advised us that it had adopted the methods in general
use by the
u. s.
Forest Service in ascertaining and determining
the values of the extensive areas of mountain, forest, marginal and
improved lands which have been acquired for use as National Forests
by the Federal Government in recent years in Virginia and other
southern and eastern states.
Petitioner also advised us that it
would adhere as far as practicable to this method in offering evidence
as to the various elements of value constituting the total value of
the various tracts in question, and furnished us with printed forms
containing blank spaces for the entry of
notes and records of facts
and figures showing the various elements of value entering into the
sum total of the value of the various tracts of land it sought to
condemn.
Counsel further advised us that these blank forms ha4 been
submitted to and received the approval of the Judge of the Circuit
Court of Warren County in which the Park Condemnation Proceedings had
been first instituted; and requested the adoption and use of these forms
in all counties in the proposed park area in order to secure uniformity
-16lQ
�in the proceedings in-·the entire park area.
Upon consideration we were favorably impressed with the
practicability and utility of the general procedure thus outlined by
the Petitioner, and we adopted these printed blank forms, or typewritten modifications thereof, as convenient and efficient "work
sheets" upon which we entered our findings as to the elements of
value making up the total value of the various tracts of land of diverse
ownership under consideration in each county.
These "work sheets" were
filed and will be found with our reports in each county •
.After our work sheets had been completed in each county,
the Petitioner submitted a form of report, setting forth in carefully
summarized and detailed _form, the uncontroverted facts established and
disclosed at the hearings and in the course of the proceedings before
us, with blank spaces left therein for the insertion of controverted
facts, including values and amounts of incidental damages, as to which
evidence had been submitted by the Petitioner, and the owners or claimants of the lands sought to be condemned.
Counsel for Petitioner advised the various Boards of which
I was a member that this form of report had also been submitted to the
Judge of the Circuit Court of Warren, and subject to objection by any
interested party, had received his approval.
The Petitioner and its
Counsel urged the adoption as far as practicable of this form of report
in each county, in order to maintain as much uniformity as practicable
in the procedure in the various counties, and as it met with our
approval and appeared to furnish a concise and comprehensive form in
which our reports might be submitted, we adopted the form thus outlined, and had the blank spaces filled in under our directions to con-1?-
�form with the - preliminary findings in .our work sheets and other findings as to the various matters submitted to us for ascertainment and
determination.
GENERAL COMMENT:
From the date of their appointment to the date of the filing
of their reports, the various Boards of Appraisal Commissioners of
which I was a member, devoted to this work a pproximately seventy-five
days in Warren County; one hundred and ten days in Rappahannock County;
two hundred and sixty days in Page County; one hundred and eighty days
in Rockingham County.
The greater part of this time was spent in the intensive and
thorough inspection or view of the various tracts and the improvements
thereon, the values of which were set forth in our reports, and we
visited each and every such tract on foot, and made a careful, thorough,
and detailed inspection of every element of value entering into the
total fee simple value thereof and of all improvements thereon.
Although the proceedings had by and before us were long and
in some cases arduous and difficult, we encountered no insurmountable
difficulties in the performance of our duties, and in my judgment the
procedure prescribed in the Public Park Condemnation Act for the
aseertaimnent and determination of the values of lands, such as those
sought to be condemned in the above named counties by Boards of
Appraisa l Connnissioners, was entirely practicable and workable, so that
the Boards in these counties were able to ascertain, determine a nd
report the fact or facts of value of the various tracts of diverse
ownership sought to be condemned, and the amount of incidental damages
which would arise therefrom with entire accuracy, after giving the
-18-
�petitioner and each and every owner or claimant of any right, title,
-·
estate or interest in the lands sought to be condemned, full opportunity
to be heard in support of his contentions and claims as to the value
of these lands and the amount of incidental damages which would arise
from their condemnation.
In the normal and natural course of events, the members of
the different Boards of Appraisal Commissioners not infrequently met
and conversed with Counsel for the Petitioner, its agents and employees.
Occasionally some of the individual members of these Boards dined or
put up at the same hotels, or travelled with one or other of these
agents or representatives in the same automobile, or invited them to
join us in our own automobiles.
Being engaged in the performance of
our duties as we were for so many months in the mountains and forests
of the Park Area and the nearby towns and villages, and farms, in which
not infrequently the agents and representatives of the Petitioner were
also at work, such contacts with them as well as like contacts with some
of the owners and claimants, were natural and to·be expected.
As liberal provision was made under the Public Park Condemnation
Act for payment under the direction of the Court of all our travel
and subsistence expenses while engaged in the performance of our duties,
and as we were advised that all the agents, representatives and expert
appraisers and surveyors employed by, or called as witnesses for the
Petitioner, had been instructed not to discuss or submit any evidence
as to values of any of the lands within the Park area, or of -incidental
damages, on any occasion upon which they were thus brought into casual
or temporary contact with the members of the Board, we did not deem it
necessary to take any special measures to avoid or prevent such casual
contacts.
I know of no occasion upon which any such agent or represent-
ative of the Petitioner attempted to take advantage of such casual or
-19-
Zo5
�.•
temporary contacts for the purpose of discussing or submitting any
evidence as to the value of any tract within the Park area, or as to
the amount of incidental damages arising out of its condemaation.
Under authority of the Public Park Condemnation Act we
employed guides who appeared to be well acquainted with the lands in
the area sought to be condemned in each county, and With many of the
owners and claimants of these lands .
We also employed such clerical
and other assistance and rented such temporary offices as we found
necessary or convenient in the proper performance of our duties.
Payment for all such services were made by order and with the ?pproval of the Court, upon the submission of proper vouchers therefor,
and neither the Petitioner nor its agents or representatives had any
authority or power over any of the persons thus employed by us,
though the Petitioner was required , under the provisions of the
Public Park Condemnation Act, to pay over to the Clerks of the
respective Courts, the amounts evidenced by such vouchers as and
when the same were approved by the Judge.
I know of no occasion throughout the course of these proceedings upon which the Petitioner or its Counsel, its agents, or
representatives attempted to use any undue influence or to offer any
improper inducement for any purpose whatever to any of the Boards of
which I was a member , or any of the members thereof .
On the con-
trary , the position taken by the Petitioner and its Counsel, and
agents, throughout the proceedings , was that Petitioner represented
the State, and had no purpose or desire to secure any of the private
lands in the Park Area without paying the owners just compensation
therefor; that the Petitioner had no other purpose or desire than to
- 20-
�I
J
have a just and fair value set upon the various tracts of land within
the area it sought to condemn; and that if any error should be committed
in the ascertainment and determination of the value of any tract within
the area, the Petitioner would prefer that we should err on the side of
liberality in our findings, rather than that any owner or claimant should
have well founded ground of complaint that he hdd been deprived of his
lands without just compensation.
Witness my signature this
•
-21-
1933 •
�STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF WARREN
)
( ss .
)
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in my said State and County, George H. Levi whose name is
signed to the foregoing statement, and who being duly sworn, made
oath that the matters and things set forth therein are true to the
best of his knowledge and belief .
Witness my signature and Notarial Seal this 23 day of
Mar ch, 1933 •
,nmission
l:.x~11
to Ueltmber 3rd, 1933
- 22-
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Jan. 8, 1933 - Aug. 15, 1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
affidavits-1.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Affidavits 1
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/eb1fe66f8f950aad36f323a55910ff93.pdf
039af037b17287532f4094cf4e3fd187
PDF Text
Text
·,
I
STAT E lCOM MISS ION
WILLIAM E. CAR$ON, \:HAIRMAN, RIVERTON
COLEMAN WORTl"fAM , VICE CHAIRMAN, RICHMOND
JUNIUS P. FISHBIJRN , ROANOKE
E. GRIFFITH DODSON, NORFOLK
RUFUS G . ROBERTS , CULPEPER
THOMAS L. FARRAR, CHARLOTTESVILLE
LEE LONG, DANTE
R. A. GILLIAM
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY AND TREASURER
ON
CONS ERVA TION
RICHM OND, VA.
AND
. '
DEVE LOPM ENT
BUREAU S OF THE COMMIS SON
GEOLOGICA L SURVEY
WATER RESOURCES AND POWER
FOREST SERVICE
PA.R KS AND LANDSCAPE ENGINEERIN G
ARCHAEOLO GY AND HISTORY
STATE PUBLICITY
Shenandoah Nation al Park
Division
S . H , MARSH, SUPERVISOR
PHONE
e•,
P'RONT ROYAL
ADDRESS YOUR REPLY TO
FRONT ROYAL, VA.
Augus t 10, 1933
TO THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY.
Dear Sir:
We are handin g you for file in the Shenan doah Natio nal
Park Conde mnatio n Proce edings pendin g in your court ,
affida vits as listed below :
Affid avit of
Suppl ement al
Affid avit of
supple menta l
Affid avit of
Suppl ement al
s.
H. Marsh , Dated July 1, 1933, Re. Rockin gham
county Excep tions.
Affid avit of Georg e H. Levi, Dated Augus t 5,
1933, Re. Gener al.
M.A. Price , Dated April 1st, 1933. Re. Gener al
Rockin gham county
Affid avit of Mille r A. Price , Dated Augus t 5,
1933,
Re . Gener al
W. L. Green , Dat®d March 31, 1933 . Re. Gener al .
Rockin gham county
Affid avit of w. L. Green , Dated Augus t 5, 1933
Re . Gener al.
�STATE OF VIRG!· I.\
COUi\1TY OF ROCK!- 0HA' , to-ui t :
This is to certify that I have t i s day received of
Elliott :Marshall , the following o.f'fidnvits :
Aff idav1 t of
s.
H. Marsht dated July 1 ., 1933, Re . Rockineham
County Excepti ons .
Supplemental Affidavit of George H. Levi , dated August 5 ,
1933 , Re. General .
Affidavit of M. A. Price ,
dated April 1 , 1933 , Re . General
Roclingham County
Supplemen tal Affidavit of Millar A. Price , dated .August 5 ,
1933 ,. Re . General
Affidavit of
w.
L. Groen , nated March 31, 1933. Re . Gener al .
Rookine)lam County
Supple.nental Af:f1dnv1t of W. L . Green , d ted August 5 • 1933
Re . General .
I further eer t ify that I have marked all of the s1c id
papers as filed in the Circ111t Cour t of Rockingham. County , Virginia ,
among the pa p ers of the Sh enandoah Mati o..nl Park Condm. proceedi ngs as of August 15, 1933 o.t 4:30 P . 1¥.
______,._~---
Tes te : ---~"""""'.. . _. """""
of
, Clerk
Cir cu 1 t Court
f Rockingham County,
Virgin 11 .
�Filed in the Clerk's Offi1
Rockingham County, Va
Q
AUG ;s- 1933·1/:10
~Clef
SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVIT OF GEORGE H. LEVI, DATED AUG . 5,1933.RE. GENERAL.
This affidavit is made at the request of the State Commission on Conservation and Development of the State of Virginia for
file with the record in all or any of the following Public Park Condemnation proceedings pending in the Circuit Courts of the Counties
of Virginia in which said Commission is Petitioner and in which the
defendants are as follows:
cuit Court of Warren County;
cuit Court of Page County;
Virginia Atwood, et als, etc., in the CirAda Abbott and others, etc., in the CirClifton Aylor and others, etc., in the
Circuit Court of Rappahannock County;
Armentrout, C. E. and others,
etc., in the Circuit Court of Greene County;
etc., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County;
Archer, A.
w.
and others,
Cassandra Lawson Atkins,
et als., etc., in the Circuit Court of Rockingham County;
w.
and others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Albemarle County;
L. Arey
D. F.
Anderson, et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Madison County.
It is my understa nding, purpose and intention in making
this sworn statement, that the said Commission may, in its discretion,
file and submit the same in support of its prayers, motions, answers
and contentions submitted in the course of all or any of the above
mentioned condemnation proQeedings, including its answers to the several motions by claimants and landowners in the several above
mentipn-
ed, condemnation proceedings, praying the respective courts to decline
to accept or to disapprove the respective reports and findings of
Special Investigators and Boards of Appraisal Commissioners appointed
in the course of the said condemnation proceedings:
�My name is George H. Levi.
Berryville, Virginia.
to time in the last
I am a farmer
My post office address is
by occupation, and from time
twenty years I have owned, operated, managed,
bought, sold and leased farm lands including grazing lands, orchards,
vegetable and fruit gardens and the like.
I v~s appointed a Special Investigator and a member of
the different Boards of Appraisal Commissi oners appointed in the
course of the above mentioned Shenandoah National Park Condemnation
proceedings in the counties of Warren, Rappahannock , Page and Rockingham, and as such I joined in the preparation of the respective
reports of said Boards filed with the record in the above mentioned
condemnation proceedings in the respective Clerks' offices.
Iw as eleeted as Secretary of each of the said Boards, and
acted as such Secretary in the preparation and filing of their reports.
The members of the Appraisal Boards of which I was a member
were in most cases able to agree on our findings as to the market
value of the different tracts, and the
amount of incidental damages
to be allowed, though in many cases prolonged and
were
cases
repeated discussions
necessary to enable us to unite in our findings; and in a few
we adopted as our findings of value the figures upon which only
two of our number were fully agreed if we found it impossible to come
to a unanimous vote, or if the third member was not entirely satisfied
with the figures agreed upon by the other two, after full discussion.
But in all cases at least two of the members were in agreement as
to the fair market value and the damages before the figures as reported were finally adopted.
�While tt sometimes happened that one or other of the
members, and in some cases all of the members changed or modified
their views as a result of discussion and argument among ourselves,
such changes of view were wholly the result of mutual discussion
and concessions to the weight of· the opinion of the other members,
and sometimes of additional inspections of the tracts themselves;
and we had no agreement or understa nding by which we bound ourselves
to accept the average of our individual figures, whatever they might
be.
The members of each and all the Boards of Appraisal Commissioners of which I was a member were all of opinion and agreed
with each other that, having adopted the practice of hearing the
witnesses and taking all the evidence at public hearings when we all
three sat together, (except as indicated in my affidavit captioned "Affidavit of George H. Levi, dated March 23, 1933, Re. General)
we should go together to make our "views or personal inspections"
of the lands sought to be condemned, and we did in fact go together
and viewed and inspected together the va rious tracts, the values of
which a re set out in our reports; and to the best of my knowledge and
belief, none of the members visited any of these tracts separately
from the other members af the Board in the County in which the tract
was located;
and this was the procedure agreed upon and adopted in
making our views and inspections of all the separate tracts, the
value of which was shown in our reports.
The several Boards of which I was a member, made findings
of value and incidental damages in some cases
less, than the values placed
greater, in some cases
on the various tracts in the appraisal
�sheets submitted by the witnesses for the Petitioner, and in many
cases we found the values and damages to be the amount shown on these
appraisal sheets after full consideration of all the evidence.
So
also, we found the facts as to the location of the land, its acreage,
the nature of the imRrovements, and of other elements of value as
set forth in the said appraisal sheets, in many, if not in most cases
to be notably accurate and correct, and in such cases we frequently
adopted the relation of facts set forth in these a ppraisal sheets in
filling out our own sheets, where the
evidence and the results of our
own inspection and view of the land satisfied us as to the accuracy
and correctness of these appraisal sheets, and of the values set forth
therein.
But in cases in which the evidence, considered together
with our own view of the lands in question, disclosed other, or different or additional facts than those set out in these appraisal
sheets, we set out the fact"s and the values as we found them in our
own work sheets.
While an examination of our work sheets will show many
such changes, necessitated by a consideration of the evidence submitted by owners and claimants, all the members of the several Boards
of which I was a member were mu.ch impressed with the manifest evidences of the care and skill with which each of these appraisal sheets
had been prepared and the substantial accuracy and correctness with
which they set out the various elements of value of each tract.
We based our findings of value of the fee simple estate in
the various tracts mentioned in our reports on the fair market value
which (as was repeatedly submitted to us from the outset by Counsel
for the Petitioner, and by the attorneys for various claimants who
1o
�a ppeared before us) we understoo d to be the
amount for which the
tract might be sold if without being obligated to do so, the owner
desired to sell and there were buyers who desired to buy
the particula r tract whose market value was to be ascertaine d by us.
Counsel-fo r the Petitione r from the outset, and other attorneys who appeared before us also expressed their opinions that
we should not take into considera tion assessed
valuation s of the
tracts in question or of other similar tracts, or prices paid at
forced sales, and that in considerin g prices paid for other similar
tracts we should not give considera tion to sales made at too remote
a time prior to the date when we made our f i ndings as to prices paid
for lands so remote or distant from the tract in question
ferences in time or location or of local condition s
value of the lands
that dif-
might affect the
different ly, and these contentio ns appearing to
be well founded, we were careful to act upon them in every case.
All of the members were fully informed by their own experienc e and
observatio n as to the fact that in Virginia, assessed values are in
most cases far
below the real value of the lands assessed, and
in making our findings as to values and damages we wholly disregard ed
any evidence as to assessed acreage and value and gave it no considera tion except as evidence as to a claim of ownership by the person
in whose name any particula r lands were assessed and who paid taxes as
assessed.
Counsel for the Petitione r, from the outset, and on various occasions stated in discussio n of questions of value to be determined by us, that while it wa s our duty to ascerta in the fair
market value of t h e lands, neither too much nor too little, never-
�theless the courts always recognized and approved liberal but not
..
excessive findings of value in condemnation proceedings in which
the ovlners were being deprived of their lands for the benefit of
the public whether they themselves were or were not willing to part
with them for the price awarded.
And while we endeavored in each
instance to f'ind the f'air market value, we tried always to see to
it that if we erred at all we erred on the side of liberality rather
than on the side of niggardliness. ·
No member of any of the Boards of which I was
a member, so
far as I know, had any interest, either direct or indirect in the establishment of the Park, beyond th.at which any intelligent citizen
of the State of Virginia may be supposed to have in the establishment
of a National Public Park within the state.
of value and the
And in finding the facts
amount of incidental damages in each case, we were
careful not to give any weight to any consideration of the possibility
of the need for low findings of value to enable the State to acquire
the tract.
We clearly understood that the laws
and
the Constitution
of the State protect each private owner in his right to just compensation for his lands if they are taken for public uses.
Counsel for- the
Petitioner as . well as the attorneys for different claimants repea.ted- ly called ou~ attention to these constituti onal provisions protecting
the rights of the private citizen and of private ownership.
My attention has been directed to an affidavit of G. L.
Wilkinson, executed on the 19th day of May, 1933, an affidavit of
Mr. Tyler Miller, Superintendent of Schools, an affidavit of John
A.
Keyser, executed on May 19, 1933, in which they say that they frequently saw the members of the Boards of Appraisal Commissioners in
73 I
�the Park Office in Front Royal, and saw Mr. Marsh and Mr. Stoneburner and the aitorneys and other employees of the Petitioner in the
offices of the various Boards of Appraisal Connnissioners, and tha.t
they saw papers and records being carried to and fro between
the
o.ffices.
It is true that in the performance of their duties the
various Boards of Appraisal Commissioners of which I was a member,
sometimes visited the offices of the Conservation and Development
Commission, a nd that the attorneys for the Petitioner and Mr. Marsh
and Mr. Stoneburner and other employees and witnesses for the Petitioner frequently went to and s tayed for several hours at a time in
the offices of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners, and tha.t on more
than one occasion, indeed, on a number of occasions, papers and documents were carried to ap.d fro between the o.ffices.
For a considerable time and at more or less irregular intervals, the Board of Appraisal Cormnissioners of Warren County held
public hearings in their offices which were continued from time to
time and the attorneys for the ~etitioner
and Mr. Marsh and other
witnesses for the Petitioner regularly attended these hearings and
frequently carried papers and documents and other records to and fro
in connection with these hearings.
It is tru~,also, tha.t the members
of the different Boards on which I served, sometimes stopped in at
the Park Offices in Front Royal, but in doing so, in practically all
instances, they had some business in connection with the proceedings
pending before them.
I cannot say tha.t I,
myself, nor any member
of the Commission never entered the Park offices in Front Royal without having express business there.
We sometimes called if only to
ask how many witnesses the Petitioner expe9ted to call at Sperryville
�or Washingto n or Luray, and whether the hearings set for that day
would be likely to take up much time.
But I can say that in most
cases we went to these offices on business of one kind or another,
connected with our duties; for example, we not infrequen tly stopped
there to get direction s and to find out the best route to take on
our trips of inspectio n, to the various tracts shown on the County
Ownership Map , and to get informatio n as to the precise location of
these tracts.
Although the attorneys and agents for the Petitione r did
not attend Yery many such inspection s and views .made by us, nevertheless, we always notified them as to the time and place of such inspections and gave them an opportuni ty to attend.
Then too, we sometimes found on our personal inspection s
and views that there was either error or confusion in the names of
the owners of the various tracts shown on the County ownership Maps,
and that where some of these maps showed two adjoining tracts claimed
by different persons, that were in fact claimed by a single person,
or that some other person was the real owner, or th8t there were laps
on some of these tracts, and in order that our 1re.ps as filed might
show our findings, we not infrequen tly discussed the location of the
tracts shown on the Map with Mr. Marsh or Mr. Stoneburn er, and had
correction s made on the maps correspon dingly. Then too, at the different times when each of the Boards of which I was a member prepared
its report, the Boards and sometimes the Chairman and secretary called,
on more than one occasion, at the Park Offices to see JUdge Carson,
one of Counsel for the Petitione r, who prepared the draft of the
report, and, on those occasions , we sometimes brought a part of our
7.5
�papers with us so as to enable us to give him the facts as to our
findings, but in all _such cases, there was no discussion wh~tever
as to our findings of value and in fact, the findings as to value were
left blank in these reports to be filled in under our direction.
We did, however, inform Judge Carson as to the general nature of our
find i ngs as to the various tracts substantially as set out in our
reports.
I do not doubt and.do not question the fact that the members
of the different Boards were seen on more than one occasion discussing
some of these matters, and discussing JUdge carson's draft of their
report with him in the Park Office, though, as a matter of fact, the
visits for this purpose were neither frequent nor prolonged.
Aside
from these occasions, I myself rarely saw eitner Judge carson or
Mr.
w.
E.
Carson in the course of the condemnation proceedings,
though I did meet them on occasions, and responded to general inquiries as to how we were progressing, and the length of time it
would probably take us to complete the work and similar matters in
connection with the condemnation proceedings, but on no occasion did
we discuss the evidence or the values of any of the tracts sought to
be condemned with these gentlemen, or with anyone else.
Indeed, we
were so fareful in this regard that when 8.lllt.yone came into our offices
while we were consulting together, we would invariably stop until they
had left us.
There is no ground whatever for any charge that because of
our occasional contacts with M.'r. Marsh and
M;r:.
stoneburner, and the
attorneys of the Connnission outside of the formal hearings had before
us, any of the memb ers of t he Boards of which I was a member, were
subjected to any undue influence or could have been subjected to undue ·
•
�influences, or that any attempt was made on the part of any officer or
employee or attorney of the state Commission on conservation and Development, to exercise undue influence over us in the forming of our judgments
as to our values and damages or that we or any of us favored one
party more than another in making our findings .
It is true, also, that on a few occasions, we dined at
the same hotels or boarding houses, sometimes in the same room with
the attorneys and agents of the Petitioner, in sperryville, and at
other points, in the public dining rooms, but we always paid for our
own meals and our bills were regularly audited and approved by the
different Courts in the different counties where we were engaged in
our war.-k.
In the small towns and country places where we, as well as
the officers and employees of the Commission were engaged in our
work, such contacts were practically unavoidable , and we neither encouraged or discouraged them, but neither I, myself, nor any of the
Boards of which I was a member, so far as I know , ever discussed the
evidence or the values of the tract which we appraised on the occasion of any such meetings .
Witness my signature this __ z_day of August , 1933.
Georgvff.ie vi.
7
�STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF WARREN
)
( ss.
)
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in my said State and County,
George H. Levi, whose name is
signed to the foregoing statement, and who being duly sworn, made
oath that the matters and things set forth therein are true to the
best of his knowledge and belief.
Witness my signature and Notarial Seal this
1933.
7
I I
--1'-----
�filed in the Clerk'! Offic
&)kingham County, Va.
~ AU G/5"' 1933f'.:;,a
1
ll.FFIDLVIT OF M. A. PRICE, DATED 1'J>RIL
1st, 1933.
r;.l,IJ-,Lly) Cl~
RE • G-1,;NERAL.
ROCKINGH.AM COUI'JTY.
This affidavit is made at the request of the State Commission on Conservation and Development of the State of Virginia for
file with the record in all or any of the following Public Park Condemnation proceedings pending in the Circuit Courts of the Counties
of Virginia in which said Commission is petitioner , and in which the
defendants are as follows:
Virginia Atwood et als, etc., in the
Circuit Court of Warren County; Ada Abbott and others, etc. , in the
Circuit Court of Page County; Clifton Aylor and others etc. , in the
C.ircui t Court of Rappahannock County; Armentrout , C. E . and others
. etc ., in the Circuit Court of Greene County; Archer , A.
w.,
and others
etc. , in the C"ircui t Court of Augusta County; Cassandra Lawson Atkins
et als ., etc. , in the Circuit Court of Rockingham County ;
• L. Arey
and others etc ., in the Circuit Court of Albemarle County; D. F .
Anderson et als , etc ., in the Circuit Court of Madison County.
It is my understandin g , purpose and intention in making
this sworn statement, that the said Commission may , in its discretion ,
file and submit the same in support of its prayers, motions , answers ,
and contentions submitted in the course of all or any of the above
mentioned condemnation pro ceedings , including its answers to .the
several motions by claimants and l and.owners in the several above mentioned condemnation proceedings,, praying the respective courts to
decline to accept or to disapprove the respective reports and findings
of Special Investigator s and Boards of A~praisal Commissioner s
appointed in the course of the said. condemnation proceedings:
- 1-
79
�My name is Miller A. Price .
My post office address is
New Market , Virginia .
I was appointed a Special Investigator and a member of
the different Boards of Appraisal Commissioner s appointed in the
course of the above mentioned Shenandoah N~tional Perk Condemnation
proceedings in the counties of Warren , Rappahannock , Page and Rockingham, and as such I joined in the preparation of the respective
reports of said Boards filed with the record in the above mentioned
condemnation proceedings in the respective Clerks' offices .
I have read the separate affidavits of George H. Levi
captioned as follows :
"Affidavit of George H. Levi , dated March 23 ,
1933, Re General , Warren County ; n
"Affidavit of George H. Levi ,
dated March 23 , 1933 , Re General , Rappahannock County ; "
"Affidavit
of George H. Levi , dated MArch 23 , 1933 , Re General , Page County , "
and ".l.ffidavi t of George H . Le.v i , dated MHrch 23 , 1933 , Re General ,
Rockingham County, "
and the matters and things set out therein are
true to the best of my knowledge and belief .
Witness my signature this ~ d a y of
a,,;u;,(.
, 1933 ,
~~
Miller A. Price .
�STATE OF VIRGINIA)
(. ss .
COUNTY OF VTARREN
)
.
4
Personally appeared before me , the undersigned 1ifotary
Public in my said State and County , M. A. Price, whose name is
signed to the foregoing statement , and who being duly sworn ,
made oath tha t t he matters and things set forth therein are
true to the best of his knowledge and belief .
Witness my signature a nd Notarial seal this first
day of April , 1933 .
Bl
�!"
Fi~d the Clerk's omce
~ kingham County, Va,
::)
AUG /...,- 1933,f.34'-
-9 <ALfi
i
,
.R; ~lerk
SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVIT OF MILLER A. PRICE, DATED A1TGUST ~ 1933. GENERAL.
This affidavit is made at the request of the State Commission on Conservation and Development of the ~tate of Virginia for
file with the record in all or any of the following Public Park Condemnation proceedings pending in the Circuit Courts of the Counties
of Virginia in which said Commission is Petitioner and in which the
defendants are as follows:
cuit Court of Warren County;
cuit Court of Page County;
Virginia Atwood, et ala, etc., in the CirAda Abbott and others, etc., in the CirClifton Ayior and others, etc., in the
Circuit Court of Rappahannock County;
Armentrout, C. E. and others,
etc., in the Circuit Court of Greene County;
etc., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County;
Archer, A.
w.
and others,
Cassand~a Lawson Atkins,
et als., etc., in the Circuit Court of Rockingham County;
and others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Albemarle County;
W. L. Arey
D. F.
Anderson, et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Madison County.
It is my understanding, purpose and intention in making
this sworn statement, that the said Commission may, in its discretion,
file and submit the same in support of its prayers, motions, answers
and contentions submitted in the course of all or any of the above
mentioned condemnation proceedings, including its answers to the several motions by claimants and landowners in the several above mentioned condemnation proceedings, praying the respective courts to decline
to accept or to disapprove the respective reports a nd findings of
Special Investigators and Boards of Appraisal Commissioners appointed
in the course of the said condemnation proceedings:
�·I
My name is Miller A. Price.
My post office address is
New Market, Virginia.
I was appointed a Special Investigator and a member of the
different Boards of Appraisal Commissioner s a ppointed in the course
of the above mentioned Shenandoah National Park Condemnation proceedings in the Counties of Warren, Rappahannock , Page and Rockingham., and a s s uch I joined in the preparation of the respective
reports oi' said Boards filed with the record in the above mentioned
condemnation proceedings in the r espective Clerks' offices.
I have read the affidavit of Veorge H. Levi, captioned
11 Supplemental
Affidavit of George H. Levi, dated
1933, Re. General,"
5n
,
August
and the matters and things set out therein are
true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Witness my signature this~day of
Augus ~ 1933.
~a- 6~
Miller A. Price
�STATE OF VIRGINIA
)
COUNTY OF WARREN
)
( ss.
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in my said State and County, Mille~ A. Price, whose name
is signed to the foregoing statement, and who being duly sworn,
made oath that the matters and things set forth therein are true
to the best of his knowledge and
belief.
Witnes s my signature and Notarial Seal t h i s ~ day of
~ ,· , 1933,
L,
�fil;;d in the Clerk's Offioo-:
Q ckfngham County, Va... .
AUG
I"_
1933-¥,..,.,
I
AFFIDAVIT OF VJ. L. GREEN , D_ TED MLRCH 31, 1933. _ RE. ~ C l e r k ·
I
ROCE:r JGI-Iill.1 co
TL
j
This affida vit is made at the reques t of the State Connnis sion
on Conser vation and Develop ment of the State of Virgin ia for file
with the record in all or any of the follow ing Public Park Condemne:--
I
I
tion procee dings pending in the Circui t Courts of the Counti es of
Virgin ia, in which said Commis sion is petitio ner, and in which the
defend ants are as follow s:
Virgin ia Atwood et als, etc., in the
Circui t Court of Warren County ; Ada Abbott and others etc., in the
Circui t Court of Page County ; Clifton Aylor and others etc., in the
Circui t Court of Rappah annock County ; Armen trout, C. E. and others
etc., in the Circui t Court of Greene County ; )...rcher , A. W. a nd others
etc., in the Circui t Court of August a County ;
Cassan dra Lawson
Atkins et als., ·e tc., in the Circui t Court of Rocking ham County ;
W. L. 1...rey and others etc., in the Circui t Court of Albema rle County ;
D. F. Anderso n et als, etc., in the Circui t Court of Madison County .
It is my unders tanding , purpos e and intenti on in making this
sworn statem ent, tha t the said Commis sion may, in its discre tion,
file and submit the same in suppor t of its prayer s, motion s, answer s
and conten tions submit ted in t he course of all or any of t he above
mentio ned condem nation procee dings, includ ing its answer s to the
severa l motion s by cla imants and landow ners in the severa l above
mentio ned condem nation procee dings, praying the respec tive courts
to decline to accept or to disappr ove the respec tive report s and
finding s of Speci al Invest igators and Boards of Apprai sal Commissio ners appoin ted in the course of the said condem nation proceedin gs:
-18 5,
�My name i s W. L. Green.
My post office address is
Strasburg , Vi rginia .
I w? s appointed a Speci ~l Investigator and a member of the
different Boards of Appraisa l Commi ssioners appointed in the course
of the above mentioned Shenandoah Na tional Park condemnation proceedings in the counties of Page and Rockingham , a nd as such I
joined in the preparation of the respective reports of said Boards
filed with the record in the above mentioned condemnation proceedings in the respective Clerks ' offices .
I have read the separate a ffidavits of George H. Levi
ca ptioned a s follows :
"Affidavit of George H. Levi, da ted March 23 ,
1933 , Re General , Page County , " and "Affidavit of George H. Levi ,
da ted March 23 , 1933 , Re Gener al , Rocki ngham Count y , "
a nd the
matters and things set out therein are true to the best of my
knowledge and belief .
VJitness my signature this
3 / ~ r?- Y o f ~ ' 1933 .
W. L. Green.
�---------
STATE OF VIRGINIA
)
CCUNTY OF WARREN
)
( ss.
Personally appeared
Public in my said State
before me, the undersigned Notary
and County,
w.
signed to the foregoing statement, and
made oath that the matters and things
L. Green, whose name is
who being duly sworn,
set
forth therein are
true to the best of his knowledge and belief.
Witness
day of March,
my signature
and Notarial Seal this 31st
1933.
My Commission Expires December 3rd, 193.l
z~-' ::t/;..atufl (
SEA L)
�Fi' ,.,]n the Clerk's Office
~ - -{Ingham County, Va.
AU G/5' 1933 ,r.;,0
CJ l
II
·.J-
J
~,,,
; ; ~-Clerk
SUPPLEMENTAL AFFibAVIT OF W. L. GREEN, DATED AUGUST 5 ,1933. RE.GENERAL.
This affidavit is made at the request of the State Commission on Conservation and Development of the State of Virginia for
file with the record in all or any of the following Public Park Condemnation proceedings pending in the Ci~cuit Courts of the Counties
of Virginia in which said Commission is Petitioner and in which the
defendants are as follows:
cuit Court of Warren County;
cuit Court of Page County;
Virginia Atwood, et als, etc., in the CirAda Abbott and others, etc., in the CirClifton Aylor and others, etc., in the
Circuit Court of Rappahannock County;
Armentrout,
etc., in the Circuit Court of Greene County;
etc., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County;
c.
E. and others,
Archer, A.
w.
and others,
Cassandra Lawson Atkins,
et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Rockingham County;
W. L. Arey
and others, etc., in the Circuit Court of Albemarle County;
D. F.
Anderson, et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Madison County.
It is my understanding, purpose and intention in making
this sworn statement, that the said Commission may, in its discretion,
file and submit the same in support of its prayers, motions, answers
and contentions submitted in the course of all or any of the above
mentioned condemnation proceedings, including its answers to the s everal motions by claimants and landowners in the several above mentioned condemnation proceedings,. praying the respective courts to decline
to accept or to disapprove the respective
report.s and .findings of
~pecial Investigators and Boards of Apiraisal Commissioners appointed
in the course of the said condemnation proceedings:
�My name is
..
w.
L. Green •
My post office is Strasb urg,
Virgi nia.
I was appoi nted a Speci al Inves tigato r and a member of the
differ ent Board s of Appra isal Comm issione rs appoi nted in the course
of the above mentio ned Shena ndoah Natio nal Park condem nation proceedin gs in the Count ies of Page and Rockin gham, and as such
I joined in the prepa ration of the respe ctive repor ts of said
Boards filed with the record in the above mentio ned condem nation
procee dings in the respe ctive Clerk s' office s.
I bave read the affida vit of Heorg e H. Levi, captio ned
"Supp lemen tal Affid avit of George H. Levi, dated 5th , Au~ust
1933, Re. Gener al," and the matte rs and things set out there in are
true to the best of my knowl edge and belie f.
Witne ss my signa ture this .Jit.hd ay of Augus t , 1933.
W.
L. Green
�-----
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF WARREN
)
( ss.
)
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in my said State and County,
w.
L. Green, whose name
is signed to the foregoing statement, and who being duly sworn,
made oath that the matters and things set forth therein are true
to the best of his knowledge and belief.
Witness my signature and Notarial Seal this
6_,,
day of
Q
��Filed in the Clerk's Office
Rockingham County, Va,
AUG /.S- 1933 /f:ao,-,.,,,
AB1FIDAVIT OF S. H. MARSH, DATED
1,
July
1933,~~1=erk
.
EXCEPrIONS.
This affidavit is made at the request of the State Commission on Conservation and Development of the State of Virginia for
file with the record in all or any of the following Public Park Condemnation proceedings pending
in the Circuit Courts of Virginia in
which said Commission is Petitioner and in which the defendants
are as follows:
·warren County;
of Page County;
Virginia Atwood, et als., in the Circuit Court of
Ada Abbott and others, etc., in the Circuit Court
Clifton Aylor and others, etc., in the Cir•cui t
Court of Rappahannock County;
Armentrout,
in the Circuit Court of Greene County;
c.
E. and others, etc.,
Archer , A.
etc., in the Circuit Court of Augusta County;
vv .,
and others,
Cassandra Lawson
Atkins , et als , etc., in the Circuit Court of Rockingham County;
·J .
L. Arey and others, etc.,- in the Circuit Court of Albemarle County;
D. F. Anderson et als, etc., in the Circuit Court of Madison County.
It is my understanding, purpose and intention in making
this sworn statement, that the said Commission may, in its discretion, file and submit the same in support of its prayers , motions,
answers, and contentions submitted in the course of all or any of
./
the above mentioned condemnation proceedings, including its ~Ce;s
to the several motions by claimants and landowners in the feveral
above mentioned condemnation proceedings, praying the/espective
courts to decline to accept or to disapprove the r~~ctive reports
and findings of Special Investigators and Board~/ of Appraisal Commissioners appointed in the course of the said condemnation proceedings:
l
I
�I have before me copies of each and all of said motions
and exceptions filed in the proceeding pending in the Circuit
Court of Rockingham County, furnished me by counsel for the Peti ti oner , and in this affidavit I shall deal with each of said motions
and exceptions separately and in the f ollowing order:
(A)
by Geo .
Motion or exception filed by Sallie A . Kite, represented
s.
Harnsberger , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissi oners and the reccrd of
the proceedings , appea r to be Tracts No . 3 and 372- I , as shown on
the map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
( B)
Motion or exception filed by J . T . Heard , represented
by Georges . Harnsberger , and David A. Conrad , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tract No . 41 - a , as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
( C)
Motion or exception filed by Vernon · •• Foltz , represented
by Robert \v . Keyser , Counsel .
The
lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the record of
the proceedings , app::ar to be Tra ct No . 48 , as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
�(D)
lotion or exception f i led by Wesley A. Dean, represented
by D. ~f . Earman, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of AppraisGLl Commissioner s and the rec<r d of
the proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 50, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s .
( E)
Motion or exception filed by
\i .
F. Dean, Jr ., represent-
ed by Geo . S . Harnsberger , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s and the record of
the proceedings , appea r to be Tracts No . 53 and 53-a, as shown on
the map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s .
(F)
Motion or exception filed by Annie Laura Baugher, repre-
sented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s and the record of
the proceedings , appea r to be Tracts No . ?O and ?O- I, as shown on
the map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisa l Commissioners .
(G)
Motion or exception filed by John K. Haney, represented
by D. W. Earman, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this excepta nt
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s and the record of
-3-
�the proceediµgs, appear to be fract No . 76, a s shown on the map f iled
with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(H)
Motion or excepti on filed by _E . C. and E . E . Lam, repre-
sented by E . D. Ott , Counsel .
The
lands sought to be condemned in which these exceptants
have any claim of right, title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the record of the
proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 81 , as shown on the map filed
with the r eport of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(I)
Motion or exception filed by Maude M. Shipp, represented
by Chas . A. Hammer, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the r e cord of
the proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 84 , as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of
(J)
ppraisal Commissioners o
Motion or exception filed by A. L . and J . F . Moubray,
re presented by Charles A . Hammer, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which these exceptants
have any claim of- right , title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Cor.imissioners and the record of
the proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 166 , as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of App:- a isal Commiss i oners .
(K)
by Geo .
Motion or exceptio n filed by Annie R. Begoon, represented
s.
Harnsb erger , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which t his exceptant
has any ~1~am of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
- 4-
�report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the record of
the proceedings , a ppear to be Tract No . 242, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissio n ers .
(L)
Motion or exception filed by J. W. Hinkle , represented by
Geo • • Harnsberger , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of 1ppraisal Commissioners and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tracts No . 244 and 326- III , as shown
on the map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(M)
Motion or exception filed by John J . Mace, James G. Mace,
Elizabeth Mace Via, R. H. Mace, Julia :Mace Spitzer, Charles M.
Mace, and heirs at law of Ben F. Mace, represented by Geo . S.
Harnsberger , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which these exceptants
have any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shov1n by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Cow.missioners , and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tracts No . 312 , 312-a, and 312 - b ,
as shown on the map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal
Commissioners .
(N)
Motion or exception filed by Robert T . Mill er , represented
by Hamilton Haas, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of
ppraisal Commissioners , and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tract No . 325 , as shown on the map filed
with the report of the Board of Appraisal commissioners •
.a5-
�(0)
Motion or exception filed by Herbert G. Patterson,
represented by George S . Harnsberger, Counsel.
The lands sought to be condemned in which this ex.c eptant
has any claim of right, title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the record of
the proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 335, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commi ssioners.
(P)
Motion or exception filed by
David H. Patterson, represented
Herbert G., Howard H., and
by George S. Harnsberger, Coun-
sel.
The lands sought to be condemned in which these exceptants
have any claim of right, title, estate or interest as shown by
the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissi oners and the record
of the proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 337, as shown on the
map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners.
(Q)
Motion or exception filed by Elijah Catterton, represented
by Geo. S . Harnsberger, Counsel.
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title, estate or interest as shown by
the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the record
of the proceedings , ap:p9ar to be Tra ct No . 357, as shown on the
map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners.
(R)
Motion or exception filed by E.
c.
Lam, represented by E.
D. Ott, Counsel.
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title, estate or interest as shown by
the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the record
-6-
�of the proceedings , appear to be Tract No . 368, as shown on the
map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commi;:;sioner s .
(S)
Motion or exception filed by Margaret Mundy, represented
by D. \ • Earman, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s and the record of
the proceedings , appe~r to be Tract No . 371, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s .
(T)
Motion or exception filed by G. Luther Kite , represented by
C. A . Hammer , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s , and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tracts No . 372 and 372- I, as shown
on the map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(U)
Motion or exception filed by R.
o.
Nizer , represented by
George S . Harnsberger , Counsel .
The lands
sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s , and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tract No . 40 , as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s .
(V )
Motion or exception filed by C. G. Harnsberger , represented
by George S . Harnsberger, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
- 7-
�has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Corr~ issioners , and the record of
the proo eedings , appea r to be Tracts No . 41 and 42, as shown on the
map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissi oners .
(W)
Motion or exception filed by John l . Hensley, Layton
'd . Hensley, and other heirs of Virgin ia V. Hensley, represented by
Georges . Ha rnsberger , Counsel .
The l a nds sought to be condemned in which these excepta nts
have any claim of right , title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners , and the record of
the proceedings , appea r to be Tra ct No . 56 , as shown on the map
filed with the rep ort of the Board of Appt'aisal Commissi oners .
(X)
Motion or exception filed by Luther J . Strickler,
represented by George S . Harnsberger, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptent
has a ny claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commi ss io ners , and the record of
the proce edings, a ppea r to be Tract No . 56 , as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissi oners .
(Y)
Moti on or exception filed by Cassie M. Naylor , repre-
sented by George S . Harnsberger , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in wh:ich this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or int erest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commb si oners , and the r ecord of
the prcc e eding s , appear to be Tra ct No . 62 , as shovm on the map
filed with the report of the Board of App raisal Co:m..>m.ssioners .
( Z)
Motion or excepti on filed by J .
- 8-
o.
Harnsberger , A. L.
�Harnsber~ er , Nannie T . Harnsberg er , Clinton T . Harnsberg er ,
Kate W. Snapp, J .
c.
Bishop, A.
c.
Davis and A. . Florence Forrer ,
represente d by George S . Harnsberg er , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which tblis exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissi oner s , and the record of
the proceeding s , appear to be Tract No . 70- I, as shown on the map
filed with the repcr t of the Board of Appraisal Commissio ners .
(AA)
Motion or exception filed by Sarah L . Upp , represente d
by George S . Harnsberg er , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Cornmissic.~ners, and the record of
the proceedin gs, appear to be Tract No . 71, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal CommJ ssioners .
(BB)
Moti ~n or exception filed by Julia L. Comer , represente d
by Miss Ethel Irwin, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commfu sioners , and the record of
the proceedin gs , appear to be Tract No . 123, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissio ners .
(CC)
Motio n or exception filed by Edward Herring and W. T .
Herring, represente d by Georges . Harnsberg er , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which these exceptant s
have any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissio ners , and the record of
- 9-
�the proceedings, _appear to be Tract No . 145, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(DD)
Motion or exception filed by M. H. Long, represented by
Ralph H. Bader , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissi oners , and the record of
the proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 152, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(EE)
Motion or exception filed by Hosea Shifflett, represented
by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Com.missi oners , and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tract No . 160, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of App raisal Commissioners .
(FF·}
Motion or exception filed by Thomas L . Yancey, Emma V.
Gibbons , Hunter M. Gibbons , Mrs . Mary Gibbons Snapp, F . M. Yancey,
Nettie I . Mauzy, Julia Estes, A.
s.
Yancey, and Frank W. Yancey,
Represented by Chas . A. Hammer , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which these exceptants
have any claim of right , title, estate or interest as shown by
the report of the Board of Appraisal C:mmmissioners , and the record
of the proceedings , appear to be Tract No . 163, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(GG)
Motion or exception filed by :Mr s. E .
w.
Harrison, repre -
sented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel .
-10100
�The lands sought to be condemned, in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Ap~raisal Commissioners, and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tracts No . 208 and 208-a, as shown on
the map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal CowJnissioners .
(HH)
Motio n or exception filed by
Jos . E. Carickhoff, re-
presented by Ralph H. Bader , Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Aprraisal Commissioners, and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tract No . 210, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(II)
Motion or exception filed by M. H. Harrison, represented
by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title , estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners , and the record of
the proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 212 , as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Ap.i;raisal Commissioners .
( JJ)
Motion or exception filed by Thomas
L . Yancey, repre-
sented by Chas . A. Hammer, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title, es tate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Apprais a l Commissioners, and the record of
the proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 213 , as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
I
- 11IOI
�(KK)
Motion or exception filed by
Annie E . Hedrick, repre-
sented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners , and the record of
the :pt'Oceedings , appear to be Tract No . 248 , as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(LL)
Motion or exception filed by J . H. Lewin, represented
by Georges . Harnsberger, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Comnissioners , and the record of·
the pro ceedings, ap:r:ear to be Tracts No . 256 and 256-a, as shown
on the map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(MM)
Motion or exception filed by A.
s.
Kemper, represented
by Hamilton Haas, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Com.mi ssioners , and the record of
the proceedings , appear to be Tract No . 276, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(NN)
Motion or exception file d by D. M. Clark, represented
by Hamilton Haas, Counsel .
Th e lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right , title, estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners, and the record
- 12lo'Z-
�of the proceedings, appear to be Tract No . 277, as shown on the
map filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
(00)
Motion or exception filed by John Roadcap, represented
by Hamilton Haas, Counsel .
The lands sought to be condemned in which this exceptant
has any claim of right, title, · estate or interest as shown by the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners, and the record of
the proceedings, appear to be Tr'1ct No. 307, as shown on the map
filed with the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissi. oners .
I also have before me an affidavit captioned "Affidavit
of
s.
H. Marsh, dated M:arch 1, 1933, Re . General,n
prepared by
me for file and use in each and all of the condemnation proceedings
mentioned in the opening paragraph of this affidavit, which sets
forth in detail and at length, a history and report of the activities of myself and
Mr . Stoneburner, and our assistants, in the
preparation of the maps of the various tracts of diverse ownership
within the proposed Park area, and in the examination, classification and ascertairunent of the elements of value of the various
tracts of land, ownership of which has been or is claimed by the
various persons mentioned in the Board of Appraisal Commissioners'
report filed with the record in these proceedings, which affidavit
also includes a statement as to our special training, experience
and qualifications for such work.
I have reread that affidavit,
and in order to avoid unnecessary repetition, I here refer to the
said affidavit, and make the same an integral part of this affi ..
davit.
~lnce the filing of said exceptions, or motions, I have
-13ICS
�care.L·ully examined the report oi' the Board of Appraisal Com.'Tiissioners filed with the record of the above mentioned condemnation proceedings in Rockingham County and the tables and findings of values
and incidental damages therein set out, and the
11
,Jork Sheets 1
filed with the report setting forth the elements upon which the
Board of Appraisal Commissioners based its valuation of . the fee
simpl~ estate in each of said tracts, and of the incidental damages arising out of the proposed condemnation, and together with my
chief assistant for • . • H. Stoneburner, I have checked the various
items of value and damages set out in the report of the Board of
Appraisal Commissioners and their "Work Sheets" with the data and
corresponding appraisals of value and damages proposed by Mr . Stoneburner and me , as set forth in my said affidavit dated March 1 ,
1933 ..
Referring specifically to the moti ons to disapprove or
exc eptions mentioned above under separate letters of the alpha bet , and dealing more specifically with the matters set forth in
these several motions to disapprove , or exceptions , I will deal
with each under its proper alphabetical head, it being understood
that what is said under each alphabetical head as to each of these
specific motions to disapprove , or exceptions, should be read
together with the general stat ements in this affidavit, and in my
affidavit captioned
11 Affidavit
of
s.
H. Marsh, dated March 1,
1933, Re . General . "
-14 lo~
�(A)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by Sallie A• Kite,
represented-: by George
s . Harnsberger , counsel .
The lands within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which were described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of Sallie A. Kite, with the record in the clerk•s Office in
response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition,
are the lands shown as Tract No. 3 and 372-I, on the county ownership
Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of APPraisal commissioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit captioned "Affidavit of
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re . General , "
s.
H•
-
I have set forth the meas-
ures adopted by Mr. Stoneburner and myself in the preparation of this
map and. in the location thereon of the various tracts of di verse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition, reference
is made to that affidavit.
As shown by their report, the Board of APPrai sal commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view, that the lands within the park area in
Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have an
interest, are the said tracts No . 3 and 372-I, as shown on the said
map.
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplificatio n
order of the court, directing her to file with the record, a statement
showing whether or not the lands in which she now claims an interest
are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board of APPraisal
Commissioner s found that she claimed or appeared to have an interest,
it appears that the lands in which this exceptant now claims an interest
are the lands in which the Board found that she claimed or appeared
-1/o
�to have an interest, as shovm on the county ownership Map filed With
its report.
The mapping and examinatio n was conducted by myself and
Mr. Stoneburn er, With our assistant s, as set forth in my separate
affidavit, captioned "Affidavi t of s. H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933,
Re. Generall'
These lands were located on the county ownership MaP
as described in the general affidavit .
They were plotted and checked
and tied to the surroundin g and adjoining lands, and to known property
corners.
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as
evidence to the Appraisal Commissio ners.
These two tracts or parcels of land are located in the
extreme eastern part of Rockingham county and between cucumber Spring,
and Bear Wallow spring, and comprise that portion of a larger tract
purchased by Sallie A. Kite which lies on the west slope of the
Blue Ridge.
The residue of the tract lies on the opposite side
of the Blue Ridge in Greene County.
Tract No. 3?2-I in which the report of the Board of
Appraisal Conµnissio ners shows that the exeeptant appears to have an
interest, is a part of the lands claimed by the exceptant , but a
claim of ownership has been set up by others, and this tract was
therefore shown on the map and reported as a lap.
opinion as to the ownership of t his tract.
I express no
This claimant was given
an opportuni ty to be heard on the value of the lap in which she
claims an interest, as well as on the value of the land as to which
-2l~b
�there appear to be no contesting claimants .
Both tracts are very similar in character .
a clay loam of medium depth and fertility .
'l'he soil is
The slopes are gentle
to moderatel y steep with patches of loose rocks on the surface.
Tract No. 3 contains 24 acres of which 14 acres is "Slope
-
type" land.
This
may
be described briefly a s land which is capable
of growing 1-3 log timber, or trees With a merchantable length
of 16-48 feet.
Eight acres is "Fields restocking " which is land
that was at one time cleared, but which is now growing up to brush
and has only a relatively low grazing value.
TWo acres is Grazing
land.
Tract No. 3?2-I, containing 60 acres, has 30 acres of
"slope type" land; 2? acres, Field-rest ocking; and 3 acres of Grazing
land.
The exceptant is apparentl y of the opinion that Tract NO•
3?2-I was reported in the name of G. Luther Kite and that her claim
to ownership thereof was disregarde d.
As previousl y stated, the
report of the Board of Appraisal commissio ners shows that she appears to have an interest in this tract, but a claim of ownership
having been set up by G. Luther Kite also, it was reported as a
lap of the G. Luther Kite Tract on the Sallie A• Kite tract.
A care-
ful investiga tion on the ground and a compariso n of the descriptio n
contained in the deeds for the respectiv e tracts, indicates clearly
the existence of a lap.
No opinion as to ownership of the lap
is expressed .
There are no improveme nts on either of these tracts.
An
attempt was made several years ago to develop this land
for grazing purposes.
After the removal of the merchanta ble timber the
-3-
lo,
�remaining trees were either felled or girdled.
Some blue grass sod
was secured but failm-e to keep the brush cut off later has greatly
reduced the grazing value of these lands.
I was unable to discover on these tracts any indications
that they are capable of producing any substantial r~venue at this time,
or that t hey can be made a profitable property for many years to come
and then only at a considerable expense.
It is my opinion that the values of $112.00 for Tract #3
and $270.00 for tract #372-I placed upon these tracts by the APPraisal
Commissioners is considerably higher than the property would now bring
on the open market;
that it is not unfair or inadequate, and that no -
better price can or will be secured for these lands if the owners
desire to sell, and no better price could have been secured for them
at any time within the last five years.
II&
�(B)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by J. T.
Heard, represented by Georges. Harnsberger , and David A. Conrad,
Counsel.
The lands within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which were described in the claim filed by or
in behalf of J . T. Heard, with the record in the Clerk's Office
in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition, are the lands shown as Tract #41-a on the County Ownership Map for Rockingham County, filed by the Board of Appraisal
Connnissioners with its report.
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of
s.
H.
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re. General, 0 I have set forth the
measures adopted by
Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the prepara-
tion of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts
of diverse ownership within the proposed park area, and to avoid
repetition, reference is made to that affidavit.
As shown by their report, the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view, that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to
have an interest, is the said tract No . 41-a, as shown on the said
map.
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the Court directing him to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the l a nds in which he now claims a n
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the
Board of Appraisal Comrnissioners found th9.t he claimed or appeared
lo~
�to have an interest, it appears that the lands in which the exceptant now claims an interest are the lands in which the Board
found that he claimed or appeared to have an interest , as shown on
the County Ownership Map filed with its report .
The mapping and examinati 0n was conducted by myself and
Mr . Stoneburn er, with our assistant s, as set forth in my separate
affidavit , captioned "Affidavi t of& . H. Marsh, dated March l,
1933, Re . General . "
These lands were located on the County Own-
ership Map as described in the general affidavit .
They were plot-
ted and checked and tied to the surroundin g and adjoining lands,
and to known property corners .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted
as evidence to the Appraisal Com1i1issioners .
This tract lies in Cold Comfort Hollow, on either side
of Cold Comfort Branch, on the west side of the public road leading from Beldor through Powells Gap to Bacon Hollow , about two
miles east of the Beldor Post Office and about eight miles from
Elkton .
The exceptant complains of the inadequat e value placed
on this tract .
The soil is a sandy clay loam of medium depth and fertility .
The slopes throughou t the wooded portion are for the
most part steep and rocky .
The smoother areas were cleared many
years ago and are now in sod with some large boulders and small
clumps of trees scattered throu~ut .
Two hundred and twelve acres
is "Slope type land", valued at $5 . 00 per acre, which is higher
110
�than the value ordinarily awarded for land of that type .
Pre -
sumably the Board of Appraisal Commissioners considered that this
wooded area had some grazing value because of the scattered patches
of sod .
Land of Slope type may be described briefly as land which
is capable of growing 1- 3 log timber, or trees with a merchantable
length of 16 - 48 feet .
There are no improvements on this tract .
The wooded or timbered portion of the tract has been
cut over repeatedly for various timber products .
The last cut -
ting , for stavewoo d, was being conducted at the time of our examination .
This may account for the difference in the timber
value found by the Board of Ap:i;raisal Commissioners, and the value
found by me and my assistants .
\Ve found a value of $190 . 80 for
merchantable timber while the Board of Appraisal Commissioners
valued the remaining stand of merchantable timber at $100 . 00 .
At least six months having elapsed after the date of our examination of this tract and the da te of inspection and view by the Board
of Appraisal Cormnissioners, the operator would have had ample time
to remove the total estimated stand of 63,600 board feet .
Chestnut oak and other hardwoods predominated in the
original forest areas on the Blue Ridge Mountains in Rockingham
and adjoining counties .
The relatively large amount of chestnut
oak timber to be found , the bark of which is used extensively for
the tanning of leather , led to the establishment of tanneries at
Luray, Elkton, Harrisonburg and other points in Northern Virginia .
The Elkton Tannery was established about 1875 and was operated continuously until destroyed by fire about ten years ago .
Ill
�Evidences of old bark peelings on this and adjoining
tracts are easily distinguis hable from the stumps and the peeled
logs , some of which have not completel y rotted, and by abandoned
roads .
The
11
Bark peelingstt were followed by sawmill operation s
which manufactu red into lumber the accessibl e peeled chestnut oak
timber , and the timber of other species .
Sawmill seats on this
and other tracts adjacent to this property show where these operations were conducted , and the condition of the present stand and
stumps furnish ample evidence that practical ly all accessibl e timber has been cut .
Wu.thin the last twenty years all chestnut trees
on this and adjoining tracts were kill ed by the blight and as a
result thereof there is no chestnut timber now on this tract of any
value whatsoeve r .
With the developme nt of commercia l apple orchards in
Rockingham and other Valley Counties there developed in this and
adjacent territory an active demand for apple barrel staves .
The
owner of this tract has long been recognize d as one of the large
producers of slack cooperage stock .
There is ample evidence on
the tract to indicate that it was also cut over for stavewood .
Only 16 acres of the tract was reported by the Board
of Appraisal Commissio ners as grazing land .
Owing to the relative-
ly small amount of grazing land and the fact that only a very small
additiona l area is considere d suitable for developme nt for this
purpose , this cannot be regarded as a grazing or even a potential
grazing propositio n .
There are no evidences of successfu l exploratio ns or
I
111.-
�prospecting for miµerals or mineral bodies on this tract, and there
are no outcroppings of minerals or mineral bodies or deposits
thereon which have any marketable or cash value, and the mineral
rights in this tract add nothing to the market or cash value
of the fee simple estate therein.
As already stated, no indications of substantial or successful prospecting or development of minerals or mineral rights
are to be found and none was shown at the public hearings which
would justify a finding of any mineral bodies or right in or under
this tract in Rockingham County, and sustain a finding that exceptants have any mineral rights of any value in these tracts;
and
the minerals and mineral rights in or under these tracts add nothing to their fee simple estate.
When the fact is taken into consideration that a substantial part of the tract is covered with a stand of young timber only and when the further fact is borne in mind that a long
period of years will be required for a new crop of timber to
reach maturity, the present timber growth, together with the land
which supports it must be considered of very little value as a
revenue producing property for many years to come.
In fact,
the only available market which has developed in this region of
Virginia for cutover tracts of steep, rugged, rocky mountain land
such as this, is the U.S. Forest Service for the National Forest
purposes.
The lands which have been acquired by the U. S. Forest
Service have been purchased by negotiations with the owners and
some half million acres have been acquired in this manner in northern
Virginia, some of this National Forest land being not more than ten
h3
�miles distant from the tract under conside ration .
The average
price of this Nationa l Forest land is very much lower than the
value reported by the Ap:rrais al Board for this tract .
It is my opinion that the Apprais al Commiss ioners
appraise d this tract at its full market value and that the ualue
placed upon the fee simple estate by the Apprais al Commiss ioners
is conside rably higher than the property would bring on the open
market ;
that ~1665 . 00 is as high or a higher price than it could
have been sold for at any time during the past five years;
and
that the owner if he desired to sell, would not be able to dispose
of this property at a higher price than that allowed by the Board
of
Apprais al Commiss ioners .
�(C)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by Vernon
w.
Foltz , represented by Robert W. Keyser , Counsel .
The lands within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which were described in the claim filed by
or in behalf of Vernon '. . • Fo l tz , with the recor·d in the Clerk ' s
Office in response to the publication of notice of the filing of
the petition, are the lands shown as Tract No . 48 on the County
Ownership Map for Roc k ingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal CoI11.missioners v1ith its report .
In my separate affidavit , capti oned "Affidavit of
s.
H.
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933 , Re . General , 11 I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed park area , and to avoid repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view , that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in v1hich this party claims or a ppe'lrs to have
an interest, is the s a id tract No . 48, a s shown on the s a id map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplifica ti on
order of the court , directing him to file with the record, a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now cla ims an
inter est are the same as the lands i n
whi ch the report of the
Board of Appraisal Commissioner s found that he claimed or appeared
to have an interest , it appears that the lands in v1hich the exceptant now claims a n interest a re the l a nds in ·w hich the Board foundtha t
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ HS':
�he claimed or _appeared to have an interest, as shown on the County
Ownership Map filed with its report .
The mapping and examination was conducted by myself and
Mr . Stoneburner, with our assistants, as set forth in my separate
affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of S . H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933,
Re . General . "
These lands were located on the County Owner-
ship Map as described in the general affidavit .
They were
plotted and checked and tied to the surrounding and adjoining lands,
and to known property corners .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted
as evidence to the Appraisal Commissioner s .
This tract is located near the top of the Blue Ridge
about three miles north of Swift Run Gap and is bounded on the
East by the G. S . Lough Tract No . 49;
Meadows Tract No . 30;
on the North by the L. G.
on the West by the J . B. Dean Tract No . 33,
and the Dorsey J . Dean Tract No . 54, and on the South by the Wesley A. Dean Tract No . 50 .
The soil is· a sandy clay loam of good depth and fertility .
blopes are moderate and gently rolling with comparatively
few loose rocks on the cleared area .
No exception is made by the claimant as to the identity
or acreage reported for this tract .
It contains 143 acres of
which 98 acres, including 3 acres of orchard, is grazing land, and
the remainder 45 acres is Slope type land.
This may be described
briefly as land which is capable of growing 1-3 log timber or
trees with a merchantable length of 16-48 feet .
lib
�The claimant has made exception to the value placed
-·
on the tract by the Board of Appraisal Comn1iss:bners , and he cites
the price paid b-y. him in 1921, refers to the improvements in the
form of clearing, grubbing and fencing done by himself since
the dat e of purcha se and new improvements added s i nce the pro perty was viewed and inspected by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
There was found on this tract at the time of inspec tion by the Board of Appraisal Cornrnissi oners the following improvements:
A two room log dwelling, in a dilapidated condition ; a
frame dwelling occupied by a tenant;
two old log ba rns ; an old
frame stable; and some small , miscellaneous outbuildings .
The total value placed on the above group of buildings was $655 . 00 .
A r ec ent inspection of this pro p erty di sclosed the fact that
there has been erected on it a filling sta t i on a nd a small frame
building large enough to house a small family .
Construction of
these new improvements may have been started before the report of
the Board of Appraisal Commissioners was filed with the Clerk of
the Court , but the owner admits that they were erected after the
Comniiss i oners had been upon the land, and at a cost to him of
$2500 . 00 .
I have made no inspec tion of these improvements for
the purpose of estimating or ascerta ining their value , but I am
convinced their value was not reported by the Board of Appr a isal
Commissioners .
This pro perty is f a irly representa tive of the numerous
mountain farms which are to be found on the western slopes of the
Blue Ridge in Rockingham County, and nearby on the dra ins of Na ked
Ill
�Creek in Page County except that it is one of the most isolated
and inaccessible .
The style of construction and condition of the
dwelling , barn, and other farm buildings indicates that the property was used for general agricultural purposes many years ago,
but like many similar properties in the locality above mentioned
it apparently became less desirable as a farm for the production
of crops and was finally acquired by the present owner .
Although
the owner claims he paid $9 , 000 . 00 for this tract in 1921 at public sale after spirited bidding, and maintains it has increased
in value since he owned it, nevertheless it is generally recognized that real estate values have depreciated generally, and in
many instances as much as 50% .
After testimony tending to show the value claimed by
the exceptant was presented at the public hearings held in this
County, the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s went upon this land
and after a personal view and inspection, valued the grazing land
at exactly the rate per acre as appraised by me .
The exceptant
complains that the compensation for his land, of all the lands embraced in the report of the Board, is the most grossly inadequate.
There are, in the immediate locality, several tracts of grazing
land very similar in character and comparable in size which were
valued by the same Commissioner s in these proceedings and in which
in my opinion, are as valuable per acre, but apparently the owners
were entirely satisfied with the award .
At least these owners
filed no exception to the awards .
In addition to the above the exceptant asserts that
the members of the Board of Appraisal Commissmers were guilty of
�such ill~gal and improper conduct as to render their report
filed on the second day of August, 1932, wholly null and void
they were unduly influenced by the agents, servants
and that
and employees of the State Commission on Conservation and DeIn this connection, reference is made to the affi-
velopment .
davit of Geo . H. Levi, Secretary of the Board, which covers these
objections of the exceptant .
The
exceptant states that his revenue from this tract
of land is @540 . 00 to $720.00 per year, based on a rent 1 of
the grazing rights at ~l . 50 per head per month, (for a season
of six months) .
The figures above mentioned appear to be the
gross returns, however, and apparently no deduction has been
made therefrom for interest on
the investment, (which alone
at 6%, would equal $540 . 00), maintenance of fences, salting,
herding, upkeep of
buildings, and other miscellaneou s expenses .
It is my opinion that the Commissioner s appraised this
tract at its full market value, and at a figure in line with
other similar tracts within the Park area;
that in allowing
$4880 . 00 therefor they were fair and generous;
that this price
is higher than the property w_uld now bring on the open market ;
and
that the owner, if he desired to sell, would not be able
to dispose of this property at a higher price than that allowed
by the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s .
Although claimant testified as to the great value of
this land for grazing µirposes, the Commissioner s, after a careful inspection, declined to accept this evidence at its face
value and placed upon it a value much nearer the figure recom -
Ji~
�mended by me th n that claimed by the exceptant , which, as I
have alrea dy stated, I believe to be a fair value , considering
the location and general character of this property .
(!_ - ~
IU>
�(D} ·
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by Wesley A.
Dean, r epresented by D. W. Earman, Counsel .
The lands within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, in which this excepta nt appears to have an
interest, but for which no claim was filed by the exceptant with
the record in the Clerk ' s Office in response to the publication of
notice of the filing of the petition, are the lands shown as Tract
No . 50 on the County Ownership Map for Rockingham County filed
by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of S . H.
:Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933 , Re . Genera l," I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts
of diverse ownership within the proposed park a rea , and to avoid
r epetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their
own personal inspection and view , that the land withi._n the Park
area in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appe'1.rs
to have an interest , is the said tract No . 50 , as shown on the
said map .
From the answer of this exc eptant to the amplification
order of the court , directing him to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the
Board of Appraisal Commissioners found that he claimed or appeared
to have an interest , it appears tha t the lands in which the ex-
�ceptant now claims an interes t are the lands in which the Board
found that he claimed or appeared to have an interes t , as shown
on the County Ownersh ip Map filed with its repcr t .
The mapping and examina tion was conducte d by myself
and Mr . Stonebu rner, with our assistan ts, as set forth in my
separate affidav it, captione d
March 1 , 1933 , Re . General ."
11
Affidav it of S . H. Marsh , dated
These lands were located on the
County Ownersh ip Map as describe d in the general affidav it .
Tl:-ey
were plotted and checked and tied to the surround ing and adjoining lands , and to known property corners .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefull y checked on the ground before being submitte d
as evidence to the Apprais al Commiss ioners .
This tract is located in the extreme head of Hensley
Hollow near the top
of the Blue Ridge about 2-1/2 miles north
of Swift Run Gap and is bounded on the East by the Thos . B.
Hensley Tract No . 51; on the North by the Vernon Foltz Tract No .
48; on the West by the Dorsey J . Dean Tract No . 54, and on the
South by vvm . F . Dean, Jr ., Tract No . 53 , and the Mrs . J . Knightin g
Tract No . 52 .
This is an abandone d mountain farm .
The soil is a
sandy clay loam of good depth and medium fertilit y .
are steep with northwe st and southwe st exposure .
The slopes
There were found
on the tract the followin g improvem ents:
A four room log dwelling , abandon ed and in poor conditio n;
and frame barn in fair conditio n;
house, both in poor conditio n .
a log
a frame meat house and log corn
�The tract contains 75 acres of which 22 acres is
grazing land, two acres of fields restocking and the remainder ,
51 acres , is woodland classified as nslope type 11 land .
This
may be described briefly as land which is capable of growing 1 -3
log timber , or trees with a merchant~ble length of 16-48 feet .
The wooded area has been cut over repeatedly.
The tot9.l remain-
ing stand was valued at ~30 . 00 which valuation was not raised by
the Board of Appraisal Commissioners in their report .
Thirty ap-
ple trees in fair condition were valued at ~60 . 00, independently
of the soil .
The exceptant complains that the award is manifestly
inadequate and refers specifically to the quality of the soil ,
the value of the growing timber and the excellent condition of
the orchard which he says contains more than 100 trees .
As stated above , the entire wooded portion which is
slightly more than two-thirds of the total area of the tract has
been closely cut for all merchantable timber .
What was appraised
is in reality young immature timber ordinarily not considered
merchantable because it is small and scattered.
At the time this tract vms examined, a count showed
that there were thirty fruit trees .
This evidence was presented
to the Board of Appraisal Commissioners at the public hearings
held in the County .
be heard .
The owner was also given an opportunity to
Later, the Commissioners went upon the land and ap-
parently failed to find any more trees than were found by me and
my assistants .
Although the owner was given an opportunity to
testify in detail as to the value of this property, nevertheless ,
the value pla ced upon it was very much nearer my appraisal value
�than the amount claimed by the owner .
It is my opinion that in allowing $920 . 00 for this
tract the Appraisal Commissioner s were fair and generous ;
that
the value placed upon this tract is considerably higher than it
would bring on the open market , that it is as high or higher
than it could have been sold for at any time during the past
five years and that the owner, if he desires to sell, would not
be able to dispose of this property at a higher price than that
allowed by the Board of .ppraisal Corrrnissioner s .
- - - - - - - - - - ~ - ~ -17-'1
�(E) .
Motion to dis tpprove or except ion filed by 1i1 . F . Dean,
Jr ., represe nted by Geo .
s.
Harnsb erger , Counse l .
The lands within the area describ ed in the petitio n
in Rocking ham County , which were describ ed in the claim filed
by or in behalf of . • P . Dean, Jr ., with the record in the Clerk ' s
Office in respon se to the public ation of notice of the filing of
the petitio n, are the lands shown as 'i'racts No . 53 and 53- a , on
the County Owners hip l,iap for Rocking ham County filed by the Board
of ~pprai sal Commis sion ers with its report .
In my separa te affida vit, caption ed "Affid avit of S . H.
Marsh, dated flarch 1 , 1933 , Re . Genera l , 11
I have set forth the
measur es adopte d·by Mr . Stoneb urner and myself in the prepar atinn
of this map and in the locatio n thereon of the variou s tracts of
divers e owners hip within the propos ed park a rea, and to avoid repetitio n, referen ce is made to that affida vit .
As shown by their report , the Board of 1ppr~is 9.l Commissio ners found from the eviden ce submit ted, and from their
own person al inspec tion and view , that the lands within the Park
area in Rockin gham County , in which this party claims or appear s
to have an intere st , are the said tracts No . 53 and 53- a, as
shown on the said map .
From the ansvrer of this exc ept9.nt to the amplif ication order of the court , directi ng him to file with the record , a
statem ent showing whethe r or not the la_nds in which he now claims
an intere st are the same as the lands in which the report of
the Board of Apprai sal Commi ssioner s fo~d that he claimed or
appear ed to have an intere st , it appear s that the lands in which
IU-
�the exceptant now -clai:r.1.s an interest are the lands in which the
Board found that he claimed or appeared to have an interest , as
shown on the County Ownership Map filed v1ith its report .
The mapping and examination was conducted by myself
and lllr . Stoneburner , with our assistants , as set forth in my
separate affidavit , captioned "Affidavit of S . H. Marsh, dated
I..arch 1 , 1933 , Re . General . u
These lands were located on the
County Ownershi? Map as described in the gener8.l affidavit .
They were plotted 9..nd checked and tied to the surr,o unding and
adjoining lands and to known property corner s .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field
data and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as evidence to the Ap pr~is al Cormtlssioners .
Tract No . 53- a is located at Ii.it . Pleasant Church on
both sides of the county road leading from Elkton to Hensley Hollow about four miles from Elkton .
Tract No . 53 is located ne~r the head of Hens ley Hollow
about seven miles from Elkton and is bounded on the East by the
Mr s . J . Knighting Trac t No . 52 ; on the North by the Wesley Dean
Tract No . 50, and the Dorsey
z.
Dean Tract No. 54; on the West
by the N. Lester Dean Tract No . 57; and on the South by the b . V.
and B. B. Burke Tract No . 68 .
This is an abandoned mountain farm now us e d almost exclusively for grazing purposes . There are on the tract an old
barn and corn house , of log construction, and both in poor condition .
Ul the merchantable timber i ncluding stavewood has
�been removed .
The exceptant makes no exception to the award on this
tract, but complains of a shortage of acreage , which he states is
60 acres .
According to the supporting affidavit of P. B. F.
Good, Surveyor of Rockingham County, the acreage is 58 . 2 ~ .
A computation of the acreage was made from the description in the
owner I s deed when the County Ownership Map was being prepn.red, and
the result, 48 acres , was reported to the Board of Appraisal Co~missioners which was the acre::1.ge the Board used when making their
award.
It appearing from in1"ormation
secured at a conference
with the owner, his Counsel and the County Surveyor for Rockingham County, that the survey description was erroneous, it was
decided to make a complete re-survey of the tract which was done
by F . T . Amiss , County Surveyor for Page County, and vJ . H. Stoneburner, and the acreage then computed by latitudes and departures
was found to be 59 . 82 acres .
The survey description contained
in the owner ' s deed was found to be incorrect in that the longest
east and west line which was described as being 59 poles in length
was, when carefully measured on the ground,fonnd to be 80 poles
long .
The claimant is therefore entitled to payment for an
additional 11 . 82 A. of land, the value of which is, in my opinion,
$15 .00 per acre .
Tract No . 53- a is a farm of average size and quality
and fairly conveniently located as to markets , schools, and
churches .
The buildings are comfortable although rather old.
117
�The owner was given an opportunity to testify as to the value of
.•
this tract at the public hearings held by the Board of Appraisal
Commissioners in the County after which the Board went upon the
land and fixed a value on the property which wa s nearer the value I placed upon it than the value claimed by the owner .
It is my opinion that the value placed upon these tracts
by the Appraisal Commissioners, even without the addition of the
11 . 82 acres, is considerably higher than the property would now
bring on the open market; that it is not unfair or inadequate,
and that no better price can or will be secured for t h is land if
the owners desire to sell, and no better price could have been
secured for it at any time ·within the last five years .
�(F)
Motion to disapprove or excepti on filed by Annie
Laura Baugher, represented by Ralph H, Bader,
Counsel .
The lands within the area described in the petition
in Rockingham County, which were described in the claim filed
by or in behalf of Annie Laura Baugher, with the record in the
Clerk's Office in response to the publication of notice of the
filing of the petition, are the lands shown as Tracts No . 70
and 70-I on the County Ownership Map for Rockingham County filed
by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned " Affidavit of
1arsh,
s.
H.
dated March 1, 1933, Re . General,u I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts
of diverse ownership within the proposed park area, and
to avoid
repetition, ref erence is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted,
and from their own
personal inspection and view , that the lands within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have
an interest , are the said tracts No . 70 and 70-I , as shown on the
said map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the court, directing her to file with the record, a
statement showing whether or not the lands in which she now claims
an interest are the same
as the
lands in which the report of
the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found that she claimed or
1'-
I
�appeared to have . an interest, it appears that the lands in which
the excepta nt now claims an int erest are the lands in which the
Board found that she claimed or appeared to have an interest, as
shown on the County Ownership Map filed with its report .
The mapping and
and
Mr .
examination was conducted by myself
Stoneburner, with our assistants , as set forth in my sep-
arate affidavit, captioned"Affidavi t of S . H. Marsh, dated March 1 ,
1933, Re . General . 11
These lands were located on the County Own-
ership map as described in the general affidavit .
The~were plotted
and checked and tied to the surrounding and adjoining lands, and
t o known property corners .
The ustrip survey 11 method was used for making the s oil
valuations , and
determining tho other elements which go to make
up the tota l valuati ons of the fee simple esta te i n these tracts .
The maps and
reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted
as evidence to the Appraisal CommissiDners .
These tracts are located on the west side of the Spottswood Trail on Hanse Mountain about two miles south of Elkton .
They adjoin and a re bounded on the East
by the George W. Baugher
Tract No . 151; on the South by the fu . H. Long Tract No . 152; on
the West by the Sarah L . Upp Tract No . 71 and on t h e North by
the Frances R, Gratten Tra ct No .
106 - a and severa l small tracts
fr onting on the Spottswood Tra il .
The soil is a s a ndy loam of good depth and fertility except on the ridges where it is thin and rocky .
outcrops and considerable loose rock .
There are some
On the north end there is
�quite a large area with smooth and gentle slopes .
The south and
west sides are very rocky and steep with high cliffs .
Tract No . 70- I, in which the report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners shows that the exceptant appears to have
an interest, is a part of the lands
claimed by the exceptant,
but claims of ownership have been set up by others and this tract
was therefore shown on the map and reported as a lap .
no opinion as to the ownership of this tract o
I express
This claimant was
given an opportunity to be heard on the value of the lap in which
she claims an interest, as well as on the value of the land as
to which there appear to be no contesting claimants .
There are no improvements on either of these tracts .
They have never been used for agricultural purposes, and are distinctly not adapted to such use .
No serious attempt was ever
made, so far as my examination disclosed, to clear up or use any
of these lands for grazing purposes .
the sandy nature of the soil
These lands, because of
and the lack of water , and the dense
brush and reproduction, have little or no value other than for
the production of timber .
Tract
No . 70 contains 821 acres of which approximately
75% is "Slope type" land
and the remainder is
0
Ridge type" land .
"Slope type" land may be described briefly as land capable of
growing 1 - 3 log timber or trees with a merchantable length of
16- 48 feet .
"Ridge type 11 land is land of poorer quality which will
produce timber with a merchantable length of one log, or less .
Tract No . 70- I contains 51 acres and is all "Slope type"
land,
but the quantity, size and quality of the timber is the
13'1
�same as that on the larger tract .
The exceptant complains that the award placed on her
land is inadequate and supports her exception with affidavits
which purport to show that the stand of timber of this land was
under-estimated and undervalued .
This tract has been closely cut over for
all timber
products .
Evidences of old bark peelings on this and
adjoin-
ing tracts are easily distinguishable from the stumps and the
peeled logs , some of which have not compl e tely rotted, and numerous haul roads which a re to be found in almost every part of the
tract .
The
11
Bark peelings" were followed by .sav'IInill operations
which manufactured into lumber the accessible peeled chestnut
oak timber and the timber of other species .
Sawmill seats on this
and other tracts adjacent to this property show where these operati ~ns
were c onducted, and the conditi on of the present stand and
stumps furnish ample evidence that practically all acc essible
timber has been cut .
Within the last twenty years all chestnut
trees on this and adjoining tracts were killed by the blight, and
as a result thereof there is no chestnut timber now on this tract
of any value whatsoever .
There is evidence on many parts of these lands to indicate that they have been seri ously burn ed in the past .
The last
fire occurred in the summer of 1927 when the entire tract was
burned over .
There are on t h e tract a few scattered patches of
small pines suitable for staves , estima ted to cut 75 cords of
stavewo~d , and an estimated stand of 400 cords of fuelwood .
It
�is my opinion the above
tract
estimate covers all the timber on the
hich can be cut and removed profitably .
There are no evidences of successful exploratinns or
prospecting for minerals or mineral bodies on this tract, and
there are no outcroppings of mi nerals or mineral bodies or deposits
thereon which have
any marketable or cash value, and the min-
eral rights in these tracts add nothing to the market or cash
value of the fee simple estate therein .
As aiready stated, no indications of substantial or successful prospecting or development of minerals or mineral rights
are to be found, and none was shown at the public hearings which
would justify a finding of any mineral bodies or right in or under these tracts in Rockingham County, and sustain a finding
that exceptants have any mineral rights of any value in these
tracts;
and the minerals and mineral rights in or
under these
tracts add nothing to · their fee simple estate .
It is my opinion that
the value placed
upon
these tracts
by the Appraisal Commissioners is considerably higher than the
property would now bring on the open market;
that it is not un-
fair or inadequate, and that no better price can or will be secured
for this land if the owner desires to sell, and no better price
could :ta.ve been secured for it at any time with~n the
last five
years .
133
�(G)
Motion to · disapprove or exception filed by John
Haney, represented by D.
w.
K.
Earman, Counsel .
The lands within the area described in the
petition in
Rockingham County, which were described in the claim filed by or
in behalf of John K. Haney, with the record in the Clerk's Office in response to the publication of notice of the filing of
the petition, are the lands shown as Tract No . 76 on the County
Ownership Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal
Commissioners with its report .
In mys eparate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of S . H.
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re . General , " I have
set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the vari ous tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed park area, and
to avoid
repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the
evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view, that the lands within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to
have an intere st, is t h e said tract No . 76, as shown on the said
map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the court, directing him to file with the record a
statement showing whether or not the lands in which h e now claims
an interest are the same as
the lands in which the report of the
Board of Appraisal Commissioners found
tha t he claimed or appear-
ed to have an interest, it appears that the lands in which the
,0 - I
�exceptant now claims an interest are the lands in which the Board
found that he claimed or appeared to have an interest , as shown nn
the County Ownership Map filed with its report .
The mapping and examination was conducted by myself and
Mr . Stoneburner,w ith our assistants , as set forth in my separate
affidavit, captioned
1933 .
11
Affidavit of
s.
These lands were located on the County Ownership Map
as described in the general affidavit .
checked
H. Marsh, dated March 1 ,
and
They were plotted and
tied to the surrounding and adjoini:p.g lands, and to
known pr-operty corners .
The maps and
and were
reports were worked up from the field data
carefully checked on the ground before being submitted
as evidence to the Appraisal Commissioners .
This is a mountain farm located in Swift Run Gap on top
of the Blue Ridge and on the south side of the Spottswood Trail .
The entire tract contains
Rockingham
County and
115 acres of which 74 acres is in
41 acres in Greene Uounty.
The soil is a sandy clay loam of good depth and
tility .
fer -
The slopes are gentle to moderately steep, but somewhat
rocky .
The improvements on this tract consist of a 6-room
dwelling, a barn, store-house and miscellaneous outbuildings .
There is an orchard ofabout five
acres, three acres of which is
in Rockingham County.
Of the 74 acres of this tract i n Rockingham County all
is cleared except 11 acres of woodland .
The chief value of
the woodland is for fuelwood which was estimated to cut a total
of 66 cords worth 50t per cord on the stump .
The
cle~red l a nd
&_; ; .,
�has been used in recent years mostly for grazing rather than for
cultivation .
The exceptant complains of the low valuation placed on
his property by the Board of Appraisal Co.'.!1l11issi -1 ners and attempts
to show by supporti ng affidavits that the 76 acres of his land in
Rockingham County is worth at least $10 , 000 . 00 .
However , v1hen
he filed a claim in response to the published notice of these
proceedings he claimed only a tota. l value of $6825 . 00 for the
entire tract of 115 acres which is the total value awarded by the
two Boards of Appraisal Commissioners .
It may be that a p:i.rt of
the increase in value now claimed by him i s for the new filling
station whi ch has been erected since the date of my examination,
and which is not included in the list of improvements enumerated
in the vork Sheet of the Appraisal Board for Rockingham County .
I fail to see however , hov1 these improvements can account for the
difference of $3175 . 00 between the original claim and the value
the except~nt has set up in his exception.
It is my opinion that in a llowing $5065 . 00 for this
tract , the Appraisal Commissioners were fair and generous;
that
the value placed upon it is considerably higher than it would
bring on the open market;
that it is a higher price than it
could have been sold for at any time during the past 5 years;
and that if the owner desired to sell, he would not be able to dis pose of this prop erty at a higher price than that allowed by the
Board of Appraisal Commissioners , and that
the value placed on
this land by the Board is not less than the full and fair market
value .
13b
�(H)
Motion to dis a pprove or exception filed by E .
c.
and E. E.
Lam, represente d by E . D. Ott , Counsel .
The lands within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which were described in the claim filed by or
in behalf of E . C. and E. E . Lam, with the record in the Clerk's
Office in response to the publicati on of notice of the filing of
the petition, are the lands shown as Tract No . 81 on the County
Ownership Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal
Commissi oners with its report .
In my separate affidavit , captioned "Affidavi t of
s.
H.
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933 , Re . General," I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburn er and mys elf in the preparatio n
of this reap and in the location thereon of the
vari ous tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed park area , and to avoid repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report, the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s found from the evidence submitted , and from their mvn
personal inspection and view , that the lands within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have
an interest, is the said tract No . 81 , as shown on the s aid nap .
From the answer of these exceptants to the amplifica tinn
order of the court , directing them to file with the record a
statement showing whether or not the lands in which they now
claim an interest are the same
as the lands in which the report
of the Board of Appraisal Commissio ners found trat they claimed or
appeared to have an interest ,
it appears that the lands in which
the exceptants now claim an interest are the lands in which the
I~ - l
,~1
�Board found tha~ they claimed or appeared to have an interest, as
shown on the Gounty Ownership Map filed with tts report .
The mapping and examinatio n was conducted by myself and
Mr . · Stoneburn er, with our assistant s, as set forth in mys eparate
affidavit , capti oned "Affidavi t of S . H. Marsh, dated March 1,
1933, Re . General . "
These lands were located on
Ownership Map as described in the
the County
general affidavit .
They were
plotted and checked and tied to the surroundin g and adjoining lands,
and to known property corners .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as
evidence to the Appraisal Commissio ners .
This tract is located about four miles east of Elkton
on the north side of the Spottswoo d Trail near the Swift Run
Post Office .
It is a small lot containing according to the owners'
deed, 2880 square feet .
It adjoins the Swift Run Church lot on
the north side, and fronts on the old public road but is separated
from the present improved highway by another small lot on which
there is a filling station .
The exceptant s complain of the inadequate award placed
on their property and with supporting affidavits declare that the
value of the lot alone is $500 . 00 instea d of the $100 . 00 valuation of the Board of Appraisal Commiss i oners; - that the improveme nts
are worth $2000 . 00 instead of $1400 . 00 as valued by the Board;
that the prices awarded by the Board of Appraisal Commissio ners
for the land
and improveme nts are manifestl y inadequate and con-
fiscatory , and that they have not awarded the owners the present
H- 2)38
�fair _.market value of the same;
that the price allowed for the
property violat es Article 5 of the Constitution of the United
st~tes;
and that the finding of the said Board violates Section
58 of the Constitution of Virginia.
One of the owners of this prop erty testified as to the
value of this lot and the improvements thereon at the public
hearings held i n the County after whi ch the Board of Appraisal Commissioners went upon the land , and after an inspection of the property, decided on a value of onl y $200 . 00 in excess of what I
thought it was worth .
This property is used as an automobile repair shop and
one of the excepta nts declares that by reason of the distance to
the nearest similar shops this property is especi a lly valuable .
Ordinarily others engaged in similar work find it desira ble to
locate in or near some
village,town or community where peo ple
assemble on business or for other reasons .
The value placed
on this lot by the Board of Appraisal Commissi oners is at the
rate of $800 . 00 per acre which is comparable to the value of
many lots in the town of Elkton .
In view of the fact that this lot does not front on the
highway, and the further fact that the intervening lot has on it
a building attached to the main building on this lot, is , in my
opinion, a distinct disadvantage so long as the lots remain in
separate ownership .
It is my opinion that the value of $1500 . 00 placed upon
this tract by the Appraisal Commiss io ners is considerably higher
than the property would now bring on the open market;
that it
13'1
�is not uni'air--or inadequat e, and that no better price can or will
be secured for this land if the owners desire to sell, and no
better price could have been secured for it at any time within
the last five years .
J~O
�(I)
Motion to disappro ve or exceptio n filed by Maude M. Shipp,
represen ted by Charl~s A. Hamra.er, counsel . ·
..
The lanCE within the area describe d in the petition in
Rockingh am County, which were describe d in the claim filed by or in
behalf of Maude M. Shipp, with the record in the clerk's Office in
response to the publica tion of notice of the filing of - the petition ,
are the lands shown as Tract No . 84, on the county Ownersh ip Map for
Rockingham County filed by the Board of Apprais al commiss ioners with
its report.
In my separate affidav it captione d "Affida vit of
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re . General ,"
s.
H·
I have set forth the measure s
adopted by Mr t Stonebu rner and myself in the prepara tion of this map
and in the location thereon of the various tracts of diverse ownersh ip
within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetiti on, referenc e is
made to that affidav it .
As shown by their report, the Board of Apprais al Commiss ioners found from the evidence submitte d, and from their own persona l
inspecti on and view, that the lands within the park area in Rockingh am
County in which this party claims or appears to have an interes t, is
the said tract No. 84, as shown on the said map_.
From the answer of this exceptan t to the amplific ation
order of the court, directin g her to file with the record, a statemen t
showing whether or not the lands in which she now claims an interes t
are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board of APpraisal Commiss ioners found that she claimed or appeared to have an
interes t, it appears that the lands in which the excepta nt now claims
an interes t are the lands in which the Board found that she claimed
or appeared to have an interes t, as shovm. on the county Ownersh ip Map
:J,.--- \
l'il
�filed With its report.
The mapp1Rg and examinati on was conducted by myself and
Mr. Stoneburn er, with our assistant s, as set forth in my separate
affidavit captioned "Affidavi t of
Re. General."
s.
H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933,
These lands were located on the County ovmership Map
as described in the general affidavit .
They were plotted and check-
ed and tied to the surroundin g and adjoining lands, and to known
property corners.
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as
evidence to the Appraisal Commissio ners.
This tract is located about three miles east of Elkton
on either side of the Spottswoo d Trail at its junction with the Beldor
road.
It contains ro acres all of which is tillable land and has
on it a 3 room dwelling, a stable, garage and several outbuildin gs.
The owner resides on the tract.
The soil is a clay loam of good depth and fertility .
The surface is even and nearly. level with some loose rocks.
The exceptant complains of the low value placed upon
this land by the Board of Appraisal Commissio ners as well as the low
value of the improvere nts.
The Board of Appraisal Commissio ners heard
the testimony of the owner as to the value of this prope rty after
which they went upon the land and after making their inspection
they found a value much nearer the value found by l[r• Stoneburn er
and me than th at claimed by the exc eptant.
They did consider the
buildings and orchard worth $186.00 more than I recommend ed.
It is my opinion that the value placed upon this tract
by the Appraisal Commissio ners is not unfair or inadequat e, and
�that no better price can or will be secured for this land if the
ovmers desfre to sell, and no better price could have been secured
for it at any time Within the last five years.
l'i3
�(.J)
.r.
Moti~n to disapprove or exception filed by A. L• and
F.
Moubray, represented by Charles A. Hammer, Counsel.
The lands within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham. County, which were described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of A. L. and .J. F. Moubray, with the record in the Clerk's
-·
Office in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the
petition, are the lands shown as Tract No. 166, on the county owner-ship Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal commissioners with its report.
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of
s.
H.
~
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re. General,"
I have set forth the
measures adopted by M:r. stohebur.ner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition, reference is made to that affidavit.
As shown by their report, the Board of Appraisal commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal ins~ction and view, that the lands within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have
an interest, is the said ~ract No. 166, as shown on the said map.
From the answer of these exceptants to the amplificatio n
order of the court, direct i ng t h em to file with the record, a statement showing whether or not the lands in which they now claim an
interest are the same as the lands in 11hich the report of t he Board
of Appraisal Commissioner s found that the y claimed or a ppeared to
have an interest, it appears that the lands in which the exceptants
now claim an interest are the lands in which the Board found that ·
they claimed or a ppeared to have an interest, as shown on the county
�Ownership Map filed with its report .
The mapping and examination was conducted by myself and
Mr . Stoneburner, with our assistants, as set forth in my separate
affidavit captioned "Affidavit of
Re . General . "
s.
H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933,
These lands were located on the County Ownership Map
as described in the general affidavit .
They were plotted and checked
and tied to the surrounding and adjoining lands, and to known property
corners .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data and
were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as evidence
to the Appraisal Commissioners .
This tract is located about two miles east of Yancey on
both sides of the public road and Gap Run .
It is b ounded on the south
by the Jacob Yost Tract No . 165-a; on the East by the Mary E. Wyant
Tract No . 167; on the north by the Ida Phelps Tract NO . 165; and
on the west by the E.rnma
v.
Gibbons Tract No . 163.
This tract contains 101 acres according to the metes and
bounds description in the owner's deed although the deed calls for
only 87 acres and the tract is assessed as only 87 acres .
a poor rocky sandy loam.
face and some outcrops .
The soil is
There is much small loose rock on the surAt the time of my examination of this property
I found on it an old dilapidated frame house , an incomplete log stable
v~thout a roof , and an old shed all of doubtful value but which I
valued at $40 . 00 .
land .
Only five acres of this tract is cultivated
91 acres is "Slope type" and five acres is "Cove type" land.
.
"Slope typett land may be described briefly as land which is capable
of growing 1- 3 log timber or trees With a merchantable length of
�16-48 feet.
"Cove typen land is .relatively the best forest soil
~
type and is capable of groWing trees with three or more merchantable
logs .
The exceptan ts complain of an inadequate valuation and award
as made by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners and state that they
paid $500 . 00 for the tract and have since erected sundry buildings
and otherwise improved the land .
If and such improvements have been added they were made
since the tract was examined.
The fertility of the cleared land
has been almost completely exhausted by repeated attempts at cultivation.
The moded area has been repeatedly cut over for all
timber products .
Much of the present stand of young timber is too
small for fuelwood .
such chestnut oak trees as were large enough
to peel were cut in 1930, the original stand of chestnut oak having
been removed many years ago .
It is my opinion that the price of $523 . 00 placed upon
this tract by the Appraisal Commissioners is considerably higher than
the property would now bring on the open market; that it is not unfair or inadequate, and that no better price can or will be secured
for this land if the onners desire to sell, and no better price could
have been secured for it at any time within the last five years .
-:S)
_ _ _ _ _ /%
�(K)
Motio n to disapp rove or excep tion filed by Annie R.
Begoo n, re~res ented by George s . Har nsb erger, couns el.
The land within the area descri bed in the petiti on in
Rockingham Count y, which was descri bed in the qlaim filed by or in
behal f of Annie R. Begoo n, With fu.e record in the Clerk ts office
in respon se to the public ation of notice of the filing of the
petiti on, is the land shown as Tract 242, on the County ovmersh ip
Map for Rockin gham County filed by the Board of Appra isal comm issioners with its repor t.
In my separa te affida vit captio ned "Affid aVi t of s. H.
Marsh , dated March 1, 1933, Re. Gener al," I have set forth the
measu res adopte d by Mr. Stone burne r and mysel f in the prepa ration
of this map and in the locati on thereo n of the variou s tracts of
divers e avners hip within the propo sed Park area, and to avoid
repet ition, refere nce is made to that affid avit.
As shown by their repor t, the Board of Appra isal commissio ners found from the eviden ce submi tted, and from their own
perso nal inspe ction and view, that the land wit hin the Park area
in Rockin gham County in which this party claim s or a ppears to have
an intere st, is the said tract No. 242, as shown on the said map.
From the answe r of this excep tant to the ampli ficati on
order of the court, direc ting her to file with the record , a state ment shoWing wheth er or not th e land in which she now claim s an
intere st is the same as the land in which the repor t of the Board
of Appra isal Comm issione rs found that she claime d or a ppeare d to
have an intere st, it appea rs that the land in which this excep tant
now claims an intere st is the land in which the Boar d found that
she claime d or appea red to have an intere st, as shown on the county
1'17
�Ownership Map filed with its report .
The mapping and exam.ina tion was conducted by myself
and Mr. Stoneburner, with our assistants, as set forth in my separate
affidavit captioned ".Affidavit of
Re . General . "
s.
H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933,
These lands were located on .the county ownership Map
as described in the general affidavit .
They were plotted and check-
ed and tied to the surrounding and adjoining lands, and to known
property corners .
The "strip survey" method was used for ma.king the soil
valuations, and determining the other elements which go to make
up the total valuations of the fee simple estate in this tract.
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as
evidence to the Appraisal Commissioners .
This tract lies on top of the Blue Ridge on the west
side of the Simmons Gap Road about eight miles east of Yancey.
It contains about 120 acres and is a part of a larger
tract or parcel of land containing 149 acres .
The remaining portion
of 29 acres lies in Greene County and was examined and valued by the
Board of Appraisal Commissioners appointed for that county.
The soil is a sandy loam of fair depth and fertility .
The woodland is very steep and rocky with some cliffs .
A portion
of the grass land is relatively smooth with moderate to gentle slopes ,
but the remainder is very steep and rocky with some shaley soil .
Sixty seven acres of the tract is grazing land and the remainder,
53 acres is "Slope type" land .
This may be described briefly as
land which is capable of growing 1-3 log timber or trees . with a
merchantable length of 16- 48 feet .
None of the timber on the
,Iv
\,
�tract can be consider ed merchan table.
The excepta nt complain s that the price per acre allowed
for this land by the commiss ioners is manifes tly inadequ ate and
confisca tory, and that these lands instead of being worth $24. 00
per acre, as reported by the Commiss ioners, are worth $66 . 00 per
acre.
It is noted that the exceptan t states in a supporti ng
affidav it tha t her grazing lands will graze each and every year, 45
head of cattle for six months, and that these cattle will put on at
least 250 pounds each, and that this gain, which she values at 6¢ per
pound, makes a profit on the property of $675 . 00 .
The sum of $675 . 00 is represen ted by the exceptan t as the
revenue from this grazing place, and she proceed s to capitali ze this
sum, entirely overlook ing or ignoring the items of taxes on land and
stock, supervis ion, maintena nce of fences and improvem ents, salting ,
losses, herding and other expenses inciden tal to the busines s of
stock raising .
The capitali zation of this sum produce s the rather
imposing amount of $11 , 250 . 00 .
As a matter of fact, however , this sum of $11,250 . 00
represe nts not only the value of the grazing land, but also that
part of the farm devoted to the winterin g of the stock, and other
items enumera ted below.
The fallacy of this statemen t is apparen t when there is
taken into account the fact that the gross revenue has been credited
to this grazing land, without deductio ns for taxes on land or stock,
superVi sion, maintena nce of fences and improvem ents, salting , losses,
herding and other inciden tal expense s . Probably the greates t error
in such a calculat ion is the failure to recogniz e the farm that is
�behi nd this graz ing plac e, wher e the stoc k is wint
ered usua lly on a
main tena nce ratio n, exce pt wher e it is bein g topp
ed off for mark et .
Acco rding to the line of reas onin g of the exce ptan
t, that part of
the farm whic h prod uces the crop s that carr y catt
le thro ugh the
win ter, woul d be valu eles s beca use as a rule , no
add ition al weig ht
is put on duri ng the win ter . Among stock men it
is the gene ral concens us of opin ion that if they can hold what is
put on duri ng the
summer on gras s, they have brou ght thei r catt le
thro ugh the wint er
in good shap e .
As an exam ple of the role whic h the farm behi nd
the
graz ing land play s, it is common prac tice in some
loca litie s for a
farm owne r and an owner of graz ing land to purc hase
stoc k in part nership with the unde rstan ding that the owne r of the
graz ing land will
farr y the stoc k thro ugh the Sllm.J.ll:lr, and that the
owne r of the farm
will wint er feed it, and that the prof its will be
equa lly divi ded,
and altho ugh no weig ht is expe cted to be adde d duri
ng the wint er
feed ing, the fact that the farm behi nd the graz ing
land is of equa l
impo rtanc e in hold ing the weig ht put on by gras s,
is reco gniz ed .
The exce ptan t has fail ed enti rely in pres enti ng
her
figu res to show the rela tion of many of the elem
ents whic h ente r
into the calc ulat ion of the valu e of this graz ing
prop erty . A grea t
deal of evid ence was prod uced at the hear ings and
ther e is a grea t
deal of info rmat ion avai labl e show ing the rela tion
whic h the graz ing
land bear s to the sell ing pric e of a beef anim al,
all of whic h appe ars
to have been over look ed or igno red by the exce ptan
t.
From the evid ence as subm itted at the hear ings ,
and from
men who have been enga ged in the catt le busi ness
, and from data whic h
!SD
�has been published on this matter, the following data has been
gathered showing the relation which the grazing land bears to the
t .otal value of a beef animal:
Initial cost of animal • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Cost of grazing••••••••••••••••••••••••
Cost of winter feeding • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Finishing (90 da) • • • • • • . • . • • • • • • • • . • • • •
19%
29%
28%
2~
--1-0""'0%"0--
In other words, if four men went into partnership in the
cattle business, and one furnished the calf, and the second the place
on which to graze it, the third winter fed it, and the fourth finished it off for market, each would be entitled to the percentage of the
proceeds as .indicated above.
In fact, on page 11 of the
u. s.
Depart-
ment of Agriculture Circular #408,-"Wintering Beef cattle in the APpalachian Region, "--the following staternen t will be found,-"The winter
feed bill is the greatest problem facing cattlemen in every beef producing area.
The winter feed costs generally constitute two-thirds
of the yearly · cost."
That part of the farm devoted to the raising of this
feed that carries the stock through the winter plus the grazing land,
is the unit which must be dealt with therefore, and the exceptant•s
method of arriving at the value of her grazing land is entirely
erroneous, and misleading, and the results she secures thereby are
not borne out by the sale prices of such lands.
It is my opinion that the Commissioners appraised this
tract at its full market va lue; that in allowing $2878.00 therefor,
they were fair and generous; tha t t his price is higher than the property would now bring on the open market, and that the owner, if she
desires to sell, would not be able to dispose of t his property at a
hi gher price tha n tha t allowed by the Board of Appraisal commiss ioners.
�(L)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by J.
w.
Hinkle,
represented •by Georges. Harnsberger, counsel.
The lands within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which were described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of J.
w.
Hinkle, with the record in the Clerk's Office in
-
response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition,
are the lands shown as Tracts No. 244 and 326-III, on the county
Ovmership Map for Rockingham county filed by the Board of APpraisal
Corruni ssi ners with its report.
In my separate affidavit captioned "Affidavit of
s.
H•
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re. General," I have set forth the measures
adopted · by Mr. Stoneburner and myself in the preparation of this map
and in the location thereon of the various tracts of diverse ownership
within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition, reference is
made to that affidavit.
As shown by their report, .the Board of A,Ppraisal Commmissioners found from the eVidence submitted, and from their own personal
inspection and View, that the lands Within the Park area in Rockingham
County in which this party claims or appears to have an interest, are the
said tracts NOo 244 and 326-III, as shown on the said map.
From the answer of this exceptant to ·the amplification
order of the court, directing him to file with the record, a statement
showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an interest are
the same as the lands in which the report of the Board of Appraisal
Commissioners found that he claimed or appeared to have an interest,
it appears that the lands in which this exceptant now claims an interest
are the l ands in WJ ich the Board found that he claimed or appeared
L-1
IS"l-
�to have an i~terest, as shown on the county Ownership Map filed with
its report .
The mapping and examination was conducted by myself and Mr •
Stoneburner, with our assistants, as set forth in my separate affidavit
captioned "Affidavit of
s.
H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re . General. "
These lands were located on the County Ownership Map as described in the
general affidavit .
They were plotted and checked and tied to the surround-
ing and adjoining lands, and to known property corners .
The "strip survey" method was used for making the soil
valuations, and determining the other elements which go to make up the
total valuations of the fee simple estate in this tract .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data and
were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as evidence
to the App raisal Commissioners .
These are adjoining tracts and lie on top of the Blue Ridge
about two miles south of Simmons Gap .
Tract #244 contains five acres
and Tract #326-III contains 71 acres .
They are portions of a larger
tract cont eining 141 acres, 65 acres of which lies in Greene county.
Tract #326- III in which the report of the Board of APPraisal
Commissioners shows that this exceptant appears to have an interest
is a part of the land claimed by the exceptant, but claims of ownership
have been set up by others and t t is tract was therefore shown on the
map and reported as a lap .
I express no opinion as to the ownership of
this tract .
This claima nt was given an opportunity to be heard on the
value of the lap in which he claims an interest, as well as on the value
of the land as to which there appear to be no contesting claimants .
The soil is a sandy loam of fair depth and fertility on top of
\.-
�the ridge, but the slopes are thin and poor .
The surface along the
top of the mountain is not especially steep or roc~y but on the sides
of the mountain the slopes are steep and rocky .
Tract No . 244 containing 5 acres is all "slope type" land
and 55 acres of Tract No . 326-III is of the same type . This may be described briefly as land capable of growing 1-3 log timber, or trees
with a merchantable length of 16-48 feet .
The remainder, 16 acres, of
Tract No . 326-III is grazing land .
There are no improvements of any kind on this tract .
The owner files exception to the award declaring it is
extremely unfair and confiscatory and states that this tract is chiefly
valuable for grazing purposes.
He claims the entire tract of 141 acres
will satisfactori ly carry 35 head of cattle for six months during each
and every year; that these 35 head of cattle Will put on an average of at
least 200 lbs., each during that period; that the aggregate number of
pounds thus put on would be 7 , 000; that a very conservative average price
would be 6¢ per lb., which would make the income from the grazing of this
tract each year, $420 . 00; and that this amount is equivalent to the
income at 6% on $?~000 . 00, and that the average value per acre would
therefore be approximatel y $49 . 00 as against an average of about $8. 00
allowed by the commission on all the lands here involved.
The average price of $8 . 00 of course includes a considerable
acreage of rough, mountain land, which is not suitable for grazing,
and on which there has never been any attempt to develop as a grazing
proposition.
The exceptant further explains that owing to the fact that all
the grazing land in the Blue Ridge is being acquired for National Park
purposes, that no other grazing lands will be available in the Vicinity
l- ~
I'S'!
�of this propeirty .
The sum of $420 000 is represen ted by the excepta nt as the
revenue from this grazing place, and he proceeds to capitali ze this sum,
entirely overlook ing or ignoring the items of taxes on land and stock,
supervis ion, maintena nce of fences and improvem ents, salting, losses,
herding and other expenses inciden tal to the busines s of stock raising .
The capitali zation of this sum produces the rather imposing amount of
$?,000 . 00 .
As a matter of fact, however , this sum of $? , 000 . 00
represe nts not. only the value of the grazing land, but also that part
of the farm devoted to the winterin g of the stock, and other items
enumera ted below.
The fallacy of this statemen t is apparen t when there is
taken into account the fact that the gross revenue has been credited
to this grazing land, Without deductio ns for taxes on land or stock,
supervis ion, maintena nce of fences, and improvem ents, salting, losses,
herding and other inciden tal expense s .
Probably the greates t error
in such a calculat ion is the failure to recogniz e the farm that is
behind this grazing place, where the stock is wintered usually on a
maintena nce ration, except where it is being topped off for market.
Accordin g to the line of reasonin g of the except ant, th-at part of the
farm which produce s the crops that carry cattle through the winter,
wo uld be valueles s because as a rule, no addition al weight is put on
during the Winter .
Among stock.men it is the general concensu s of
opinion that if they can hold what is put on during the summer on
grass, they have brought their cattle through the winter in good shape .
As an example of the role wh ich the farm behind the grazing
land plays, it is common practice in some localiti es for a farm owner
l-
�and an owner of grazipg land to purchase stock in partnership with the
understanding that the owner of the grazing land will carry the stock
through the summer, and that the owner of the farm will winter feed it,
and that the profits will be equally divided, and although no weight is
expected to be added during the winter feeding, the fact that the farm
behind the grazing lend is of equal importance in holding the weight
put on by the grass, is recognized.
The exceptant has failed entirely in presenting his figures
to show the relation of many of the elements which enter into the calculation of the value of this grazing property.
A great deal of evi-
dence was produced at the hearings and there is a gr-eat deal of information available showing the relation which the gr-azing land bears to the
selling price of a beef animal, all of which appears to have been overlooked or ignored by the exceptant.
From the eVidence as submitted at the hearings, and from
man who have been engaged in the cattle business, and from data which
has been published on this matter, the following data has been gathered
showing the relation which the grazing land bears to the total value
of a beef animal.
Initial cost of animal o••••••••••••••••• 19%
Cost of grazing•••••••••• ••••••••••••••• 29%
Cost of Wi nter feeding•••••••••• •••••••• 28%
Finishing (90 da) ••••••••••••••••••• ••••
156~
In other words, if four men went into partnership in the
cattle business, and one furnished the calf, and the second the place on
which to graze it, the third winter fed it, and the fourth finished it
off for market, each would be entitled to the percentage of the proceeds
as indicated above.
In fact, on Page 11, of the
u. s.
Department of
.ABriculture Circular #408,-"Wintering Beef Cattle in the APPalachian
�follow ing statem ent w111 be found,- "The winter feed bill
Region ,"-- ':Che
.•
is the greate st problem facing cattlem en in every beef produc ing area.
The Winter feed costs genera lly consti tute two-th irds of the yearly cost."
That part of the farm devoted to the raising of this feed
that carrie s the stock through the winter plus the grazing land, is the
unit which must be dealt with therefo re, and the except ant~me thod of arriving at the value of his grazin g land is entire ly errone ous, and misleadin g, and the result s he secured thereby are not borne out by the
sale prices of such lands.
It is my opinio n that the commis sioners apprai sed these
tracts at their full market value; that in allowin g $15.00 for Tract
No. 244, and $645.00 for Tract No . 326-II I, they were fair and genero us;
that this price is higher than the proper ty would now bring on the open
IOO.rket, and that the owner, if he desire s to ' sell, would not be able
to dispos e of this proper ty at a higher price than that allowed hy the
Board of ,Appra isal commi ssioner s.
t,
�(M)
Motion tq disappro ve or exceptio n filed by 3ohn 3. Mace,
J".ames G. Mace , Elizabe th Mace Via, R. H. Mace, J"Ulia Mace spi tzer,
Charles M. Mace, and heirs at law of Ben F. Mace, represen ted by
Georges . Harnsbe rger , counsel .
The lands within the area describe d in the petition in
Rockingh am County, which were describe d in the claim filed by or in
behalf of J". H. Mace's Estate, with the record in the clerk•s Office
in response to the publica tion of notice of the filing of the petition ,
are the lands shown as Tracts f/'ZJ12, 312-a and 312-b, on the county
Ownersh ip Map for Rockingh am county filed by the Board of APPrais al
Commiss ioners with its report.
In my separate affidav it, captione d tt.A.ffida vit of
Marsh , dated March 1, 1933, Re. General ,n
s. H•
I have set forth the measure s
adopted by Mr. Stonebu rner and myself in the prepara tion of this map
and in the location thereon of the various tracts of diverse ownersh ip
within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetiti on, referenc e is
made to that affidav it.
As shown by their report, the Board of APprais al commiss ioners found from the evidence submitte d, and from their own persona l
inspecti on and view, that the lands within the Park area in Rockingh am
County in which these parties claim or appear to have an interes t, are
the said 't'racts No . 312, 312-a, and 312-b, as shown on the said map.
From the answer of these excepta nts to the amplific ation
order of the court, directin g them to file with the record, a statemen t
showing whether or not the lands in which they now claim an interes t
are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board of Apprais al
Commiss ioners found that they claimed or appeared to have an interes t,
it appears th&t the lands in which these excepta nts now claim an
�interest are the lands in which the Boar d found that they claimed or
appeared to have an interest, as shown on the county Ownership Map
filed with its report.
The mapping and examination was conducted by m¥self and
Mr. Stoneburner, with our assistants, as set forth in my separate
affidavit captioned "Affidavit of
General."
s. H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re.
These lands were located on the county Ownership Map as
They were plotted and checked
described in the general affidavit.
and tied to the surrounding and adjoining lands, and to known property
corners.
The "strip surveyn method was used for making the soil
valuations, and determining the other elem9nts which go to make
up the total valuations of the fee simple estate in these tracts.
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data and
were carefully che cked on the ground before being submitted as evidence to the Appraisal Co:rmnissioners.
These three tracts of land are to be fo und in the southeastern part of Rockingham county.
Tract #312 lies on the Brown.'s Gap
road in Madison Run about 3 miles east of Grottoes.
#312-b are located on the drains of Madison Run.
Tracts #312-a and
Tract #312-a lies
on both sides of the Brown's Gap road about 5 miles east of Grottoes.
Tract #312-b lies near the top of the Blue Ridge just south of Brown •s
Gap and about eight miles east of Grottoes.
Both tracts ~ie entirely
inside· of the :r. A. Alexander Tract #325 .
Tract #312 of ei ght acres co.n sists of 4 acres of "Cove
type" land, 4 acres of old fields which are restocking to forest growth.
Tract #312-a of 29? acres consists of 44 acres of "Ridge
type" land; 215 a cres is "Slope type" land, and 38 acres is "Cove typen
q- 2
lS"t
�land.
Tract #312-b of 84 acres, consists of 8 acres of "Ridge
-
typ~" land, 63 acres of "Slope type" land and 13 acres of cul ti va ted
land.
nslope type" land may be described briefly as land which
is e~pable of groWing 1-3 log timber, or trees with a merchantable
length of 16-48 feet.
"Ridge type" l and may be described as land which
will produce timber With a merchantable length of one log or less, and
"Cove type" land is relatively the best forest type, and is capable of
producing timber with three merchantable - logs or better.
The old Mt. Vernon iron furnace was operated for many
years on Madison Run about two miles from Tract #312-a, but discontinued
operations more than 30 years ago.
Charcoal was used exclusively as
fuel for smelting the iron ore, which required for each ton of pig
iron manufactured about 2-1/2 cords of mod.
There are now numerous
old charcoal hearths scattered over the Madison Run drainage area and
even on the head of Big Run.
It was not uncommon at that time for the
old iron masters to haul charcoal a distance of 10 to 12 miles.
The
even aged stands of immature hardwood stands on Tract No . 312-a and on
the adjoining Alexander tract is further evidence that the more
accessible portions of these tracts were cut clean once at least for wood
for charcoal.
There are no improvements on Tract #312.
On the 4 acres of
cove type the total stand of merchantable timber was estimated as 5 M•
feet of sawtimber and 20 cords of fuelwood.
There are no improvements on Tract #312-a,
As reported and
outlined on the Ownership Map this tract contains 29? acres whi ch was
classified approximatel y as follows: 38 acres "cove type," 215 acres
/<,o
�"slope type" and 44 acres "ridge type."
be shown later.
cut over as will
..
This tract has been closely
The total stand of merchantable timber
was estimated at 55 M. feet of sawtimber.
At
the time of the examin ati on there were found to be on
Tract #312-b, a two room - one story log dwelling, in poor condition,
occupied by a tenant; an old abandoned log house, a log smoke house in
fair condition and a log hen house in poor condition.
Tract #3J.2. is a sna.11 tract of 8 acres and lying on the east
side of the Port Republic-Brown's Gap Road, about two miles south of
Port Republic,
The soil is a sandy loam of medium depth and fertility.
One-half of it was at one t i me cl.eared and cultivated, but later allowed to revert to forest growth.
stocking."
This was reported as "Fields re-
The remaining half was classified as "cove type" land,
which is relatively the best grade of forest soil, capable of growing
trees containing three or more merchantable 16' logs.
The soil on Tract #312-a is a sandy shaley loam-shallow on the
upper slopes, medium over most of the area, deep, well watered and fertile
at the lower elevations.
The surface is full of fine shale and larger
rock except in cove where rock content is moderate.
On Tract #312-b, the soil is a gravelly shaley loam of
medium depth and fertility with rock outcrop on ridge .
25% of the surface is covered with rock .
Approximately
The slopes are moderate
to steep.
The exceptants complain in a supporting affidaVit signed by
John J. Mace and P. B. F . Goode, Surveyor of Rockingham county, that
the aggregate acreage of Tracts #312, 312-a and 312-b should be 512
instead of 389 acres allowed by the Board of APPraisal commis sioners .
These statements have been investigated, and it ha s been discovered
lbl
�since the exception was filed that one tract claimed by the exceptants
was overlooked.
This.tract is known as the Harris 220 acre tract.
It adjoins, and in fact, overlaps the tract shown on the ownership Map
and reported by the Appraisal Commissioners as #312-a.
the overlap being 85 acres.
The amount of
This leaves on the outside of Tract #312-a
and adjoining it an area of 137 acres which should be included with
the acreage of the exceptants, which totals 526 acres instead of 512
acres claimed by the exceptants.
The exceptants complain further because the commissioners
failed to place a value upon a valuable spring upon this property.
So far as l know , the CoI:rrnissi oners have placed no separate valuation on
springs or waters on any property, unles s there was a showing that such
springs had outstanding medicinal or other peculiar values, otherwise,
the value of the springs and other waters is included in the valuation
of the property as a whole.
The lack of water on a property such
as this one might result in a lower valuation than was assigned by the
Commissioners, but the market value of the property in most cases is
predicated upon an adequate water supply.
The exceptant s complain further that no value for grazing
purposes was assigned to these lands.
Aside from the areas indicated
i n the reports or the Cominissioners as having been cleared, there are no
indications that
any substantial attempt has ever b een made to clear
up or use any considerable p2rt of any of these tracts for grazing
purposes.
There are a few small, scattered patches of sod in the
wooded area, but on account of the character of the land in general ,
the steep slopes and brush, and the timber growth, the development
of the wooded portion of these tracts as a grazing proposition would
be entirel.y impracticable, although of cour s e the pea vine, which grows
�in the woods, the leaves , and other browse furnish a consid erable
amount of forage for cattle when used in connec tion with sod lands.
The except ants furthe r compla in that these tracts contain
valuab le deposi ts of mangan ese and iron ore . The commi ssioner s, however, did not report any value for these ores, and their failure to
report such a value is sustai ned by the genera l statem ents as to the
mi neral deposi ts and minera l ri ghts within the propos ed park area set
forth in an affida vit caption ed "Affida vit of nr . Arthur Bevan,
State Geolog ist, dated April l?, 1933 , Re. Genera l, Mineral Claims ,"
and affida vit of Will iam M. McGill, caption ed "Affida Vit of William
Mahone McGill, dated April 22, 1933, Re . Genera l, Mineral Claims . "
It is my opinio n tha t the commis sioners apprais ed these
tracts at their full ma~ket value; that in allowin g $145 . 00 for Tract
#312, ll , 1?2 . 00 for Tract #312-a , and $730 . 00 for Tract #312-b they
were fair and genero us; that these prices are substa ntially higher
than the proper ty wo uld now bring on the open market ; that these are
higher prices t h an they could have been sold for at any time during
the past five ye a rs, and that the owners , if they desired to sell at
this time, would not be able to dispos e of these proper ties at highe r
prices than those allowed by the Board of APirai sal Commiss i oners .
�(N)
Motion to. isapprove or exception filed by Robert T .
Miller , represented by Hamilton Haas, Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of Robert T. Miller , with the record in the Clerk's Office
in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition, is the land shown as Tract No . 325, on the County Ownership
Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Com.mi-ssioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of
s.
H.
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re . General , " I have set forth the meas ures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation of this
map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of diverse
ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition,
reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own personal
. inspection and view, that the lands within the Park area in Rockingham
County in which this party claims or appears to have an interest, is
the said tract No . 325, as shown on the said map.
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the court, directing him to file with the record, a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board
of . ppraisal Commissioners fou~d that he claimed or appeared to have
an interest, it appears that the lands in which this exceptant now
claims an interest are the lands in which the Board found that he
7/-1
�claimed o~ appeared to have an interest, as shown on the county
Ownership Map filed with its report .
The mapping and examinati on was conducted by myself and
Mr. Stoneburn er, with our assistant s, as set forth in my separate
affidaVi t captioned ttAffidavi t of
Re. General . "
s. H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933,
These lands were located on the County ownership
Map as described in the general affidaVit .
They were plotted and
checked and tied to the surroundin g and adjoining lands, and to
known property corners.
The "strip survey" method was used for making the soil
,
valuation s, and determinin g the other elements which go to make
up the total valuation s of the fee simple estate in this tract.
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as
evidence to the Appraisal Commissio ners.
This tract is located in the extreme southern corner
of Rockingham County at the head of Paines Run between Trayfoot
Mountain and the crest of the Blue Ridge .
It is bounded on the
North and West by the John A. Alexander Tract No . 326; on the
South by the Black Rock Springs Company Tract in Augusta County
and on the East by lands in Albemarle county.
The entire tract
claimed by R. T. Miller was found by examinatio n to contain 566
acres of which 59 acres lie in Augusta county .
The soil is a poor, shallow, shaley loam.
The surface is
rather rocky with some rock slides and outcroppin gs in the higher
elevation s .
The slopes are moderate to extremely steep .
This property was used some years ago as a health resort,
and attained a reputatio n locally.
It was patronize d largely by the
�people living in the northern part of Albemarle and Augusta counties
and the southern ~rt of Rockingham county.
Most of the cottages
were burned several years ago by a forest fire which swept over this
tract of land.
These have not been rebuilt and the property has now
been abandoned as a re sort.
The improvements on this tract consist of the following:
an old hotel building, two story, With porch 25x62• with 12 bedrooms
kitchen and pantry of cheap construction ; an amusement hall 20x96• in
which there are two bowling alleys, and a dance hall; one cottage
16x26', a cabin for help, 14xl4', and some small miscellaneou s outThe springs are on that :i;:art of the tract in Rockingham
buildings .
County.
There are five springs on the property near the buildings.
Two of these have been analyzed and are reported to contain minerals
with medicinal properties and also an algae with "radio active proThis water and the precipitate therefrom are claimed to
perties."
possess valuable curative properties.
As stated above a portion of this tract lies in Augusta
County.
The area in Rockingham County is 507 acres of which approxi-
mately 75% is "slope type" land which may be described briefly as
land which is capable of growing 1-3 log timber, or trees with a merchantable length of 16-48 feet.
TWen ty-fi ve percent is "Ridge typen
w'nich is land capable of groWing timber of only one merchantable 16'
log or less.
This property has been neglected for a number of years
and its use as a hotel or resort for the accommodatio n of transients
was abandoned, many years ago.
There is evidence of repeated fires which have occurred
since the removal of the bark and merchantable timber, which seriously
�injured or destroyed much and in some cases all of the young growth .
Within the last twenty years, all chestnut trees on these lands were
killed by the blight and as a result there is no chestnut timber now
on these tracts of any value matsoever .
One of these fires destroyed
a number of cottages which have not been rebuilt .
All have detracted
seriously from the scenic beauty of the resort .
I was unable to discover on this property any indications
that it is capable of producing any substantial revenue for resort
purposes at this time, or thLt it can be made a profitable property
for many years to come .
The timbered portion of the tract is typical of the cutover areas of this region.
value has been cut.
Practically all the accessible timber of
A few straggling trees or clumps of trees have
been left in places from which it was impossible or impracticable
to remove them.
There are scattered over the area many old snags
or "wolf trees" which are " s tag headed," "hollow butted," ttdoty" and
crooked, most of which are "fire scarred" and neat faced" or otherwise
defective .
These trees with the fire-scarred young growth which has
made an attempt to replace the original stand, are worse than worthless because they occupy the ground which should be producing a crop
of timber.
This "forest debristt appears to the inexperienced observer
to be timber .
As a matter of fact, it has only the form without
the substance of what was o~might have been merchantable timber.
It is not an asset but a liability, and the land would be more
valuable today without it • .
.After the chestnut timber became generally affected by
the blight the injurious effects of the repeated forest fires was
'1L-8
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ / !.]
�more severe because of the increased amo·J.nt of inflammable material
on the area .
It is my opinion that the commissi oners appraised this
tract at its full market value; that in allowing $4744.00 for it
they were fair and liberal; tha t this price is substantially higher
than the property would now brir.g on the open market; that it is a
higher price tban it could have been sold for at any time during
the past five years; and that the owner, if he desired to sell at
this time, would not be able to dispose of this property at a higher
price than that allowed by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners .
�(0) .
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by Herbert Go
Patterson, represented by George
s . Harnsb·erg~r, counsel.
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham. County, which was described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of Herbert G. Patterson, with the record in the Clerk's Office
in response to the publication of notiee of the filing of the petition,
is the land shown as Tract No. 335, on the county ownership Map for
Rockingham county filed by the Board of ,Appraisal Commissioner s with
its report.
In my separate affidavit captioned "Affidavit of
Marsh, dated March l, 1933, Re. General,"
s.
Ho
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr. Stoneburner and myself in t~e preparation of
this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of di verse
ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition,
reference is made to th at affidavit.
As shown by their report, the Board of APpraisal commissi ners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own personal
inspection and view, that the land Within the Park area in Rockingham
County in which this party claims or appear·s to have an interest, is
the said tract No. 335, as shown on the ·said map.
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplificatio n
order of the court, directing him to file w.ith the record, a statement
showing whether or not the land in which he now claims an interest is
the same as the land in which the report of the Board of APPrai sal
Commissioner s found tha t he claimed or appeared to have an interest, it
appears that the land in which this exceptan.t now claims an i nterest
is the land in which. the Board found that he claimed or appeared
lt,'1
�to have an interest, as shown on the County ownership Map filed with
its report.
The mapping and examinati on was conducted by myself and
-Mr . Stoneburn er, with our assistant s, as set forth in my separate
affidavit captioned "Affidavi t of
Re. General. "
s.
H• Marsh, dated March l, 1933,
-
These lands were located on the County Ownership Map
as described in the general affidavit .
They were plotted and checked and
tied to- the surroundin g and adjoining lands, and to known property · c:orners.
The "strip survey" method was used for making the soil
valuation s, and determinin g the other elements which go to make
up the total valuation s of the fee simple estate in this tract .
The maps and reports were vorked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as evidence to the Appraisal commissio ners.
This is one of several tracts along the crest
of the Blue
Ridge between Brown's Gap and Simmons Gap which this exceptant owns or in
which he claims an interest . This particula r tract is the Rockingham.
portion of a larger tract whieh lies in Rockingham and Albemarle
Counties.
It is located two miles North of Brown's Gap and is bounded
on the south, east and north by other lands in which the exceptant
claims an interest and on the west by the John A. Alexander Tract NO •
326 .
The entire tract contains 198 acres, of which 73 aeres is in
Rockingham county; 49 acres of the Rockingham portion is grazing land
and 24 acres is woodland which was classified as "Slope type" land
which may be described briefly as l end which is capable of growing 1- 3
timber or trees with a merchanta ble length of 16-48 feet .
0-
2..-
�The soil is mostly a fertile sandy l oam of fair depth with
some shaley ~pots.
rocks.
There are some cliffs and a fair amount of loose
The s _lopes are moderate to steep.
The improvements oonsist of two old houses of no value .
The exceptant complains because of what he considered the low
value assigned to- this tract of land.
He claims that this 73 acres
of land will graze 20 cattle for seven months during each and every
year, and that these twenty cattle will put on an average of at least
-
200 lbs., each during that period; that the aggregate number of pounds
thus, put on wo uld be 4,000 lbs., per season.
He states .further that
a conservative aver~ge price would be 7¢ per lb., which would make the
income from this grazing tract each year $280 . 0b; and that tnis amount
capitalized at 6% is $4666 . 00, and that therefore the average price
per acre of this 73 acres would be $62. 00, whereas the average value
per acre found by the commissi oners was $25. 33.
It is noted that the exceptant states that the length of his
grazi ng season is seven months, while the testimony of a number of
owners of grazing lands within the Park area indicates that although
cattle are sometimes left on the range for seven months, the usual
season is from May 1, to November 1, a period of six months, and that
after November 1, ~he weather conditi ns usually become so uncertain
as to make grazing more or less hazardous except in unusual seasons.
The sum of $280.00 is represented by the exceptant as the
revenue from this grazing place, and he proceeds to capitalize this sum,
entirely overlooking or ignor i ng the items of taxes on land and .stock,
superVision , maintenance of fences and improvements, salting, losses,
herding and other expenses incidental to stock raisi ng as well as to
other enterprises.
The capitalization of t his sum produces the r a ther
l7/
�imposing amount of $4,666 . 00
As a matter of fact, however, this sum of $4,666 . 00 represents
not only the value of the grazing land, but also that part of the farm
devoted to the wintering of the stock, and other items enumerated below.
The fallacy of this statement is apparent when there is taken
into account the fact that the gross revenue has been credited to this
gra~ i ng land, without deductions for taxes on land or stock, supervision,
maintenance of fences, and improvements, salting, losses, herding and
other incidental expenses.
Probably th~ greatest error in such a cal-
culation is the failure to recognize the farm that is behind this grazing place, where the stock is wintered usually on a maintenance ration,
except where it is being topped off for market.
According to the line
of reasoning of the exceptant, that part of the farm which produces the
crops that carry cattle through the winter, would be valueless because, as a rule, no additional weight is put on during the winter .
Among stockm.en, it is the general concensus of opinion that if they can
hold what is put on during the summer on grass, they have brought their
cattle through the winter in good shape .
As an example of the role which the farm behind the grazing
land plays, it is common practice in some localities for a farm owner
and an owner of grazing land to purchase stock in partnership with the
understa nding that the owner of the grazing land will carry the stock
through the summer, and that the owner of the farm will winter feed it,
and that the profits will be equally divided, and although no weight
is expected to be added during the winter feeding, the fact that the
farm behind the grazing land is of equal importance in holding the
weight put on by grass, is recognized.
The exceptant has failed entirely in presenting his figures
D-Y
l72-
�to show · the ·rela.tion of many of the elements which enter into the
calculation of the value of this grazing property.
A great deal of
evidence was produced at the hearings and there is a great deal of information available showing the relation which the grazing land bears to
the selling price of a beef animal, all of which appears to have been
overlooked or ignored by the except ant.
From the evidence as s~bmitted at the hearings, and from men
who have been engaged in the cattle business, and from data which
has been published on this matter, the following data has been gathered
showing the relation which the grazing land bears to the total va.lue
of a beef animal:
Initial cost of animal•••••• ••••••••••••
cost of grazing·· ·············· ········
Cost of winter feeding•••• •••••••••••••
Finishing (90 da) ••••••••••••• •••••••••
·
19%
29%
28%
2~
Io
1o
In other words, if four men went into partnership in the
cattle business, and one furnished the calf, and the second the place on
~
which to graze it, the third winter fed it, and the fourth finished
it off for market, each Vl)uld be entitled to the percentage of the
proceeds as indicated above.
In fact, on page 11 of the U.
s.
Depart-
ment of Agriculture Circular #408,-"Winte ring Beef cattle in the A:Ppalachian Region,"' -- the following statement will be found,- "The winter
feed bill is the greatest problem facing cattlemen in every beef producing area.
The winter feed costs gener~lly constitute two-thirds
of the yearly cost."
That part of the farm devoted to the raising of this feed that
carries the stock through the Winter plus the grazing land, is the unit
which must be dealt with therefore, and the exceptant's method of arriving at the value of his grazing land is entirely erroneous, and mis0 s
173
�leading , and the r~sult s he secure s thereby are not borne out by the
sale prices of such lands.
It is my opinio n that the commis sioners apprais ed this
tract at its full market value; that in allowin g $1849 . 00 theref or,
they were fair and genero us; that this price is higher than the proper ty
would now bring on the open :rmrket , and that- the owner, if he desire s
to sell, would not be able to dispos e of this proper ty at a higher price
than that allowed by the Board of AJ)prai sal Commi ssioner s .
O -b
�(P}
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by Herbert G.
Patterson, et al s , represented -by George s . :. Harnsberger , counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of H. G. Patterson, H. H. Patterson and D. H. Patterson, with
the record in the Clerk's Office in response to the publication of
notice of the filing of the petition, is the land shown as Tract NO•
337, on the County ownership Map for Rockingh_am county filed by the
Board of APpraisal Commissioners with its report.
In my separate affidavit captioned "Affidavit of
s.
H•
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933," I have set forth the measures adopted by
Mr. Stoneburner and myself in the preparation of this map and in the
location thereon of the various tracts of diverse ownership within the
proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition, reference is made to that
affidavit.
As shown by their report, the Board of Appraisal Connnissioners found trom the evidence submitted, and from their own personal
inspection and view, that the land within the Park area in Rockingham
County in which these parties claim or appear to have an interest, is
the said tract No. 337, as shown on the said map.
From the answer of these exceptants to the amplification
order of the court, directing them to file with the record, a statement
showing whether or not the land in which they now claim an interest is
the same as the land in which the report of the Board of Appraisal
Commissioners found that they claimed or appeared to have an interest,
it appears that the land in which these exceptants now claim an interest
is the land in which the Board found that they claimed or appeared
17S":
�to have an interest,_. as shown on the county ownership Map filed with
its report .
The mapping and examination was conducted by myself and Mr •
.
Stoneburner, w.l.th our assistants, as set forth in my separate affidavit
captioned"Affidavit of
s.
H. Marsh, dated MaDch l, 1933;' These lands
were located on the county ownership Map as described in the general
affidavit.
They were plotted and checked and tied to the surrounding
and adjoining lands, and to known property corners .
The lfstrip survey" method was used for making the soil
valuations, and determining the other elements which go to make
up the total valuations of the fee simple estate in this tract .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data and
were carefully checked on the ground before being submi t~_ed as evidence to the A:Ppraisal cormnissioners.
This is one of several tracts along the crest of the Blue
Ridge between Browns Gap and Simmons Gap which the exceptants own or
in which they claim an interest .
This particular tract is th~ Rockingham
portion of a larger tract mich also lies partly in Albemarle and partly
in Greene County.
It is bounded on the north and south by other lands
in which the exceptants claim an interest; on the west by the John A•
Alexander Tract #326, and on the east by the Crawford and Fulton tract
in Albemarle County .
The entire tract contains 1461. 75 acres of which only 415
acres lies in Rockingham. county.
The soil is a sandy loam of fair depth and fertility.
There
is only a small amount of loose rock on the cleared portion except on
small areas, but several outcrops occur .
The woodland is ve~y rocky.
Slopes are gent=e to very steep and mostly moderate except in the
, - 4--
")
171:,
�woods where they are steep.
The improvem ents consist of a two room, log, weatherb oarded
tenant house, 16xl8' in fair conditio n; a log barn, l6x22, in poor condition; a chicken house, spring house, kitchen , and corn house, and an
orchard consisti ng of 28 apple trees, 15 to 30 years old in a poor
conditio n, and four cherry trees.
This property has been used for a number of years as a
grazing farm.
Slightly more tban half of it is grazing land, and
twelve acres was found to be under cultivat ion.
Of the wooded area
15 acres was classifi ed as "Cove type" land, and 164 acres as "Slope
type" which classifi cation of woodland may be describe d briefly as
follows:
Slope type is land which is capable of growing 1-3 log
timber, or trees with a merchan table length of 16-48 feet.
Ridge
type is relative ly the poorest soil type and is land capable of
producin g merchan table trees of only one 16• log, or shorter. cove
~ype land is relative ly the best forest type, and is capable of producing timber with three merchan table logs or better.
The excepta nts complain because of the low valuatio n
placed upon this property by the Board of Apprais al Commiss ioners, and
state in a supporti ng affidav it, that this tract of grazing land of
415 acres will graze 120 head of ca ttle for seven months, during each
and every year, and that these 120 cattle will put on an average of
at least 225 lbs., each during that period; that the aggrega te number
of pounds thus put on would be 2?00 per season; that a conserv ative
average value of this increase would be?¢ per head, which would make
the income from the grazing each year worth $1890 . 00; that this amount
is equivale nt to an income at 6% on $31,333 .00, and that the average
price per acre, therefor e, would be approxim ately $?3.00.
?- ~
177
�It wil~ be noted that the exceptmts states that the length
of their grazing season is seven months, while the testimony of a number
of owners of grazing land within the Park area indicated that although
cattle were sometimes left on the range for seven months, the usual
season is from May 1, to November 1, a period of six months, and that
after November 1, the weather conditions usually become so uncertain
as to make grazing more or less hazardous except in unusual seasons.
The sum of $1890.00 is represented by the exceptants as the
revenue from this grazing place, and they proceed to capitalize this
sum, entirely overlooking ·or ignoring the items of taxes on land and
stock, superVision, maintenance of fences and improvements, salting,
losses, herding and other expenses incidental to the business of stock
raising.
The capitalization of this sum produces the rather imposing
amount of $31,333.00.
As a matter of fact, however, this sum of $31,333.00 represent~
not only the value of the grazing land, but also that part of the farm
devoted to the wintering of the stock, and other items enumerated below.
The fallacy of this statement is apparent when there is
taken into account the fact that the gross revenue has been credited to
this grazing land, without deductions for taxes on land or stock, supervision, maintenance of fences, and improvements, salting, losses, herding and other incidental expenses.
probably the greatest error in
such a calculation is the failure to recognize the farm that is behind
this grazing place, where the stock is wintered usually on a maintenance ration, except where it is being topped off for market.
According
to the line of reasoning of the exceptants, that part of the farm
which produces the crops that carry cattle through the winter, would
be valueless because as a rule, no additional weight is put on during
7_4
178
�the winter. -· .Among stockmen it is the general concensus of opinion that
if they can hold what is put on during the summer on grass, they have
brought their cattle through the winter in good shape.
As an example of the role which the farm behind the grazing
land plays, it is common practice in some localities for a farm owner
and an owner of grazing land to purchase stock in partnership with the
understandin g that the owner of the grazing land will carry the stock
through the summer, and that the owner of the farm will winter feed it,
and that the profits will be equally divided, and al. though no weight
is expected to be added during the winter feeding, the fact that the
farm behind the grazing land is of equal importance in holding the
weight put on by grass, is recognized.
The exceptants have failed entirely in presenting their figures, to show the relation of many of the elements which enter into
the calculation of the value of t hi s grazing property.
A great deal
of evidence was produced at the he arings and there is a great deal of
infonn.ation available showing the relation which the grazing land
bears to the selling price of a beef animal, all of which appears to
have been overlooked or ignored by the exceptant.
- From the evidence as submitted at the hearings, and from men
who have been engaged in the cattle business, and from data which
has been published on this matter, the following data has been gathered
showing the relation which the grazing land bears to the total value
of a beef animal:
Initial cost of animal••••• ••••••••••••• •• 19%
Cost of grazing•••• ••••••••••••• •••••••••• 29%
Cost of winter feeding•••• ••••••••••••• ••• 28%
Finishing {90 da) ••••••••••• ••••••••••• •••~
In other mrds, if four men went into partnership in the
') L -
I .,..>
17'i_
�cattle business, and one furnished th e calf, and the second the place on
which to graze it, the third winter fed it, and the fourth finished
it off for market, each would be entitled to the percentage of the
proceeds as indicated above.
In .fact, on Page 11, of the u. S• Depl; l, rt-
ment of Agriculture Circular #408,- "Wintering Beef Cattle in the APpalachian Region,tt -- the following statement will be found,- ttThe
winter feed bill is the greatest problem facing cattlemen in every
beef producing area.
The winter feed costs generally constitute two-
thirds of the yearly cost.ff
That part of the fann devoted to the raising of this feed
that carries the stock through the winter plus the grazing land, is the
unit which must be dealt with therefore, and the exceptants• method
of arriving at the value of their grazing land is entirely erroneous,
and misleading, and the results they secure thereby are not borne out
by the sale prices of such lands.
It is my opinion that the commissioner s appraised this
tract at its full market value; that in allowing $9,675.00 therefor,
they were fair and generous; that this price is higher than the property would now bring on the open market, and that the owners, if they
desire to sell, would not be able to dispose of this property at a higher
price than that allowed by the Board of ,Appraisal conn:nissioner s.
�(Q)
·· Motion to disapprove or exception filed by Elijah
Catterton, . represented by Georges . Harnsberger, counsel.
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham. County, in which this exceptant appears to have an
interest, but for which no claim was filed by the exceptant, with
the record in the Clerk ' s Office in response to the publication of
notice of the filing of the petition, is the land shown as Tract
#357, on the County Ownership Map for Rockingham. County filed by
the Board of Appraisal Commissioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit captioned "Affidavit of s. H•
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re . General,"
-
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid
repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report, the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view, that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims ar appears to have
an interest, is the said tract No . 357, as shown on the said map.
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the court , directing him to file With the record, a statement showing whether or not the land in which he now claims an
interest is the same as the land in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioners found that he claimed or appeared to
have an interest, it appears that the land in which this exceptant
now claims an interest is the land in which the Board found that
�he claimed or appeared to have an interes t, as shown on the county
-·
Ownersh ip Map filed with its report .
The mpping and examina tion was conducte d by myself and
Mr. Stonebu rner, with our assistan ts, as set forth in my separate
affidav it captione d ttAffida vit of s. H. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933,
These lands were located on the County ownersh ip
Re. General . "
Map as describe d in the general affidav it .
They were plotted and
checked and tied to the surround ing and adjoini_n g lands, and to
known property comers .
The "strip survey" method was used for making the soil
valuatio ns, and determin ing the other elements which go to make
up the total valuatio ns of the fee simple estate in this tract .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were careful ly checked on the ground before being submitte d as evidence to the Apprais al Commiss ioners .
This tract is the Rockingh am portion of a larger tract
which is located on both sides of the top of the Blue Ridge about
miles north of Simmons Gap . It is bounded on the west by the
w. w.
and E. B. sellers Tract #1?9;
---
on the north by the Webster
and Shover Tract #356, and on the south and East by lands in
Greene . County.
The oo il is a sandy clay loam of good depth and fertilit y
over most of the tract .
outcrop s .
The slopes are gentle to moderate with few
T~is tract is entirely cleared and in sod except for
limited areas on the slopes where the bare mineral soil is exposed .
There are no improvem ents on this tract .
The exceptan t complain s because of the low valuatio n which
has been assigned to his grazing lands by the Board of Apprais al Com-
�missio ners.
He states that his tract of 140 acres, 60 acres of
which is in Greene County , will graze 60 head of cattle , and that
they will put on an aver~ge of at least 250 lb-s. ,, each during the
grazing season ; that the aggreg ate number of pounds thus put on
would be 15,000 lbs., per season ; that a very conser vative averag e
price would be 5¢ per lb., which would make the income from the
grazing each year $750.0 0; that this amount is equiva lent to the
income at 6% on $12,50 0; that the averag e worth per acre would
therefo re be approx imately $89 . 00 per acre as agains t the averag e
price of $45 .00 per acre allowed by the Board.
The sum of $750 .00 is represe nted by the except ant as
the revenu e from this grazing place, and he procee ds to capita lize this
sum, entire ly overloo king or ignorin g the items of taxes on land and
stock, superV ision, mainte nance of fences and improv ements , salting ,
losses , herding and other expens es incide ntal to the busine ss of
stock raising .
The capita lizatio n of this sum produc es the rather
imposin g amount of $12,500 . 00.
As a matter of fact, howeve r, this sum of $12,50 0.00
repres ents not only the value of the grazing land, but also that part
of the farm devoted to the winter ing of the stock, and other items
enumer ated below.
The fallacy of this statem ent is appare nt when there is
taken into accoun t the fact that the gross revenu e has been credite d
to this grazing lend, withou t deduct ions for taxes on land or stock,
superv ision, mainte nance of fences , and improv ements , salting , losses ,
herdin g and other incide ntal expens es. Probab ly the greate st error
in such a calcul ation is the failure to recogn ize the farm that is
behind this grazing place, where the stock is winter ed usually on a
Q-3
183
�maintenance ration, except where it is being topped off for market .
According to the line of reasoning of the exceptant, that part of the
farm which produces the crops that carry cattle through the winter,
would be valueless because, as a rule, no additional weight is put
on during the winter .
Among stockmen it is the general concensus
of opinion that if they can hold what is put on during the summer on
grass, they have brought their cattle through the winter in good shape.
As an example of the role which the farm behind the
grazing land plays, it is common practice in ·some localities· for a
farm owner and an owner of grazing land to purchase stock i n partnership with the understanding that the owner of the grazing land will
carry ~he stock through the summer, and that the owner of the farm
will winter-feed it, and that the profits will be equally divided,
and although no weight is expected to be added during the winter
feeding, the fact t hat the farm behind the grazing land is of equal
importance in holding the weight put on by grass, is recognized.
The exceptant has failed entirely in presenting his figures to show the relation of many of the elements which enter into
the calculation of the value of this grazing property.
A great deal
of evidence was produced at the hearings and there is a great deal
of information available showing the relation which the grazing land
bears to the selling price of a beef animal, all of which appears to
have been overlooked _or ignored by the exceptant .
From the evidence as submitted at the hearings, and from
men who have been engaged in the cattle business, and from data which
has been published on this matter, the following data has been
gathered showing the relation which the grazing land bears to the
total value of a beef animal,
Q
-v
13'-l
�Initial cost of animal ••••••••••••••••••• •
Cost of grazing • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Cost of winter feeding ••••••••••..••••••• •
Finishing ( 90 da) ••••.•••••••••••••• ••••••
19%
29%
28%
24~
100 o
In other words, if four men went into partnership in
the cattle business, and one furnished the calf, and the second
the place on which to graze it, the third winter fed it, and the
fourth finished it off for market, each would be entitled to the
percentage of the proceeds as indicated above.
11 of the
u. s.
In fact, on page
Department of Agriculture Circular #408,-"Wintering
Beef Cattle in the Appalachian Region,"- the folloWing statement
Will be found,-"The winter feed bill is the greatest problem facing
cattlemen in every beef producing area.
The winter feed costs
generally constitute two-thirds of the yearly cost.n
That part of the farm devoted to the raising of this
feed that carries the stock through the winter plus the grazing
land, is the unit which must be dealt with therefore, and the exceptant 's method of arriving at the value of his grazing land is
entirely erroneous, misleading and fictitious, and the results he
secures thereby are not borne out by the sale prices of such lands.
It is my opinion that the CoID!llissioners appraised this
tract at its full market value; that in allowing $2 ,700.00 therefor,
they were fair and generous;
that this price is higher than the
property would now bring on the open market, and that the owner, if
he desires to sell, muld not be able to dispose of this property
at a higher price than that allowed by the Board of APPraisal commissioners.
�(R)
Motion _to disapprove or exception filed by E. c. Lam, -
represent~d by E. g . Ott, Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, in which this exceptant appears to have an interest,
but for which no claim was filed by the exceptan t with the record in
the Clerk's Office in response to the publication of notice of the filing
of the petition, is the land shown as Tract NO. 368, on the county ownership Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners With its report.
In my separate affidavit captioned "Affidavit of
s.
H.
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re. General," I have set forth the measures
adopted by
Mr.
Stoneburner and myself in the preparation of this map
and in the location thereon of the various tracts of diverse ownership
Within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition, reference is
made to that affidavit.
As shown by their report, the Board of APPraisal commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own personal
inspection and view, that the land within the Park area in Rockingham
County in which this party claims or appears to have an interest, is
the said tract No. 368, as shown on the said map.
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification order
of the court, directing him to file with the reoord, a statement showing
whether or not the land in which he now claims an intere st is the same
as the land in which the report of the Board of APPraisal commissioners
found that he claimed or appeared to have an interest, it appears that
the land in which this exceptant now claims an interest is the land
in which the Board found th at he claimed or appeared to have an interest,
;~.. I
�as shown on tl+e County Ownership Map filed with its report •
.
'
The map ping and exai.71.ina.tion was conducted by myself and 1.11'•
Stoneburner, ~ith our assistants, as set forth in my separate affidavit
captioned ·"A;f'fidavit of
s.
H'. Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re. General . "
This land was located on the county- ownermip Map as described in the
general affidavit .
rt was plotted and checked and tied to the surrounding
and adjoining lands, and to known property corners.
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data and
were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted as evidenc.e .to the Appraisal commissioners .
This tract is a small lot containing ~pproximately 1.10 of
an ac~e ·loc ated on the north side of and abutting on the spottswood Trail
near SWift Run and a b out four miles east of Elkton .
The exceptant complains that the prices awarded by the Board
of Appraisal Co:rm:ni ssi one rs for the land and i mprovements are manifestly
inadequ ate and confiscatory, and that they have not awarded the owner
the present fair market value of the same; that the price allowed for the
property violates Article 5 of the Constitution of the United states;
and that the findi ng o~ the said Board violates section 58 of the
Constitution of Virginia .
He states f urther that he has received for this property
an offer of $5,000 . 00 and he estimates that the lowest estimate of the ·
value should be $3,000 . 00 .
rt Will be noted from the supporting affidavit of A• M. Gooden
that the value of the lot is $1,000 . 00 and that the building could not
be replaced today for less than $10?3.39 .
It will be noted also from
the affidavit of L. A. Hensley, that he values the lot at $1,000 . 00 and
the replacement value of the buildings at $112? .oo.
It will be noted
�by reference to the report of the Board of APPraisal Commissioner s that
their valuation of the building is slightly higher than the estimate
furnished by both Messrs . Godden and Hensley, or $1200 .00.
The main dif-
ference therefore is in the valuation of the lot which at the figure
of the Commissioner s is valued at the rate of $1,000.00 per acre.
According to the valuation of the exceptant, this lot would be valued
on the basis of $10,000, per acre.
It is my opinion that the commissioner s appraised this
tract at its full market value; that in allowing $1300.00 therefor, they
were fair and generous; that this price is h~gher than the property would
now bring on the open market, and that the owner, if he desires to sell,
would not be able to dispose of this property at a higher price than that
allowed by the Board of Appraisal commissioner s.
�(S)
Motion to disapprov e or exception filed by Margaret
Mundy, represente d by Ji>. r. . Earman, counsel.
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which were described in the claim filed by or
in behalf of Margaret Mundy, with the record in the Clerk's Office
in response to the publicatio n of notice of the filing of the
petition, is the land shown as Tract No . 371, on the County Ownership for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal commissioner s with its report.
In my separate affidavit captioned uAffidavi t of
I
Marsh, dated March ' l, 1933, Re. General,"
s.
H•
-
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr. Stoneburn er and myself in the preparatio n
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid
repetition ,referenc e is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report, the Board of Appraisal commissioner s found from the evidence submitted , and from their own
personal inspection and View, that the land within the park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to
have an interest, is the said tract No . 371, as shown on the said
map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplifica tion
order of the court, directing her to file with the record, a statement showing whether or not the land in which she now claims an
interest is the same as the land in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissio ners found that she claimed or appeared to
have an interest, it appears that the land in which this exceptant
now claims an interest is the land in which the Board found that
S -1
LB'i
�she claimed or appear ed to have an intere st, as shown on the county
Owners hip Map filed with its report .
The mappin g and examin ation was conduc ted by myself and
Mr . Stoneb urner, with our 'assist ants, as set forth in my separa te
affida vit caption ed "Affid avit of
Re. Genera l."
s . H. Marsh, dated March
1, 1933 ,
These lands were located on the County 9wners hip
Map as describ ed in the genera l affida vit .
They were plotted and
checked and tied to the surroun ding and adjoin ing lands, and to
known proper ty corner s .
The maps and report s we:re worked up from the field data
and were carefu lly checked on the ground before being submit ted as
eviden ce to the Apprai sal Commi ssioner s .
This is a small tract of three acres located on the
Spottsw ood Trail in Swift Run Gap about 100 yards west of the Rockingham -Greene County line .
It was acquire d by the except ant after the Rocking ham
County lands within the propose d Park area were examin ed by representati ves of the state Commission on Conser vation and Develo pment,
and the land was oought and the buildin gs thereon were constru cted
by the owner with the full knowle dge that the land was within the
Park area, and that steps were being taken to purcha se it for
Nation al Park purpos es . Judgin g from the statem ents of Marvin
Mundy, husban d of the except ant in his suppor ting affida vit it
appear s that this place was develo ped as a resort in order to take
advanta ge of the trade which it was anticip ated would develop from
the opening of the Skylin e Drive, which was being constru cted about
the time this tract of land was purcha sed by the except ant .
�There are on this tract of land the fo13:ow1ng improvements, all of which were constructed by the exceptant;
a fifteen
room hotel. building of cement block cons true ti on, and two cottages,
all of which were valued by the Commissioners, according to their
work-sheets, at $4,500.
The land was valued at $200. per acre, or
$600.00.
Although the exceptant claims a value of $25,000.00 for
this tract and the improvements thereon, and has produced witnesses
who testified as to the great value of this property, the commissioners, after a careful inspection of the land, declined to accept this
evidence at its face value, and placed upon it a value much nearer
that set upon it by :Mr. Stoneburner and me than that claimed by the
exceptant.
This I believe was a fair and liberal valuation con-
sidering the general character of the property and the conditions
under which it was acquired and developed.
It is my opinion that the Commissioners appraised this
tract at its fair market value;
they were fai r and liberal;
th at in allowing $5100.00 for it
that t hi s price is substantially higher
than the property would now bring on the open market; and that if
the exceptant desired to sell at this time, she would not be able
to dispose of this property at a higher price than tha t allowed by
the Board of Appraisal Commissioners.
I'll
�(T)
Mot io n to disa pprove or exception
filed by
G. Luther Kite, r epresented by C. A. Hammer , Counsel .
The lands within the ar ea described in the petition in
Rock ingham County, in which this exceptant appea rs to have an
interest, but for which no claim was file d by the exceptant
with the record in the Clerk ' s Office in response t .o the publication of notice of the filing of the petition, are the lands
shown as Tracts No . 372 and 372-I on the County Ownership Map
for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re . General , n
s.
H.
I have set fo:vth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this m~p and in the location thereon of the various tracts
of diverse ownership within the proposed park area,
and to avoid
repetiti on, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence suhmitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view, that t h e lands within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or a ppears to
have an interest , are the said tracts No . 372 and 372- I , as shown
on the said map .
From the answer of this excepta nt to the amplification
order of the court, directinghim to file with the record, a statement showing whether or not the l a nds in which he now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the
Board of Appraisal Commissioner s found that he.claimed or ap-
r/' - I
�peared 'to have an interest , it appears that the lands in which the
exceptant now claims an interest are the lands in which the Board
found that he claimed or appeared to have an interest , as shown
on the County Owner-s hip Map filed with its report .
The mapping and examination was conducted by myself and
Mr . Stoneburner , with our assistants , as set forth in my separate
affidavit , captioned
1933, Re . General ,. 11
11
Affidavit of S . H. Marsh, dated March 1,
These lands were located on the County
Ownership Map as described in the
general affidavit .
They were
plotted and checked and tied to the surrounding and adjoining
lands, and to known property corners .
The
11
strip survey" method
W9.S
used for making the soil
valuations, and determining the other elements which go to make
up the total valuations of the fee simple estate in this tract .
The maps and reports were worked up from the field data
and were carefully checked on the ground before being submitted
as evidence to the Appraisal Co:mmissi:ners .
These tracts are located in the extreme eastern corner
of Rockingham County on the west slopes of the Blue Ridge .
Tract No . 372-I in which the report of the Board of Apprais al Commissioners shows that the exceptant appears to have an interest is a part of the lands claimed by the exceptant, but claims of
ownership have been set up by others, and this tract was therefore
shown on the map and reported as a lap;
I express no opinion as
to the ownership of this lap .
This claimant was given an opportunity to be heard on the
value of the lap in which he claims an interest as well as on
the
1'
�value of the ~and as to which there appear to be no contesting
claimants.
Tract No . 372-I conta ins 60 acres and was classified as
follows:
3 acres of "Grazing land, 11 27 acres of "Fields Restock-
ing" and 30 acres of
11
Slope type" land .
Tract No . 372 contains 264 acres which, with the exception
of one acre around the buildings is all Slope type land, which may
be described briefly as land which is ca pable of growing 1- 3 log
timber, or trees with a merchantable length of 16-48 feet .
The improvements consist of a two room frame dwelling
without flues , or chimney in very poor condition, and an old dilapidated concrete stable, which was formerly used in connection
with a stave operation .
E.xceptant complains about the land
value placed on this
property by the Board of Appraisal Co.;:unis sioners , but makes no
exception to the value assigned the timber and buildings and compares the value placed
on his land with the value assigned Vic-
toria Meadows Hensley 1 s tract .
By reference to the Work Sheets of the Cor.nnissi oners, it
will be noted that the values assigned by the Boa rd are comparable
to those a ssigned to the Victoria Tu . Hensley tract, and furthermore, they are in line with the values assigned to l a nds of similar
character a nd locati on throughout the County.
It is my opinion tha t the price s pla ced u po n t hese tracts
of $1439 . 00 for Tract No . 372, a nd ~270.00 for Tract No. 372-I
are considerably higher than these properties would now bring on
the open market;
that they are not unfa ir or inadequate; that
l'l 'f
�no better price can or will be secured for this land if the owner
-
desires to sell; and no better price could have been secured for
it at any time within the last five years .
�(U)
Motion.to disapprov e or exception filed by R.
represente d
by
o.
Nizer,
George S . Harnsberg er, Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of this party with the record in the Clerk 1 s Office in response to the publicatio n of notice of the filing of the petition
is the land shown as Tract No . 40 on the County Ovmership Map
for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Commissio ners
witll its report .
In my separate affidavit , captioned "Affidavi t of S . H.
:Marsh, dated foarch 1, 1933, Re • .General, 11
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburn er and myself in the preparatio n
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area , and to avoid re petition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s found from the evidence submitted , and from their own
personal inspection and _view, that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in · which this party claims or appears to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 40 as shown on the said map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplifica tion
order of the Court, directing him to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an
interest_: are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commi.~sio ners found that he claimed or appeared to
have an interest, it appears that the lands in which this exceptant
now claims an interest are the lands in which the Board found that
f'H
�he claimed or appeared to have an interest , as shown on the
County Ownership :Map filed vli th its report .
As the Petitioner, the State Commission on Conservation
and Development, is at this time considering the advisarility or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding
in re -
spect of the above mentioned tract , I limit my statemem:; at this
time ·with reference thereto , to the ex pression of my opini on that
the value thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate or less than its fair market value .
l<fl
�(V)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by C. G•
. Harnsberger , repre s ented by George S . Harnsberger , Counsel .
The
lands within the area des c ribed in the petition in
Rockingham County, whic:i::.. were described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of this party with the record in the Clerk ' s Office in re sponse to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition
are the lands shown as Tracts No . 41 and 42 , on the County o,,nership Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal
Commissioners vii th its report .
In my separate affidavit , captioned "Affidavit of
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933, Re . General , "
s.
H.
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the
diverse ownership within the proposed
various tracts of
Park area, and to avoid re -
petition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Ap9raisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view , that the lands within the Park area
in Rockingham Coomty in which this party claims or appears to have
an interest are the said tracts No • 41 and 42 as shown on the s aid
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the 6ourt , directing him to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the
Board of Appraisal Commissioners found that he claimed or appeared
to have an interest , it appears that the lands in which this ex-
�ceptant now claims an interest are the lands in which the Board
found that he claimed or appeared to have an interest , as shown on
the County Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the Petiti J ner , the State Commission on Conservation
and Development , is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condel!lilation proceeding in respect
of the above mentinned tracts , I limit my statement at this time
with reference thereto , to the expression of my opinion that the
value thereof as found by the Board is certa inly not inadequate or
less than its fair market value .
�(W)
Motion
o disapprov e or exception filed·by John A.
Hensley, Layton'· ' . Hensley, and other heirs of Virginia V. Hensley,
represente d by Georges . Harnsberg er, Counsel .
(X)
Motion to disapprov e or exception filed by Luther J .
Strickler , represente d by George S . Harnsberg er , Counsel .
These two motions {Wand X) refer to the same tract ,
separate exception s filed by two different parties .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the cl.aim filed by or
in behalf of these parties with the record in the Clerk 1 s Office
in response to the publicatio n of notice of the filing of the
petition is the land shown as Tract No . 56 on the County Ownership
Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s with its report .
In my separate affidavit , captioned "Affidavi t of S . H.
Marsh, dated Iv'.[arch 1 , 1933 , Re . General , "
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburn er and myself in the pr>eparatio n
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area , and to avoid
repetitio n, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioner s found from the evidence submitted , and from their own
personal inspectio n and view, that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which these parties claim or appear to
have an interest is the said t1·act No . 56 as shown on the said map .
From the answer of these exceptants to the amplifica tion
order of the Court , directing them to file with the record a state-
�ment showing whether or not the lands in which they now claim an
interest are the
same as the lands in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissi oners found that they claimed or appeared to
have an interest , it appears that the lands in which these exceptants
now claim an interest are the lands· in which the Board found that
they claimed or appeared to bave an interest , as shown on the
County Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the Petitioner, the State Commission on Conservation
a nd Development , is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceedings in respect
to the above mentioned tract , I limit my statement at thi s time
with reference thereto , to the expression of my opinion that the
value thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate or
less than its fair market value .
�(Y)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by Cassie M.
Naylor , represented by George S . Harnsberger , Counsel .
The land vii thin the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was des c ribed in the claim filed by or in
behalf of this party with the record in the Clerk ' s Office in re sponse to the publication of Notice of the filing of the petition
is the land
shown as Tract No . 62 on the County Ownership Map
for Rockingham County filed
by the Board of Appraisal Commission-
ers with its report .
In my separate affidavit , captioned "Affidav it of
s.
H.
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933, Re . General , 11 I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself i n the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area , and to avoid repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view, that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 62 as shown on the said map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the Court , direc t ing her to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which she now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissi oners found that she claimed o r appeared to
have an interest , it appears that the lands in which this exceptant
now c laims an interest are the lands in which the Board found that
�she claimed or appeared to have an interest , as shown on the
County Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the Petiti_ner, the State Commission on Conservation
and Development, is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in respect
of the above mentioned tract, I limit my statement at this time with
reference thereto, to the expression of my opinion that the value
thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate or less
than its fair market -wlue .
�(Z)
Motion to disa 1prove or exception filed by J .
berger, A. L . Harnsberger.,
Harnsberger, Jate
1• •
lW.ill
::;napp, J .
o.
Harns -
.i.e T . Harnsberger, Clinton T .
1.., .
Bishop,
I\ .
c.
Davis, and A.
Florence Forrer, represented by Georges . Harnsberger , Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or
in behalf of these parties with the record in the Clerk ' s Office
in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petiti on is t4e land shown as Tract No . 70 - I, on the County Ownership
Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Comm.is s ioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of
s. B.
Marsh, dated March 1, 1 9 33 , Re . General , 11 I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr o Stoneburner and myself in the preparati on
of this map and in the location thereon of the vari ous tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetiti on, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissi oners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection,and view, that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which these parties claim or app~ar to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 70- I as shown on the said map .
These exceptants have filed no answer to the amplification order of the Court, directing them to file with the record a
statement s howing whether or not the l a nds in which they now claim
an interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the
Board of Appraisal Connnissioners found that they claimed or ap-
�peared t
have an interest , and it is assumed that they ;accept the
findings of the Commissioners as to the identity of the lands claimed by them .
As the Petitioner , the State Co:r:rrnission on Conservation
and Development , is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in re '
spect of the above mentioned tract , I limit my statement at this time
with
value
J1
eference thereto , to the expression of my opinion that the
thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate
or less than its fair market value .
�(AA)
Motion -to disapprove or exception filed by Sarah L . Upp ,
represented by George S . Harnsberger, Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of this party with the record in the Clerk ' s Office in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition is
the land shown as Tract .No . 71 on the County Ownership Map for
Rockingham County filed by the Board of Ap~raisal Com..nissioners
with its report .
In my separate affidavit , captioned
Marsh, dated Tuarch 1 , 1933, Re . General , 11
11
Affidavit of S. H.
I have
set forth the meas -
ures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation of
this map and in the location thereon of the vari ous tracts of di verse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition, reference is
made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view, that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 71 as shown on the said map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the Court, directing her to file with the record a state . ment showing whether or not the lands in which she now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioners found that she claimed or apyeared to
have an interest, it appears that the lands in which this exceptant
now claims an interest are the
lands in which the Board found that
�she claim~d or appeared to have an interest , as shown on the County
Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the Petitioner, the State Co:mrissi on on Conservation
and Develo pment, is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in respect
of the above mentioned tract, I limit my statement at t Qis time wtth
reference thereto , to the expressi on of my opinion that the value
thereof as found by t he Board is certainly not inadequate or less
than its fair market value .
�(BB)
Motion t? disapprove or exception filed by Julia L .
Comer , represented by Miss Ethel Irwin, Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of this party with the record in the Clerk's Office in re sponse to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition
is the land sp.own as Tract No . 123 on the County Ownership Map
for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Comffiissioners
with its report .
In ny separate affid9.vit, captioned "Affidavit of& . H.
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933 , Re . General,n
I have
set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the pro_osed Park area , and to avoid repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of .\ppraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and vie :1 , that the land :,i thin the Park area
1
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appeo,_rs to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 123 as shown on the said map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the Court , directing her to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which she now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioners found that she claimed or appeared to
have an interest , it appears that the lands in which this exceptant
nov1 claims an interest are the lands in which the Board found that
�she claimed or appeared to have an interest, as shown on the County
Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the Petitioner,
the State Commission on Conservation
and Development, is at this time considering the advisability or
the n ecessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in respect of the above
mentioned tract , I limit my statement at this
time with reference thereto, to the expression of my opinion that
the value thereof as found by the Board is certiinly not inadequare or less than its fair market value .
�(CC)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by Edward
Herring and
vJ.
T·. Herring , represented
by George
s.
Harnsberger,
Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or
in behalf of these rarties with the record in the Clerk's Office
in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the pe tition is the land shorn as Tract No . 145 on t~e County Ownership
Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit , capti oned nAffidavit of
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933 , Re . General , n
s.
H.
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map a nd in the location thereon of the vari ous tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed
petition, reference is
Park area , ~nd to avoid
re -
made to that 4ffidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissi oners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view , that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which these parties claim or appear to
have an inter est is the said Tract No . 145 as shown on the said map .
From the answer of t hese .exceptants to the amplification
order of the Court , directing them to file with the record a state ment showing whether or not the l a nds i n VIhich they now claim an
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioners found that they claimed or appeared
to have an interest , it appears that the lands in which these ex-
Uo
�ceptants now claim an interest are the lands in which the Board
-·
found that they claimed or appea red to have an interest , as shown
on the County Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the Eetitioner, the State Commissi on on Conservation
and Development , is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing t h e condemnation proceeding in respect
of the above mentioned tract, I limit my statement at this ti~e
with reference thereto , to t h e expression of my opinion that the
value thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate or
less than its fair market value .
1.-11
�(DD )
Motion t.o disapprove or exception filed by M. H. Long ,
represented
by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or
in behalf of this party with the record in the Clerk ' s Office in
response to the publication of notice of ~he filing of the petition
is the land shown as Tract No . 152 on the County Ownership
for Rockingham County filed
Map
by the Board of Appraisal Commissio ners
with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of
s . H.
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933, Re . General , " I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the locatio n thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the pro;>ose.d Park area , and to avoid re petition, ~eference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report, the Board of lppraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted , and from their own
personal inspectiJn and view , that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have
an interest is the said tract No . 152 as shown on
the said map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplificatio n
order of the Court , directing him to file with ther ecord a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioner s found that he claimed
.:J
r appeared to
have an interest , it appears that the lands in which this exceptant
now claims an inter est are the lands in which the Board found that
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ '2.12..
�he claim d or appeared to have an interest, as shown on the County
Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the Petitioner, the State Comnission an Conservation
and Development, is at this time considering the advisability or
the
necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in respect of
the above mentioned tract , I limit my statement at this time with
reference thereto, to the expression of my opinion that the value
thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate or less
than its fair market value .
2.13
�(EE)
Motion
o disappro ve or excepti on filed
by Hosea
Shiffle tt, represen ted by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel .
The land within the area describe d in the petition in
Rockingh am t3ounty, which was describe d in the claim filed by or in
behalf of this party with the record in the Clerk's Office in response to the publica tion of notice of the filing of the petition
is the land shown as Tract No . 160 on the County Ownersh ip Map
for Rockingh am County filed by the Board of Apprais al Commiss ioners with its report .
In my separate affidav it, captione d
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933 , Re . General , "
0
Affidav it of
s.
H.
I have set forth the
measure s adopted by Mr . Stonebu rner and myself in the prepara tion
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownersh ip within the pro posed Par k area, and to avoid repetition , referenc e is made to that affidav it .
As shown by their report, the Board of Apprais al Commission ers found from the evidence submitte d, and from their own
persona l inspecti on and view, that the land within the Park area
in Rockingh am County in which this party claims or appears to have
an interes t is the said tract No . 160 as shown on the said map .
From the answer of this exceptan t to the amplific ation
order of the Court , directin g him to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an
interes t are the s ame as the lands in whi ch the r eport of the Board
of Apprais al Commiss ioners found that he claimed or ap}:Bared to
have an interes t, it appears that the lands in which this exceptan t
now claims an interest are the lands in which the Board found that
211.J
�he claimed or appeared to have an interest , as shown on the County
..
Ownership Map filed with tts report .
As the Petitioner , the State Commission on Conservation
and Development, is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in respect
of the above mentioned tract , I limit my statement at this time
with r ef erence thereto , to the expression of my opinion that the
value thereof as found by the Board is cert linly not inadequate
or less than its fair market value .
�(FF)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by Thomas L .
Yancey, Emma V. Gibbons , Hunter M. Gibbons , Mrs . Mary Gibbons
Snapp , F . M. Yancey, Nettie I . Mauzy, Julia Estes, A.
s.
Yancey,
and Frank W. Yancey, represented by Charles 1. Hammer, Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or
in behalf of these parties with the record in the Clerk's Office
in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition is the land shown as Tract No . 163 on the County Ownership
Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Commissioners with its report .
In mys eparate affidavit , captioned "Affidavit of S . H.
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933 , Re . General , "
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid re petiti on, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view , that the land within the Park area
in Rocldngham County in which these parties claim or appear to
have an interest is the said tract No . 163 as shown on the said map _.
From the answer of these ~Bxceptants to the amplification order of the Court , directing them to file ~ith the record a
statement showing whether or not the lands in which they now claim
an interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the
_Board of /ip J raisal Commissi oners found that they claimed or appeared
to have an interest, it appears that the lands in which these ex-
�ceptants now claim an interest are the lands in which the Board
found that they claimed or appeared to have an interest, as shown
on the County Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the
etitioner, the State Commission on Conservation
and Development, is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in respect
of the above ment ioned tract, I limit my statement at this time
with reference thereto, to the expression of my opinion that the
value thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate
or less than its fair market value .
l-1
�( GG)
otion to disa pprove or exception filed by Mrs . E .
i/ .
Harrison, represente d by Ralph H. Bader , Counsel .
The lands within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which were descri bed in the claim filed by or
in behalf of this party with the record in t ~e Clerk ' s Office
in response to the publicatio n of notice of the filing of the :i;etition are the lands shown as Tracts No . 208 and 208-a on the County
Ownership Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisa l
Commissio ners with its report .
In my separate affidavit , eaptioned
11
Af,fidavit of
s.
H.
~arsh, dated March 1 , 1933, Re . General , " I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburn er and myself ig the preparatio n
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the pro posed Park 'lrea , and to avoid repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report, the Board of .-.ppraisal Commissioner s found from the evidence submitted , and from their own
personal inspection and view, that the lands within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this f9.rty claims or _appears to have
an interest is the s a id Tracts No . 208 and 208- a as shown on the
said Map .
From the ansvrnr of this exceptant to the amplifica ti on
order of the Court , directing her to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which she nov1 claims an
i nterest are the same as the lands
n which t he r Aport of the Board
of Appraisal Commissio ners found that she claimed or appea red to
have an interest , it a ppears tha t the l a nds in which this exceptant
Zlb
�now claims an interest are the lands in which the Board found that
she claimed or appeared to have an interest, as shmn on the County
Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the Petitioner, the State Commission on Conservation
and Development, is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in respect
of the above mentioned tract, I limit my statement at this time wtth
reference thereto, to the expressi on of my opinion that the value
thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate or less
than its fair market value .
�(HR)
Motion to -disapprove or exception filed by Joseph E· carickhoff,
represented by Ralph H. Bader , counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham county , which was described i n the claim filed by or in
behalf of this party with the record in the clerk's Office in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition
is the land shown as Tract No . 210 on the County Ownership Map
for Rockingham County filed by the Board of AJ)praisal commissioners
with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned ttAffidavit of
Marsh, dat~d March 1 , 1933, Re . General , "
s.
H•
I have set forth the
measures adopted by itr . stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various -tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view , that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 210 as shown on the said map .
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the
Court, directing him to file with the record a state-
ment showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the Report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioners found that he claimed or appeared to
have an interest, it a ppears that the lands in which this exceptant
now claims an interest are the lands in which the Board found tha~
U.o
�he claimed o~ appeared to have an interest, as shown on the County
Ownership Map filed with its report .
As the Petitione r, the state commissio n on conservat ion
and Developme 1~t, is at this time considerin g the advisabil ity or the
necessity of dismissing the condemnat ion proceedin g in respect of
the above mentioned tract, I limit my statement at this time with
reference thereto , to the expression of my opinion that the value
thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate or less
than its fair market value .
U.l
�(II)
Motion to _.di sap prove or except ion filed by M. H. Harri son,
represented by Ralph H. Bader, Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of t h is party with the record inthe Clerk•s Office in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition
is the land shown as Tract No . 212 on the county ownership Map
for Rockingham County filed by the Board of A.Ppraisal commissioners
with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933, Re. General , "
s.
H•
I have set forth the
measures adopted by 1!r . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
di verse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to a void repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report, the Board of Appraisal commissioners found from the evidence submitted , and from their own
perronal inspection and view, that the land within the park area
in Rockingham County in wh ich this party claims or appears to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 212 as shown on the said map.
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the Court, directing hi··1 to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the Report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioners found that he claimed or appeared to
have an interest, it appears that the lands in wh ich this exceptant
now clai ms an interest are the lands in which the Board found that
�he claim d or appeared to have an interest, as shown on the county
Ownership Map filed with its report.
As the Petitioner, the state commission on conservation
and Development, is at this time considering the advisability
or
necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in respect of
the above mentioned tract, I limit my statement at this time with
reference thereto, to the expression of my opinion that the value
thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate or less
than its fair market value.
the
�(JJ)
Motion to -disapprove or exception filed by Thomas L • yancey ,
represented by Charles A. Hammer , counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham county, which was described i n the claim filed by or in
behalf of this party with the record in the clerk ' s office in response to the publication of notice of the f i ling of the petition
is the land shown as Tract No . 213 on the county ownership Map
for Rockingham county filed by the Board of APpraisal commissioners
with its report .
In my separate affidavit , captioned "Affidavit of
Marsh , dated March 1 , 1933 , Re. General , "
s.
H•
I have set forth the
measures adopted by 1-ir . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the lo cation thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area , and to avoid re petition ,. refernece is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissi oners found from the evid~nce submitted , and from their own
personal inspection and view , that the land wi~hin the park area
in Rockingham county in which this party clai~s or appears to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 213 as shown on the said map .
Fran the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the Court , directing him to file vnth with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in ii1ich he now claims an
i nterest are the same as the lands in which the Report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioners found that he claimed or appeared to
have an intere st , it appears that the l ands in which this exceptant
now claims an interest are the lands i L which the Board found that
�he claimed. or appeared to have an intere s t , as shown on the county
Ownership Map filed with its report .
s the Petitione r , the state Commissio n on conservat ion
and Developme nt , is at this time considerin g the advisabil ity or the
necessity of dismissing the condemnat ion proceeding in respect of
the above mentioned tract, I lira.it my statement at this time with
reference thereto, to the expression of my opinion that the value
thereof as fouhd by the Board is certainly not ina dequate or less
than its fair market value .
�(KK)
Motion to disappro ve or exceptio n filed by Annie E. Hedrick ,
represen ted by Ralph H. Bader , Counsel .
The land within the area describe d in the petition in
Rockingh am County , which was describe d in the claim filed by or in
behalf of t his party with the record in the clerk's of fice in response to the publica tion of notice of the fili ng - of the petition
is the land shown as Tract No . 248 on the County Ownersh ip Map
for Rockingham. County filed by the Board of APPrais al Commiss ioners
with its report .
In my separate affidav it, captione d"Affid avit of
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933, Re . General , u
s.
H•
I have set forth the
measure s a dopted by Mr . Stonebu rner and myself in the prepara tion
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts
ae-
diverse ownersh ip within the proposed Park area , and to avoid repetition , referenc e is made to that affidav it .
As shown by their report , the Board of APPrais al commission ers found from the evidence submitte d , and from their own
persona l inspecti on a nd view, that the land Within the park area
in Rockingh am County in which this party claims or appears to have
an intere s t is the said Tract No . 248 as shown on the said map .
From the answer of this excepta nt to the amplific ation
order of the Court , directin g her to file With the record a stat ement showing whether or not the lands in which she now claims an
interes t are the same as the lands i n which the Report of the Board
of Appraisa l.. commiss ioners found thc:"t she claimed or appeared to
have an interest , it appears that the lands in which this excepta nt
now claims an interes t are the lands in which the Board found that
�ije claimed or appear ed to have an intere st, as shown on the county
Owners hip Map filed with its report .
As the Petitio ner, the state commis sion on conser vation
and Develo pment, is at this time consid ering the advisa bility or the
necess ity of dismis sing the condem nation procee ding in respec t of
the above mentio ned tract, I limit my statem ent at this time with
referen ce thereto , to the expres sion of my opinion that the value
thereo f as found by the Board is certain ly not inadeq uate or less
than its fair market value.
�(LL)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by J . H. Lewin,
represented by Georges . Harnsberger , counsel .
The lands within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which were described in the claim filed by or in
behalf of this party with the record in the clerk's Office in response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition
are the lands shown as Tracts No . 256 and 256-a , on the County Ovmership Map for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Af)praisal
Commissioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933, Re . General , "
s.
H•
I mve set forth the
measures adopted by Ivtr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area, and to avoid repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report, the Board of Af)praisal commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view, that the lands within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have
an intereat are the said Tracts No . 256 and 256-a as shown on the said
map.
From the answer of this exceptant to the amplification
order of the Court, directing him to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an
interest are the same as the lands in which the report of the
Board of Appraisal commissioners found that he claimed or appeared ·
to have an interest, it appears that the lands in which this ex-
�whic h the Boar d
cept ant now claim s an inte rest are the land s in
rest , as shown on
foun d that he claim ed or appe ared to have an inte
the Coun ty Own ershi p Map file d with its repo rt.
tion
As the Peti tion er, the stat e comm issio n on cons erva
adv isab ility or
and Deve lopm ent, is at this time cons ider ing the
eedi ng in resp ect
the nece ssity of dism issin g the cond mna tion proc
t at this time
of the abov e men tione d trac ts, I limi t my state men
opin ion that the
with refe renc e ther eto, to the expr essi on of my
not inad equa te or
valu e ther eof as foun d by the Boar d is cert ainl y
less than its fair mark et valu e.
U'f
�(MM)
Motion to disapprove or exception filed by ·l. S . Kemper ,
represented by Hamilton Haas , Counsel.
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or
in beh~lf of this party with the record in the Clerk ' s Office in
response to the publication of notice of the filing of the p etition is the land shown as Tract No . 276 on the County Ownership M~p
for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Comuissjoner s
with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933 , Re . General , "
"Affidavot of S . H.
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park 1.rea , and to avoid repetition, refer~nce is
made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report, the Board of 1-1.ppraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view, that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which this party claims or appears to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 2f76 as shown on the said map .
This exceptant has filed no answer to the amplification
order of the court , directing him to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the lands in which he now claims an
interest are the same as
the lands in which the report of the
Board of Appraisal Commissioner s found that he claimed or appeared
to have an interest , and it is assumed that he accepts the findings
of the Commissioner s as to the identity of the lands
claimed by him .
�As the Petitioner, the State Commission on Conservation
and Development, is at this time
considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in respect
of the
above mentioned tract, I limit my statement at this time
with reference thereto , to the expression of my opinion that the
value thereof as found by the Board is certainly
not inadequate
or less than its fair market value .
231
�( NN)
Motion t~ disapprove or exception filed by D. },! . Clark,
represented by Hamilton Haas, Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County in which this -exceptant appears to have an interest, but for which no claim was filed by the exceptant with the
record in the Clerk's Office in response to the publicatio n of notice
of the fi~ing of the petition, is the land ghown as Tract No . 277
on the County Ownership Map for Rockingham County filed by the
Board of Appraisal Commissioners with its report .
In my separate affidavit, captioned "Affidavit of
Marsh,
dated March 1 , 1933 , Re . General,"
s.
H.
I have set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location thereon of
the various tracts
of diverse ownership within the proposed Park are~ , and to avoid
repetition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report, the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view , that the land withiµ the Park area
in Rocldngham County in which this :i;arty claims or appears to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 277 as shown on the said map .
This exceptant has filed no answer to the amplification
order of the Court, directing him to file with the record a statement showing whether or not the la.nd in which he now claims an
interest is the same as the land in which the report of the Board
,
of Appraisal Commissioners found that he claimed or appeared to
have an interest, and it is assumed that he accepts the findings
of the Commissioners as to the identity of the land claimed by him .
�As the Petitioner, the State Commission on Conservation
and Development , is at this time considering the advi s ability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in re spect of the above mentioned tract , I limit my statement at this
time with reference thereto , to the expression of my opinion that
the value thereof as found by the Board is certainly not inadequate
or less than its fair market value .
233
�(00)
Motion
o dis pprove or exception filed by John Roadcap,
represented by Hamilton Haas , Counsel .
The land within the area described in the petition in
Rockingham County, which was described in the claim filed by or
in behalf of this .f13,rty with the record in the Clerk's Uffice in
response to the publication of notice of the filing of the petition
is the land shown as Tract No . 307 on
the County Ownership Map
for Rockingham County filed by the Board of Appraisal Commiss~aner s
with its report .
In my separate affidavit , captioned "Affidavit of s . H.
Marsh, dated March 1, 1933 , Re . General,n I have
set forth the
measures adopted by Mr . Stoneburner and myself in the preparation
of this map and in the location
thereon of the various tracts of
diverse ownership within the proposed Park area , and to avoid re petition, reference is made to that affidavit .
As shown by their report , the Board of Appraisal Commissioners found from the evidence submitted, and from their own
personal inspection and view , that the land within the Park area
in Rockingham County in which tnis party claims or appears to have
an interest is the said Tract No . 307 as shown on the said map .
This exceptant has filed no answer t o the amplificatio n
order of the Court, directing him to file with the
record a state-
ment showing whether or not the land in which he now claims an
interest is the same as
the land in which the report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioner s found that he claimed or appeared to
have an interest , and it. is assumed that he accepts the findings
of
the Commissioner s as to .the identity of the land claimed by him .
�As the Petitioner , the State Commission on Conservation
and Develo -)ment , is at this time considering the advisability or
the necessity of dismissing the condemnation proceeding in re spect of the above mentioned tract , I limit my statement at this
time with reference thereto , to the expressi ~n of my opinion that
the value thereof as found by the Board is certainl y not inadequate
or less than its fair market value .
�The foregoing sta ternents dealing v1i th the several
objections , excepti ons, and moti ons
set out above , should be
read together with my affidavit captioned
11 Aff idavit
of
s.
H.
Marsh, dated March 1 , 1933 , Re . General , n to which reference is
made to avoid repetition .
Witness my signa ture this 15" day of
August
, 1933 .
~s: jI.1arsh
~
.
<
ST ~TE OF
VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF .• ARREN
H.
)
( ss .
)
Personally appeared before me , the undersigned Notary
Public in my said County and State, S . H. Mar sh, whos e name is
signed to the foregoing statement, and who being duly sworn,
made oath that the matters and things set forth therein are true
to the best of his knowledge and belief .
Witness my signature and Nota rial Seal this
August
, 1933 .
M, Con ni ;sion llc.µ1r1;, uece,nber 31 c., '
~r
day of
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Jan. 8, 1933 - Aug. 15, 1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
affidavits-2.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Affidavits 2
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/67db2be7f9fa2d2bd97333d933f6adcb.pdf
81b99146c63637b6737495b46962b1da
PDF Text
Text
•
In the Circuit court of Rockingham uounty,
va.
The State commission on Conservation and
Development of the State of Virginia
V •)
Cassandra ~awson Atkins, &c.
Complying with the order entered in the above entitled cause on
the 25th of October, 1932, and in response thereto, the undersigned
defendants, who have filed exceptions to the report of the Hoard of
Appraisal commissioners, accept the findings of said Board with respect
to the location of their respective tracts of land as shown on the map
filed in said proceeding and made a part of said Board's report and
numbered on said map as follows:
Tract 1/=277
D. M. Clarke
s.
It
#276
Robert 1'. Miller
"
#325
John Roadcap
rr
#307
A.
Kemper
However, these defendants do not mean to say that the Special Investigators and the Board of Appraisal commissioners were free from
error in identifying said tracts when making their inspection of the
same or when considering their findings for the report aforesaid.
October 27, 1932
D. M. CLARKE
A. S. K3MPER
ROBERT
JO
MILLER
DCAE
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Jan. 16, 1932 - Dec. 10, 1932
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
answer-of-defendants-clarke-kemper-miller-roadcap.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Answer of Defendants Clarke, Kemper, Miller, Roadcap
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/eff9ace4009315e32dd377fa6581990e.pdf
55ed066209d7421aae5b947c8882ae33
PDF Text
Text
STATE COMMISSION
..
WILLIAM E. CARSON, CHAIRMAN, RIVERTON
COLEMAN WORTHAM, VICE CHAIRMAN, RICHMOND
JUNIUS P. FISHBURN, ROANOKE
E. GRIFFITH DODSON, NORFOLK
RUFUS G. ROBERTS, CULPEPER
THOMAS L. FARRAR, CHARLOTTESVILLE
LEE LONG, DANTE
R. A. GILLIAM
EXECi.JTIVE SECRETARY AND TREASURER
ON
CONSERVATION
RICHMOND, VA.
AND
DEVELOPMENT
BUREAUS OF THE COMMISSION
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
WATER RESOURCES AND POWER
FOREST SERVICE
PARK!5 AND LANDSCAPE ENGINEERING
ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
STATE PUBLICITY
Shenandoah National Park
Division
S. H. MARSH, SUPERVISOR
PP-ONE 84, FRONT ROYAL
ADDRESS YOUR REPLY TO
FRONT ROYAL, VA.
JUly 19, 1933
TO THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM
COUNTY.
Dear Sir,
We are ~nding you for file, Answer ot the petitioner in the
Shenandoah National Park Condemnation Proceedings! pending
in your Court, and supporting affidavits as listed below:
Af'fidavit ot
"
tt
tt
n
ft
"
"
"
n
"
"
tt
tt
"
s. H. Marsh, dated March l, 1933, Re. General.
William E. Carson, dated April 24, 1933,
·
· Re.General~
A. c. Carson, dated May 23, 1933, Re. General.
William c. Armstrong, dated April 24, 1933,
Re. General.
Dr • .Arthur Bevan, dated April 17, 1933,
Re. General.
William Mahone McGill, da.ted APril 22, 1933,
Re. General..
Mineral Claims.
w. H. Stoneburner, dated April 24, 1933,
Re. General.
George H. Levi, dated March 23, 1933,
Re. General.
Rockingh8.Dl county.
·:-J
�ars
This i
ttor
11,
to certify that I hnvo received of lliott
v, t· ~ llo 11n
err ~or ilin- :
tho ...,t
f
"
•. • carson 1 date
"
fl
Dr • · :rt ur
ov,.. ,
~
at d ' "'l r11 1 7 , l.
CG1ll , a. tod
J,
e
, 1
• I • , toneburn r , da tcd
ff
' tt
ril
'"' n r 1 .
Gener l .
1033,
• "'e -r l .
! •
If
u.
nril 2-1 , 1933 ,
rson, d tod
c. t' .stronr,
fl
ti
io ion on cons rv ion ond evelo_
rsh ,
ted
rch 1 , 190 , Re . ~oner 1 .
n
rch
II. l,OV1 , d oc-d
I f 1r.thm- cert "'Y t u ., tl e bo
s ore c.r c,cd
an o July 20, l9a3 , a t 9t 30 a . • , tn the Cl;.; rk,t e ff ice
ook1ngh m Circ11t court .
Given un or r y h
t l 1°
, C 20 ,h d
of' July , 1
'0'.ll' t 0
1
\
~J
I
inia .
3
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Jan. 8, 1933 - Aug. 15, 1933
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
answer-of-petitioner-and-supporting-affidavits.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Answer of Petitioner and Supporting Affidavits
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/603b89df2f27ef4c19a3a2e110c8c3cd.pdf
8e54a4d6f996c348e5671077a8997b2b
PDF Text
Text
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY, VIRGINIA
The State Commission on Conservation
and Development of the State of Virginia
Condemnation
vs.
Cassandra Lawson Atkins and others
Upon the motion of Ralph H. Bader, leave is hereby given him
to file his answer herein, and the same is accordingly done.
Enter:
Judge
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Mar. 28, 1930 - Nov. 20, 1931
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
answer-of-ralph-h-bader.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Answer of Ralph H Bader
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/5638e5134de9399b69493969942b390f.pdf
4bfce4dfbc05e6c7b69607a2658e644e
PDF Text
Text
Virginia:
In the Circuit Court of Rockingham County
The State Commission on Conservation and Development
of the State of Virginia
v.
Cassandra Lawson Atkins et als
filed in the C\erk's Office
Rockingham County, \Ja,
OC1 JI \933
~/.,&t r.L~rk
The undersigned, Robert '.i' . Miller , owner of ~tr act H"o. 325 , A.
s.
Kemper, owner of Tract Uo. 276, and D. M. Clarke, ovmer of Tract No .
277, have signed the arbitration a gree.rnent in the above styled condemnation proceeding .
Oct . 31, 1933.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Aug. 16, 1933 - Mar. 8, 1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
arbitration-agreement-1.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Arbitration Agreement 1
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/2d8c55be25a046c9fdad5d3b8e0e6390.pdf
a67be66545fa88cbdc3436623d58fbcb
PDF Text
Text
GH.A.:/t COU TY , VI GI IA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKI
n and
Sta t0 Cor nmi seio n on Con serv atio
nia
ig,i
Vir
of
Dev elop men t of the Sta te
Vs .
oth ers , and
Cas sa ndr a Law son Atk ins and
am Cou nty , Vir gin h.
ingh
ock
52,5 01 acr es of lan d in
,
To the ·on ora ble H. 'V. Ber tram
king ham Cou nty , Vir gin i~;
Roc
of
Jud ge of the Cir cui t Cou rt
The und ersi gne d o:m ers
Are a corns ar.d say tha t the y
c! She r.an doa h I a tio r!al Par k
e
pos
pro
the
thin
.vi
d
lan
of
the abo ve named
tio n all que stio ns aris ir,g in
itra
arb
tc
mit
sub
to
eed
agr
hav e
sou ght to be con ue s of lan d and imp r cvem en ts
val
and
s
age
dam
to
as
gs
din
pro cee
dem ns d .
H. Long,
J • .i. Car ick hof f
Ann ie E. Hed rick
Jt .
'.iru. ct No . 152
Tra ct ho. 210
Tra ct 1~0. 248
H. Lon g
J . E. Ca. rick ho ff
Armi e E . Ha cir i ck
By Cou nse l .
ri .
flied in the Clerk's Office
Rockingham Count , V \
NOV .,z_.,, 19 1 3
~ L /p n lr,, k
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Aug. 16, 1933 - Mar. 8, 1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
arbitration-agreement-2.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Arbitration Agreement 2
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/8f6dc6e6d4d14a9c7fa168b11e921c60.pdf
0b29362707abe6ccced98d8fa49749b5
PDF Text
Text
TRACT NO .
See footnote b 48
II
II
"II
II
II
a 50
II
11
II
II
n
II
76
11 81
II 84
11242
c244
a312-a
11312 -b
11325
c326-III
a335
11336
11337
c357
a368
11371
II
II
n~rt 2
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
n
II
II
11
II
n
II
v
c·13 ;12-I ~
INCIDENTAL
DAMAGES
VALUE
~4960.00
865.80
4988100
•1§88,88
8~00;00
8898.00
15.00
:!:l9E.ee
933&88
49z?t4 .ee
645 . 00
8895080
:U~5. 00
96 t11s .ee
2700.00
:t:::-,ee . ee
5130 , 00
:1: i1 Jc1 _ee
- 227 . 00·-
None
IO /.0.0o None
,; 9 b -6', o o None
2.. o tJ9,g-1> None
:i. q 9.3,.2...2..N one
t,,
-3 I..,, o. 0
-3 :i..'6"o.o
0
0
None
None
oNone
7 b &-. .so None
-.r3.1 l. . 00 None
None
2. 1 6 LI, J " None
9 /J. oo None
1 o, 2..0 Cf. L/sNone
None
; ,r t
3.o
;710,t,,oNone
s-1190,..z.'l None
:2. i t. o . o o None
None
AGGREGATE .
$4960.00
86§,88
4988.ee
·1500 . oo
8000.00
·8898 .ee
& o, 0
I,,~
'-I q l. ,r. o o
,:i__olJ'/,8'D
:i-.99 -3. ,:l.:L
-32._S'°O,OO
15.00
'3::3::98.88
1t3o.oo
4944.00
645.00
8095.00
:r:85088
969§,88
I St,, 3, o o
7 b ft. -.ro
...Jd:1.b,O 0
:;._It.
t.f. s
Footnote c:
S-
91J,OO
.;o,:;_o o/.
'/6-
2700.00
la88.88
s5100 . oo
1:I: 436 ~88
I
7 /
t,?.
o/
2._tbO,0O
---227 .tm
Arbitration finding. See order entered -t,,£/{,.,""""t t:7 if,
See order entered January 23 , 1934.
See Table II Report of Board of Appr aisal Commissioners.
I,, O
,FL.f 90, 2
See Exception nmnbore d Seven in the body of the report filed by
the Board of Appraisal Commissioners with reference to the above
set out values of tr a cts numbered 48 , 50, 76 , 372 , and 372-I.
Footnote a:
Footnote b:
0
;01 ,r.oo
/ 1/ tJ 1/
�VIRGINIA H; .J.HE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCI{E1TGH_.:- C0U T Y
THE STi1.'.:. C Or.~_ITSSI0F or C0NS:BRV1 TI0N AITD DEVELOP:.~ KT
OF 1'IE S TL.TE OF VIR GI NI .L.,_ , P 'l'I 'l'.I ONER
1:.:::
v.
"iD GT'_P .S ! :J.) l!'IF~Y- T.JC' THOUS1J-.l1) ,
C.SS ..,NDRA LAJSON J,.TKIES
FI'if_t!; HUNDRtD .. ":D SIXTY- 01:E ( 52 , 561) ..'i.CRES OF L_.1~ , HORE OR
LESS , DEB' -DAN'.IS .
On the 28th day of February , 1934 , carie the petitioner
in the above styled proceedirig by counsel ,
0
..nd eYhibi ted to the
court the record thereof , including the judgment in rem entered
herein on the ';nd day of Nover:iber, 1933, conde!'lning tracts .. o .
223 , and No . 33
and No . 219 , as numbered and described in the
report of the Board of _.ppnisal Commissio1ers herein , to the
use of the petitioner upo11 t 11e IE :,"'Tl1ent into the custody of the
Cour·t of the sum of '1rl340.00 for tract I-To . 223 , and fp690 . 00 for
'303 . 00 for ttact No . 219 .
tract No . 338 , and
1
And thereupon petitioner shovred to the Court that , not -
Hi thstr ndingv{he condenration of the s--jJ. tracts no. 2'3 end t;o .
338 as aforesaid , and , notwithst·nding the fact thEt the petitioner
has heretofore p id into ..he custody of this Court the respective
amounts s t forth in sei d judgment in ra-:1 as the respective swards
for the taking of said tracts , petitioner thereafter ente:-ed into
or confirmed an agreement vrith one R. D. Crawford under the te1:ns
of which it agreed to submit nuestion s as to the v&l ue of cert a.:..
-:i.ineral ri ,_,.hts c ls.i :::red in said trAc t by the said CrEHfo d to erbi trati on , ,nd entered into a11agreenun t w:i. th certain cl' iriants of trc.c t
.._uestions '-' s tn the value
no . 338 under v1·1ich it a 0 reed to sub 1i t
of the fee siTiyile estate in the s id trl.'1.Ct Eo . 338 to trbitration .
Petj"ciom.:r fu...-.t!1er shored to the court tlmt &s, result
,
of t ... e s id arbi tra t · 0:1 ~he v lL °' nf the ~inercill.
by said Cra fo!'d in f'aid tr·ct ~ro .
3
1.1
c
I·i. 1 ts cl_
i lE,d
arc rt ired :..r.d de-
t :..-:nine d to be ,, 3 . 90 ; t..nd tl t the VL.l ue of thf fe u s imr:le es ..,ate
i ti trc.c t ~,o. 338
r·
s e~cc-~'t!: iPcd rn
dcternined to ')e ,,,9'"'0 . 00 ; and
�that the findings set forth in Table II of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners herein, have been amended by increasing the
value set forth therein for the fee simple estate in tract No .
•
fl,
223 by the sum of ~3 . 90, and the value of the fee simple estate
in tract No . 338 by $230 . 00 .
Whereupon petitioner prayed leave of Court to pay into
the custody of the Court the sum of $3 . 90
for the use and bene-
fit of the person or persons entitled to compens~tion
for the
mineral rights in the said traet No . 223 valued in said arbitra tion at $3 . 90;
and further prayed leave of Court to pay into
the custody of the Court the sum of $230 . 00 for the use and
benefit of the person or persons entitled to receive the amount
set forth in the said judgment in rem as the award for the
taking of said tract No . 338 , the said sum of $230 . 00 being in
addition to the sum of $690 . 00 mentioned in the said judgment
in rem as the award for the taking of the said tract
No . 338,
which sum of $690 . 00 has heretofore been paid into the custody
of this Court .
Petitioner
further showed to the Court that by a stipu-
lation entered into with William Morris , one of the claimants
herein, for the payment of compensation for improvements placed
upon tract No . 219 since
the
date of the filing of the report
of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners herein, petitioner has
agreed to pay into the custody of this Court the sum of $150 . 00,
the stipulated value of said improvements, for the use and benefit of the person or persons
set forth in the said
entitled to receive the amount
judgment in rem, as
the award for the
taking of the said tract No . 219 as shown and described in the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners herein .
Upon consideration
petitioner to pay into the
whereof , leave is granted the
custody of this Court the said sums
- 2-
�of $3 . 90 ; $230 . 00 and ~150 . 00 for the use and
benefit of the
person or persons entitled thereto under the terms and condit ions upon which , as abov e set out , petitioner prayed leave to
deposit the
me ;
payment of the said amounts into the custody
of this Court to be made by payment of the same to the Clerk
of this Court .
�VIRGINIA:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY •
.•
The State Corrrrnission on Conservation and Development
of the State of Virginia - - - - - - - Petitioner.
V. AT LAW NO.
1829
Cassandra Lawson Atkins and others and Fifty-Two r:I.1 hous and F~ve Hundred Sixty- One (52,561) Acres of Land, more or
less in Rockingham County, Virginia - - - Def endants.
On the
'l<i
day of
~..,,..ry,
1934, came the petitioner
in the above styled proceeding, and exhibited the record in
said proceeding, including the report of the Board of Appraisal
Commissioners therein, Table II and III thereof, and the County
Ownership Map filed therewith; and including also the several
exceptions and objections to said report and motions to dis approve and decline to accept the same filed with the
record,
\ and theseveral motions of petitioner praying the dismissal of
the said exceptions, objecti ons and motions, under authority of
Section 35 of the Public Pa rk Condemnation Act, on the said exceptions, objections
and motions ,
the several answers thereto ,
and the supporting affidavits filed with the record; and including also the order of this Court, setting this proceeding
for hearing on the 28th day of February, 1934, and the affidavits
filed in the record, showing the form/and manner in which, in
compliance with the terms of the said order, copies thereof were
furnished to the several exceptants, objectors and movants
ti oned in the table herei nafter
men-
set out, a nd to their counsel
of record .
Peti tioner further eY..hibited to the Court reports of
the findings of arbitrators as to certa in ma t ters submitted to
them under arbitration agreements
reports peLitioner moved the Court
record.
h ereinafter mention<:; d, which
to order filed with the
�And thereupon petitioner showed vo the Court that
arbitration agr ements had been entered into by and between
the petitioner and a number of the exceptants to the report
of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners herein; that under
authority and in pursuance of the said arbitration agreements ,
arbitrators were duly appointed, arbitration hearings were duly
had, and that the
above mentioned arbitrators' reports set forth
the findings of the said arbitrators acting under
authority
of the said arbitration agreements .
Petitioner further showed to the Court that, inter alia,
questions
as to the value of the fee simple estate in the
nUJnbered tracts of land within the area described in the peti tion herein,
shown in the following table, and described un-
der their respective nUJnbers in the aaid report of the Board
of ~ppraisal Commissioners herein, and as to incidental damages
which will arise upon the condemnation thereof, were duly submitted to the said arbitrators, in pursuance of the said agree ments , by the petitioner and some or all of the respective exout
ceptants, objectors and movants whose names are set/after each
of the said numbered tracts in the said table, which table is
as
follows:
- 2211-
�TABLE
TRACT
NU1v.BER
50
vresley '.\. Dean
76
John l • Haney
81
E. E . Lam and E.
84
Maude M. Shipp
c.
Lam
223
Crawf ord, R. D., Mineral right claim
242
Annie R. Begoon
244
J . W. Hinkle
312 - a
John J . Mace , James G. Mace , Eliz . foace Via,
R. H. Ivlace, Julia iuace Spitzer , Charles
IvI . Mace and for heirs at law of Ben .L" . Mace .
312 - b
Same exc eptants as to tract 312 - a .
325
Robert .L'• Miller ., by Hamil ton Haas , Attorney .
326 - III
Same ex c eptant as to tra ct 244 .
335
Herbert G. Patterson
336
Herbert G. Patterson and Allen B. Patterson
337
Herbert G . Patterson, Howard ~I. Patterson,
David H. Patterson
338
Elizabeth Crawford , Mary C. Canada - h.novm
as C. D. Crawford Estate . J . G. Fulton, Jr .
357
Elijah Catterton
368
E . C. Lam
371
Margaret limndy
372
G. Luther Kite
372- I
Same exceptant as to tract 372 .
- 3-
�Thereuµon petitioner, by counsel, moved the Court to
amend
the fi dings as to value and damages set forth in Tables
II and III of the said report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners to conform with the findings of' the said arbitrators;
and, thereafter, to overrule and dis iss the several motions
to disapprove the findings of the said Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the several objections and
exceptions thereto ,
submitted by the several exceptants , o bjectors and movants
whose names are set
out in the above table, on their several
exceptions, objections
and motions, the answers thereto , and
the supporting affidavits filed with the record, whether or
not they or any of them are not lawfully bound by the findings
of the said arbitrators ,
in fact to execute
by reason of their omission or failure
and enter into the above mentioned arbitra -
tion agreement, or~y reason of any defect in form or of substance
in the execution of said arbitration agreement, or by reason
of any lack of power to execute the said arbitration agreement .
Upon consideration of all which it is adjudged and ordered that the findings as to value and incidental damages as
shown in Table II and Table III of the said report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioners as to the numbered tracts set forth
in the above
set out table should be and are amended in so far
as that may be necess q ry to make the said findings conform
with the findings set forth in the said reports of findings by
the said arbitrators; and the said amendments having been
made, it is further adjudged and ordered, that the several mo tions to disapprove the findings of the Board of ~ppraisal Commissioners, and the several exceptions and objections thereto,
filed by the several exceptants, objectors and movants mentioned in the above set out table should be
and are overruled and
dismissed, on their several exceptions, objections and motions ,
- 4ZJJ
�the answers thereto , and the supporti ng affidav its filed with
the rec_ rd, whether they did or did not, in fact, severall y execute and enter into the above mention ed arbitrat ion agreeme nts
with the petition er in such form and with such effect that
they were and are lawfully bound by its te't'~
and conditio ns .
It is further adjudged and ordered that the above
mention ed amendme nts in the amounts
of value and inciden tal
damages set forth in Tables II and III of the report of the
Board of Apprais al Commiss ioners herein, be made to a:9pear by
the Clerk of thas Court, on the face of the said tables, accompanied with appropr iate referenc es to the date of entry of this
order, by insertin g the amended amounts of value in Table II of
said report in red ink by the side oi' the mmbered tract to
which they relate , and by insertin g with red ink in Table III
of said report a note setting forth whether or not any findings
as to the amount of inciden tal damages was made by the said
arbitrat ors, and if the amount of any such inciden tal damages
was found by the said arbitrat ors , the amount thereof and the
numbered tract out of the condemn ation of which such inciden tal
damages were
found to arise; all in subst~n tially the form and
manner and in the exact
amounts as shown below:
2.1"\
�-
...
TABLE II
For amendments in cr1.ounts of value of tracts 50 , 76 ,
81, 84 , 223 , 242 , 312- a, 312- b , 325 , 335 , 336 , 337 ,
338 , 368 , 371 , 372 , see order entered herein
----.
1934 .
TRACT
NUMBER
50
76
81
84
223
242
312- a
312- b
325
335
336
337
338
368
371
372
-$
/tJ7tJ,t>D
if2.t/'6'",oo
..2.. o o 9, "i{O
~9'1-3,:Lj__
J.33/3,90
.3.2.8-0,"0
1,rt,,J,00
71,,'j'.ob
-.,-3 .2.. t.
0 0
,J._//,,'f,.3S-
'ltJ·OO
I{) ,:2..0 rt, ~ Sf :2..IJ,00
17 10.t,o
S-L/ 9 0, j_ 9
j__/1,,,3,()()
TABLE III
No findings as to incidental damc ~es by Arbitrators . see
order entered herein _______ __ __ _ __ , 1 934 0
- 6-
2.\S
�It is further adjudged and ordered
that the above -
mentioned reports of arbitrators be filed with the record of
t his· proceeding :- to - wit, a report bearing date February 19,
1934, and signed by Jos .
1 .
Glasgow , Lemuel F . Smith
and
Philip Williams: and a report ~earing date February 21, 1934,
and signed by J . R. H'. Alexander, H.
Williams .
\v .
Bertram and Philip
�STATE COMM ISSlON ON CONS ERVA TION AN o DEVE LOPM ENT
WILL I AM E . CARSON, CHAIRMAN, R IVERTON
COLEMAN WORTHAM ,
V ICE CHAIRMA N, R ICH MON D
BUREAUS OF THE COMMISS ION
RICHMO ND, VA.
GEOLOG ICAL SURVEY
WATER RESOURCES AND POWER
FOREST S E RVICE
PARKS AND LANDSCAPE ENG IN E ER I NG
ARCHAEOLOG Y AN D HI S TORY
JUNIUS P . F I SHBURN, ROANOK E
E , GRIFFITH DODSON , NoR~OLK
RUFUS G . ROBERTS , CUL ...PER
THOMAS L. FARRAR, CHARLOTT ESVILL E
LEE LONG, DANTE
R , A . G I LLIAM
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY AND TREASURER
STATE P UBLICITY
Shenandoah Nationa l Park
Division
S . H . MARSH, SUPERVISOR
PHONE 84 , FRONT ROYA L
A DDR ESS YOUR RE~LY T O
FRONT ROYAL, VA,
March 5, 1934
George S. Harnsberg er, Esq .
Attorney -at-Law
Harrison burg, Virgini a
Dear Sir:
Copy of letter addresse d to you by the Chairman of the Arbitra tion
Board, dated March 1st has just come to hand.
I enclose copy of letter we are addressi ng to Judge Smith, which
will take care of the Annie R. Begoon Tract No. 155, Greene County.
With regard to the H. G. and A. B. Patterso n Tract No. 536 in
Rockingham County, it will be our purpose to make proper provisio n
for the payment of not only the award set forth in the judgment in
rem already entered , condemning this tract to the use of the petitioner , but also the differen ce between the award of the Board of
Appraisa l Commissioners, $125.00 , and the award of the Arbitra tion
Board, $90.00.
We bel ieve it will be simpler for all parties , and cause less confusion, i f we simply deposit in the custody of the Court for the
use of the person entitled to the award on Tract No. 356, the sum
of $35.00.
I enclose a draft of an order under which the petition er is granted
leave to make this deposit , and I will be obliged i f you will explain the situatio n to Judge Bertram , and move the entry of this
order, advising us as to the exact date of its entry.
We will then deposit this sum at or about the same t ime we deposit
the awards set out in the judgmen t.
Yours very truly,
,\>..U~
A. C. Carso! \
Enclosu res:
CC of letter to Judge Smith
Copy of draft of order
�COUTY, VIROINI.
THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKING
I
Harriscnb urg, Va.
arch 15, 1934
he State Commission on Conservat ion and Developme nt of
the St te of V1rg1n1a,
Dr .
to
J. Robert 3 ltzer, Clerk
Circuit Court of Rockingha:n County, Virginia
-oNI'BRING FOLLC ING OHD13RS: ..J:;i.;,
!932
ov. 17
Order granting 1 veto ary E. ye.nt
to ithdr w exception s to Report
it
Dec. 5
1933
granting leave to allace c. Saunders to vithdra except ons to Rep.
Aug. 21
granting leave to B.
ans er to petition
Oct. 5
aski
ft
fl
. 25
for order of judg~ont in rem
6 . 00
d1sm1ss1ng as to Tract '149
.so
25
n
as to hearing on exception s
2. 00
50 lailin 65 eop1es or order or 10/25/33
P'.ll'suant to said order
16.25
Certifying to Court above mailing pursu nt to said order,
. 50
Order allo 1ng First National Bank of
Hinton, • Va., to file petition,
. 25
5 . 00
in rem
4
Order of j dgmen
ft
ff
continuing to December Term
. 25
n
granting leave to nnie Laurie
Baugher to file petition
. 25
1934
"
Jan. 2
n
n
11
Lam to file
"
Dec . 21
n
. 25
23
Nov . 2
n
c.
.25
n
tt
d1smiss1n g certain tracts
1.00
appo1ng Guardian ad L1tem for Mace
infants,
. 50
overruling objection s, ate . , as to
ace infants
1.00
granting leave to A. L. and J. P.
Moubra.y to file petition
as to eorredtion s on Map filed with
Report of Boe.rd of App . Com 1 rs.
n
p pursuant
inserting notation on
1/2/.34
of
order
said
to
9
as to payment into Court of a ards ,
Carried fo
ard,
. 50
1.00
3,00
$ 39.00
�- -2-.-
Carri ed for ard ,
12M
Jan. 22
Order as to motio n to dism iss ob ec· tions -- V rnon 1. Poltz
26
Feb. 28
n
D
11
n
r.
9
Order
2 . 00
astin g for order of Judgment i n rem
6. 00
as to Tract s Nos . 223, 338 , 219,
a to amend ing flndl nss as to value
and damages set forth 1n Table s II
and III of R port ,
1.00
king notat ions on Tabl es I I and I II ,
pursu ant to. order 2/28/ 34,
n
39. 00
of
jud
ent in rem,
for paym ent into Court on Tract #336
2 . 00
1. 50
5 . 00
1,2p
51 .75
)
)
)
)
Filin g State ment s of Petit ione r, same; ))
)
Posta ge, etc.
)
)
SEE SEPARATE SHEETS FOR DETAI LS.
Filin g statem ents of lando wners pursuant to rul~s issue d by Arbi tratio n
Board ;
$
TOTAL
cails
me
dlsta
long
ing
The follow
paid for by Clerk :
$ .60
11/3/ 33, (Levi )
.70
zer)
10/28 /33 (Swit
_J.Q
am)
Bertr
e
(Judg
11/21 /33
/2££) _
·
Copie s of deeds for
.././-t $,
: tz_
~ ._
{c:l../ot- ~_
Mr. Stone burne r,_ _
_
_
_
___
_
45.00
102.7 5
2.00
l5
:tos;_
C.,'"1 erK.
�COONTY. VIRGIN
THE CIRCUIT COURT OP ROCKINGHA
I
•
Harrisonb urg , Va .
arch 15, 1934
The State Co 1ssion on Conserv tio and Development
of the State of Vl 1n1e,
Dr.
to
J . Rob rt S 1tzer, Clerlt
Circuit Court of
ock1nghan County , Virginia
666
HBO,
NTS OP
FILI G STAT
l
ARBITRATIO
BY
RU S ISSUED
ILI G STATE ENTS OF-----=- -=-!LING, BTC .
POS ioE ,
TRACT NO.
242
1 . 50
227 , 260
1. 50
Jos. E. car rickhoff
210
1. 50
Eli jah Catterton
357
1 . 50
• Clarke
277
1 . 50
Julia L. Comer
123
1 . 50
esley A. Dean
50
1 . 50
)
Emma v. Gibbons
Hunter M. Gi bbons )
Mary Gi bbons Snapp)
163
1 . 50
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
163
1. 50
Annie R. Begoon
C. J .
D.
&
Robert
•
Thomas L. Yancey
s.
V. Gibbons
. Yancey
Nettie I . Mauzy
Julia Estes
A. s. Yarieey
Prank • Yancey
urkei
HEIRS- AT-
OP
M. B .
YANCBY
John K. Haney
76
1. 50
c. o. Harnsberger
J . o. Harnsber ger, etc .
42
1 . 50
70 - I
1 . 50
J. T. Heard
41. 41-a 1 64- e
1 . 50
248 , 248- a
1. so
244, 326- III
1 . 50
ie E. Hedrick
J.
• Hinkle
CARRIED FORWARD,
22.50
5o
�---2--TRACT NO·
A.
s.
Kemper
276
Sallie A. Kite
B. E •. &
.
CARRIED FORWARD,
50
2 .50
1. 50
3, 372-I
C. Lam
81
1 ; 50
E. C. Lam
368
1.50
J. H. Le 1n
256 , 256-a
1.-so
152
1 . 50
325
1 . 50
166
1. 50
371
1 . 50
1 •
• H. Long
R. T.
A. L.
iller
&
J . F.
rgare t E.
oubra.y
undy
R. o; N1zer
1
40
H. G. Patter son
335
. 50
337
1 , 50
Maude Lt: Sh1pp -
84
1 . 50
Sara L. Upp
71
1.50
213
1,§0
H. H. Patter son )
D. H. Patter son
H.
o.
Patter son
Thome.a L. Yancey
)
)
TOTAL••••• .•••.• .•• ••.. •••••• .•
45. 00
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _ , Clerk .
SI
�TRACT NO .
See footnote b 48
II
II
"II
II
II
a 50
II
11
II
II
n
II
76
11 81
II 84
11242
c244
a312-a
11312 -b
11325
c326-III
a335
11336
11337
c357
a368
11371
II
II
n~rt 2
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
n
II
II
11
II
n
II
v
c·13 ;12-I ~
INCIDENTAL
DAMAGES
VALUE
~4960.00
865.80
4988100
•1§88,88
8~00;00
8898.00
15.00
:!:l9E.ee
933&88
49z?t4 .ee
645 . 00
8895080
:U~5. 00
96 t11s .ee
2700.00
:t:::-,ee . ee
5130 , 00
:1: i1 Jc1 _ee
- 227 . 00·-
None
IO /.0.0o None
,; 9 b -6', o o None
2.. o tJ9,g-1> None
:i. q 9.3,.2...2..N one
t,,
-3 I..,, o. 0
-3 :i..'6"o.o
0
0
None
None
oNone
7 b &-. .so None
-.r3.1 l. . 00 None
None
2. 1 6 LI, J " None
9 /J. oo None
1 o, 2..0 Cf. L/sNone
None
; ,r t
3.o
;710,t,,oNone
s-1190,..z.'l None
:2. i t. o . o o None
None
AGGREGATE .
$4960.00
86§,88
4988.ee
·1500 . oo
8000.00
·8898 .ee
& o, 0
I,,~
'-I q l. ,r. o o
,:i__olJ'/,8'D
:i-.99 -3. ,:l.:L
-32._S'°O,OO
15.00
'3::3::98.88
1t3o.oo
4944.00
645.00
8095.00
:r:85088
969§,88
I St,, 3, o o
7 b ft. -.ro
...Jd:1.b,O 0
:;._It.
t.f. s
Footnote c:
S-
91J,OO
.;o,:;_o o/.
'/6-
2700.00
la88.88
s5100 . oo
1:I: 436 ~88
I
7 /
t,?.
o/
2._tbO,0O
---227 .tm
Arbitration finding. See order entered -t,,£/{,.,""""t t:7 if,
See order entered January 23 , 1934.
See Table II Report of Board of Appr aisal Commissioners.
I,, O
,FL.f 90, 2
See Exception nmnbore d Seven in the body of the report filed by
the Board of Appraisal Commissioners with reference to the above
set out values of tr a cts numbered 48 , 50, 76 , 372 , and 372-I.
Footnote a:
Footnote b:
0
;01 ,r.oo
/ 1/ tJ 1/
�VIRGINIA H; .J.HE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCI{E1TGH_.:- C0U T Y
THE STi1.'.:. C Or.~_ITSSI0F or C0NS:BRV1 TI0N AITD DEVELOP:.~ KT
OF 1'IE S TL.TE OF VIR GI NI .L.,_ , P 'l'I 'l'.I ONER
1:.:::
v.
"iD GT'_P .S ! :J.) l!'IF~Y- T.JC' THOUS1J-.l1) ,
C.SS ..,NDRA LAJSON J,.TKIES
FI'if_t!; HUNDRtD .. ":D SIXTY- 01:E ( 52 , 561) ..'i.CRES OF L_.1~ , HORE OR
LESS , DEB' -DAN'.IS .
On the 28th day of February , 1934 , carie the petitioner
in the above styled proceedirig by counsel ,
0
..nd eYhibi ted to the
court the record thereof , including the judgment in rem entered
herein on the ';nd day of Nover:iber, 1933, conde!'lning tracts .. o .
223 , and No . 33
and No . 219 , as numbered and described in the
report of the Board of _.ppnisal Commissio1ers herein , to the
use of the petitioner upo11 t 11e IE :,"'Tl1ent into the custody of the
Cour·t of the sum of '1rl340.00 for tract I-To . 223 , and fp690 . 00 for
'303 . 00 for ttact No . 219 .
tract No . 338 , and
1
And thereupon petitioner shovred to the Court that , not -
Hi thstr ndingv{he condenration of the s--jJ. tracts no. 2'3 end t;o .
338 as aforesaid , and , notwithst·nding the fact thEt the petitioner
has heretofore p id into ..he custody of this Court the respective
amounts s t forth in sei d judgment in ra-:1 as the respective swards
for the taking of said tracts , petitioner thereafter ente:-ed into
or confirmed an agreement vrith one R. D. Crawford under the te1:ns
of which it agreed to submit nuestion s as to the v&l ue of cert a.:..
-:i.ineral ri ,_,.hts c ls.i :::red in said trAc t by the said CrEHfo d to erbi trati on , ,nd entered into a11agreenun t w:i. th certain cl' iriants of trc.c t
.._uestions '-' s tn the value
no . 338 under v1·1ich it a 0 reed to sub 1i t
of the fee siTiyile estate in the s id trl.'1.Ct Eo . 338 to trbitration .
Petj"ciom.:r fu...-.t!1er shored to the court tlmt &s, result
,
of t ... e s id arbi tra t · 0:1 ~he v lL °' nf the ~inercill.
by said Cra fo!'d in f'aid tr·ct ~ro .
3
1.1
c
I·i. 1 ts cl_
i lE,d
arc rt ired :..r.d de-
t :..-:nine d to be ,, 3 . 90 ; t..nd tl t the VL.l ue of thf fe u s imr:le es ..,ate
i ti trc.c t ~,o. 338
r·
s e~cc-~'t!: iPcd rn
dcternined to ')e ,,,9'"'0 . 00 ; and
�that the findings set forth in Table II of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners herein, have been amended by increasing the
value set forth therein for the fee simple estate in tract No .
•
fl,
223 by the sum of ~3 . 90, and the value of the fee simple estate
in tract No . 338 by $230 . 00 .
Whereupon petitioner prayed leave of Court to pay into
the custody of the Court the sum of $3 . 90
for the use and bene-
fit of the person or persons entitled to compens~tion
for the
mineral rights in the said traet No . 223 valued in said arbitra tion at $3 . 90;
and further prayed leave of Court to pay into
the custody of the Court the sum of $230 . 00 for the use and
benefit of the person or persons entitled to receive the amount
set forth in the said judgment in rem as the award for the
taking of said tract No . 338 , the said sum of $230 . 00 being in
addition to the sum of $690 . 00 mentioned in the said judgment
in rem as the award for the taking of the said tract
No . 338,
which sum of $690 . 00 has heretofore been paid into the custody
of this Court .
Petitioner
further showed to the Court that by a stipu-
lation entered into with William Morris , one of the claimants
herein, for the payment of compensation for improvements placed
upon tract No . 219 since
the
date of the filing of the report
of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners herein, petitioner has
agreed to pay into the custody of this Court the sum of $150 . 00,
the stipulated value of said improvements, for the use and benefit of the person or persons
set forth in the said
entitled to receive the amount
judgment in rem, as
the award for the
taking of the said tract No . 219 as shown and described in the
report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners herein .
Upon consideration
petitioner to pay into the
whereof , leave is granted the
custody of this Court the said sums
- 2-
�of $3 . 90 ; $230 . 00 and ~150 . 00 for the use and
benefit of the
person or persons entitled thereto under the terms and condit ions upon which , as abov e set out , petitioner prayed leave to
deposit the
me ;
payment of the said amounts into the custody
of this Court to be made by payment of the same to the Clerk
of this Court .
�VIRGINIA:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY •
.•
The State Corrrrnission on Conservation and Development
of the State of Virginia - - - - - - - Petitioner.
V. AT LAW NO.
1829
Cassandra Lawson Atkins and others and Fifty-Two r:I.1 hous and F~ve Hundred Sixty- One (52,561) Acres of Land, more or
less in Rockingham County, Virginia - - - Def endants.
On the
'l<i
day of
~..,,..ry,
1934, came the petitioner
in the above styled proceeding, and exhibited the record in
said proceeding, including the report of the Board of Appraisal
Commissioners therein, Table II and III thereof, and the County
Ownership Map filed therewith; and including also the several
exceptions and objections to said report and motions to dis approve and decline to accept the same filed with the
record,
\ and theseveral motions of petitioner praying the dismissal of
the said exceptions, objecti ons and motions, under authority of
Section 35 of the Public Pa rk Condemnation Act, on the said exceptions, objections
and motions ,
the several answers thereto ,
and the supporting affidavits filed with the record; and including also the order of this Court, setting this proceeding
for hearing on the 28th day of February, 1934, and the affidavits
filed in the record, showing the form/and manner in which, in
compliance with the terms of the said order, copies thereof were
furnished to the several exceptants, objectors and movants
ti oned in the table herei nafter
men-
set out, a nd to their counsel
of record .
Peti tioner further eY..hibited to the Court reports of
the findings of arbitrators as to certa in ma t ters submitted to
them under arbitration agreements
reports peLitioner moved the Court
record.
h ereinafter mention<:; d, which
to order filed with the
�And thereupon petitioner showed vo the Court that
arbitration agr ements had been entered into by and between
the petitioner and a number of the exceptants to the report
of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners herein; that under
authority and in pursuance of the said arbitration agreements ,
arbitrators were duly appointed, arbitration hearings were duly
had, and that the
above mentioned arbitrators' reports set forth
the findings of the said arbitrators acting under
authority
of the said arbitration agreements .
Petitioner further showed to the Court that, inter alia,
questions
as to the value of the fee simple estate in the
nUJnbered tracts of land within the area described in the peti tion herein,
shown in the following table, and described un-
der their respective nUJnbers in the aaid report of the Board
of ~ppraisal Commissioners herein, and as to incidental damages
which will arise upon the condemnation thereof, were duly submitted to the said arbitrators, in pursuance of the said agree ments , by the petitioner and some or all of the respective exout
ceptants, objectors and movants whose names are set/after each
of the said numbered tracts in the said table, which table is
as
follows:
- 2211-
�TABLE
TRACT
NU1v.BER
50
vresley '.\. Dean
76
John l • Haney
81
E. E . Lam and E.
84
Maude M. Shipp
c.
Lam
223
Crawf ord, R. D., Mineral right claim
242
Annie R. Begoon
244
J . W. Hinkle
312 - a
John J . Mace , James G. Mace , Eliz . foace Via,
R. H. Ivlace, Julia iuace Spitzer , Charles
IvI . Mace and for heirs at law of Ben .L" . Mace .
312 - b
Same exc eptants as to tract 312 - a .
325
Robert .L'• Miller ., by Hamil ton Haas , Attorney .
326 - III
Same ex c eptant as to tra ct 244 .
335
Herbert G. Patterson
336
Herbert G. Patterson and Allen B. Patterson
337
Herbert G . Patterson, Howard ~I. Patterson,
David H. Patterson
338
Elizabeth Crawford , Mary C. Canada - h.novm
as C. D. Crawford Estate . J . G. Fulton, Jr .
357
Elijah Catterton
368
E . C. Lam
371
Margaret limndy
372
G. Luther Kite
372- I
Same exceptant as to tract 372 .
- 3-
�Thereuµon petitioner, by counsel, moved the Court to
amend
the fi dings as to value and damages set forth in Tables
II and III of the said report of the Board of Appraisal Commissioners to conform with the findings of' the said arbitrators;
and, thereafter, to overrule and dis iss the several motions
to disapprove the findings of the said Board of Appraisal Commissioners and the several objections and
exceptions thereto ,
submitted by the several exceptants , o bjectors and movants
whose names are set
out in the above table, on their several
exceptions, objections
and motions, the answers thereto , and
the supporting affidavits filed with the record, whether or
not they or any of them are not lawfully bound by the findings
of the said arbitrators ,
in fact to execute
by reason of their omission or failure
and enter into the above mentioned arbitra -
tion agreement, or~y reason of any defect in form or of substance
in the execution of said arbitration agreement, or by reason
of any lack of power to execute the said arbitration agreement .
Upon consideration of all which it is adjudged and ordered that the findings as to value and incidental damages as
shown in Table II and Table III of the said report of the Board
of Appraisal Commissioners as to the numbered tracts set forth
in the above
set out table should be and are amended in so far
as that may be necess q ry to make the said findings conform
with the findings set forth in the said reports of findings by
the said arbitrators; and the said amendments having been
made, it is further adjudged and ordered, that the several mo tions to disapprove the findings of the Board of ~ppraisal Commissioners, and the several exceptions and objections thereto,
filed by the several exceptants, objectors and movants mentioned in the above set out table should be
and are overruled and
dismissed, on their several exceptions, objections and motions ,
- 4ZJJ
�the answers thereto , and the supporti ng affidav its filed with
the rec_ rd, whether they did or did not, in fact, severall y execute and enter into the above mention ed arbitrat ion agreeme nts
with the petition er in such form and with such effect that
they were and are lawfully bound by its te't'~
and conditio ns .
It is further adjudged and ordered that the above
mention ed amendme nts in the amounts
of value and inciden tal
damages set forth in Tables II and III of the report of the
Board of Apprais al Commiss ioners herein, be made to a:9pear by
the Clerk of thas Court, on the face of the said tables, accompanied with appropr iate referenc es to the date of entry of this
order, by insertin g the amended amounts of value in Table II of
said report in red ink by the side oi' the mmbered tract to
which they relate , and by insertin g with red ink in Table III
of said report a note setting forth whether or not any findings
as to the amount of inciden tal damages was made by the said
arbitrat ors, and if the amount of any such inciden tal damages
was found by the said arbitrat ors , the amount thereof and the
numbered tract out of the condemn ation of which such inciden tal
damages were
found to arise; all in subst~n tially the form and
manner and in the exact
amounts as shown below:
2.1"\
�-
...
TABLE II
For amendments in cr1.ounts of value of tracts 50 , 76 ,
81, 84 , 223 , 242 , 312- a, 312- b , 325 , 335 , 336 , 337 ,
338 , 368 , 371 , 372 , see order entered herein
----.
1934 .
TRACT
NUMBER
50
76
81
84
223
242
312- a
312- b
325
335
336
337
338
368
371
372
-$
/tJ7tJ,t>D
if2.t/'6'",oo
..2.. o o 9, "i{O
~9'1-3,:Lj__
J.33/3,90
.3.2.8-0,"0
1,rt,,J,00
71,,'j'.ob
-.,-3 .2.. t.
0 0
,J._//,,'f,.3S-
'ltJ·OO
I{) ,:2..0 rt, ~ Sf :2..IJ,00
17 10.t,o
S-L/ 9 0, j_ 9
j__/1,,,3,()()
TABLE III
No findings as to incidental damc ~es by Arbitrators . see
order entered herein _______ __ __ _ __ , 1 934 0
- 6-
2.\S
�It is further adjudged and ordered
that the above -
mentioned reports of arbitrators be filed with the record of
t his· proceeding :- to - wit, a report bearing date February 19,
1934, and signed by Jos .
1 .
Glasgow , Lemuel F . Smith
and
Philip Williams: and a report ~earing date February 21, 1934,
and signed by J . R. H'. Alexander, H.
Williams .
\v .
Bertram and Philip
�STATE COMM ISSlON ON CONS ERVA TION AN o DEVE LOPM ENT
WILL I AM E . CARSON, CHAIRMAN, R IVERTON
COLEMAN WORTHAM ,
V ICE CHAIRMA N, R ICH MON D
BUREAUS OF THE COMMISS ION
RICHMO ND, VA.
GEOLOG ICAL SURVEY
WATER RESOURCES AND POWER
FOREST S E RVICE
PARKS AND LANDSCAPE ENG IN E ER I NG
ARCHAEOLOG Y AN D HI S TORY
JUNIUS P . F I SHBURN, ROANOK E
E , GRIFFITH DODSON , NoR~OLK
RUFUS G . ROBERTS , CUL ...PER
THOMAS L. FARRAR, CHARLOTT ESVILL E
LEE LONG, DANTE
R , A . G I LLIAM
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY AND TREASURER
STATE P UBLICITY
Shenandoah Nationa l Park
Division
S . H . MARSH, SUPERVISOR
PHONE 84 , FRONT ROYA L
A DDR ESS YOUR RE~LY T O
FRONT ROYAL, VA,
March 5, 1934
George S. Harnsberg er, Esq .
Attorney -at-Law
Harrison burg, Virgini a
Dear Sir:
Copy of letter addresse d to you by the Chairman of the Arbitra tion
Board, dated March 1st has just come to hand.
I enclose copy of letter we are addressi ng to Judge Smith, which
will take care of the Annie R. Begoon Tract No. 155, Greene County.
With regard to the H. G. and A. B. Patterso n Tract No. 536 in
Rockingham County, it will be our purpose to make proper provisio n
for the payment of not only the award set forth in the judgment in
rem already entered , condemning this tract to the use of the petitioner , but also the differen ce between the award of the Board of
Appraisa l Commissioners, $125.00 , and the award of the Arbitra tion
Board, $90.00.
We bel ieve it will be simpler for all parties , and cause less confusion, i f we simply deposit in the custody of the Court for the
use of the person entitled to the award on Tract No. 356, the sum
of $35.00.
I enclose a draft of an order under which the petition er is granted
leave to make this deposit , and I will be obliged i f you will explain the situatio n to Judge Bertram , and move the entry of this
order, advising us as to the exact date of its entry.
We will then deposit this sum at or about the same t ime we deposit
the awards set out in the judgmen t.
Yours very truly,
,\>..U~
A. C. Carso! \
Enclosu res:
CC of letter to Judge Smith
Copy of draft of order
�COUTY, VIROINI.
THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKING
I
Harriscnb urg, Va.
arch 15, 1934
he State Commission on Conservat ion and Developme nt of
the St te of V1rg1n1a,
Dr .
to
J. Robert 3 ltzer, Clerk
Circuit Court of Rockingha:n County, Virginia
-oNI'BRING FOLLC ING OHD13RS: ..J:;i.;,
!932
ov. 17
Order granting 1 veto ary E. ye.nt
to ithdr w exception s to Report
it
Dec. 5
1933
granting leave to allace c. Saunders to vithdra except ons to Rep.
Aug. 21
granting leave to B.
ans er to petition
Oct. 5
aski
ft
fl
. 25
for order of judg~ont in rem
6 . 00
d1sm1ss1ng as to Tract '149
.so
25
n
as to hearing on exception s
2. 00
50 lailin 65 eop1es or order or 10/25/33
P'.ll'suant to said order
16.25
Certifying to Court above mailing pursu nt to said order,
. 50
Order allo 1ng First National Bank of
Hinton, • Va., to file petition,
. 25
5 . 00
in rem
4
Order of j dgmen
ft
ff
continuing to December Term
. 25
n
granting leave to nnie Laurie
Baugher to file petition
. 25
1934
"
Jan. 2
n
n
11
Lam to file
"
Dec . 21
n
. 25
23
Nov . 2
n
c.
.25
n
tt
d1smiss1n g certain tracts
1.00
appo1ng Guardian ad L1tem for Mace
infants,
. 50
overruling objection s, ate . , as to
ace infants
1.00
granting leave to A. L. and J. P.
Moubra.y to file petition
as to eorredtion s on Map filed with
Report of Boe.rd of App . Com 1 rs.
n
p pursuant
inserting notation on
1/2/.34
of
order
said
to
9
as to payment into Court of a ards ,
Carried fo
ard,
. 50
1.00
3,00
$ 39.00
�- -2-.-
Carri ed for ard ,
12M
Jan. 22
Order as to motio n to dism iss ob ec· tions -- V rnon 1. Poltz
26
Feb. 28
n
D
11
n
r.
9
Order
2 . 00
astin g for order of Judgment i n rem
6. 00
as to Tract s Nos . 223, 338 , 219,
a to amend ing flndl nss as to value
and damages set forth 1n Table s II
and III of R port ,
1.00
king notat ions on Tabl es I I and I II ,
pursu ant to. order 2/28/ 34,
n
39. 00
of
jud
ent in rem,
for paym ent into Court on Tract #336
2 . 00
1. 50
5 . 00
1,2p
51 .75
)
)
)
)
Filin g State ment s of Petit ione r, same; ))
)
Posta ge, etc.
)
)
SEE SEPARATE SHEETS FOR DETAI LS.
Filin g statem ents of lando wners pursuant to rul~s issue d by Arbi tratio n
Board ;
$
TOTAL
cails
me
dlsta
long
ing
The follow
paid for by Clerk :
$ .60
11/3/ 33, (Levi )
.70
zer)
10/28 /33 (Swit
_J.Q
am)
Bertr
e
(Judg
11/21 /33
/2££) _
·
Copie s of deeds for
.././-t $,
: tz_
~ ._
{c:l../ot- ~_
Mr. Stone burne r,_ _
_
_
_
___
_
45.00
102.7 5
2.00
l5
:tos;_
C.,'"1 erK.
�COONTY. VIRGIN
THE CIRCUIT COURT OP ROCKINGHA
I
•
Harrisonb urg , Va .
arch 15, 1934
The State Co 1ssion on Conserv tio and Development
of the State of Vl 1n1e,
Dr.
to
J . Rob rt S 1tzer, Clerlt
Circuit Court of
ock1nghan County , Virginia
666
HBO,
NTS OP
FILI G STAT
l
ARBITRATIO
BY
RU S ISSUED
ILI G STATE ENTS OF-----=- -=-!LING, BTC .
POS ioE ,
TRACT NO.
242
1 . 50
227 , 260
1. 50
Jos. E. car rickhoff
210
1. 50
Eli jah Catterton
357
1 . 50
• Clarke
277
1 . 50
Julia L. Comer
123
1 . 50
esley A. Dean
50
1 . 50
)
Emma v. Gibbons
Hunter M. Gi bbons )
Mary Gi bbons Snapp)
163
1 . 50
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
163
1. 50
Annie R. Begoon
C. J .
D.
&
Robert
•
Thomas L. Yancey
s.
V. Gibbons
. Yancey
Nettie I . Mauzy
Julia Estes
A. s. Yarieey
Prank • Yancey
urkei
HEIRS- AT-
OP
M. B .
YANCBY
John K. Haney
76
1. 50
c. o. Harnsberger
J . o. Harnsber ger, etc .
42
1 . 50
70 - I
1 . 50
J. T. Heard
41. 41-a 1 64- e
1 . 50
248 , 248- a
1. so
244, 326- III
1 . 50
ie E. Hedrick
J.
• Hinkle
CARRIED FORWARD,
22.50
5o
�---2--TRACT NO·
A.
s.
Kemper
276
Sallie A. Kite
B. E •. &
.
CARRIED FORWARD,
50
2 .50
1. 50
3, 372-I
C. Lam
81
1 ; 50
E. C. Lam
368
1.50
J. H. Le 1n
256 , 256-a
1.-so
152
1 . 50
325
1 . 50
166
1. 50
371
1 . 50
1 •
• H. Long
R. T.
A. L.
iller
&
J . F.
rgare t E.
oubra.y
undy
R. o; N1zer
1
40
H. G. Patter son
335
. 50
337
1 , 50
Maude Lt: Sh1pp -
84
1 . 50
Sara L. Upp
71
1.50
213
1,§0
H. H. Patter son )
D. H. Patter son
H.
o.
Patter son
Thome.a L. Yancey
)
)
TOTAL••••• .•••.• .•• ••.. •••••• .•
45. 00
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _ , Clerk .
SI
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Aug. 16, 1933 - Mar. 8, 1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
arbitration-findings-and-awards.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Arbitration Findings and Awards
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/ac069e5f8b746444b1542f6bc4e5cad4.pdf
b635c56f6eacbdf3936172e98f876226
PDF Text
Text
---
. .........._
I
----
IN TH!s CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY, VIRGINIA.
The state commission on conservation and
Development or the State of Virginia
Plain tiff
#1829
v.
Defendants
Cassandra Lawson Atkins, etc.,
CERTIFICATE OF CLERK
I, J. Robert Switzer, Clerk of the Circuit Court of
Rockingham county, Virginia, do hereby certify that on October
25, 1932, I mailed in the postoffice at Harrisonburg, Virglnia,
as required by the order of Court of date the said 25th day of
October, 1932, a copy of said order to each of the objectors
named in said order, to their several addresses filed with the
record, and also to their respective attorneys of record, to
the addresses of said attorneys filed with the record or known
to me.
The nemes and addresses of said objectors and attorneys
is as follows, to-wit:
OBTECTORS
Baugher, Annie Laurie
Elk ton, Va • , R. #1
Begoon, Annie R.
Penn Laird, Va.
carickhoff, Jos. E.
Elkton, va., R.#4
Catterton, Elijah
Charlotttesville, va.
Clark,
n.
2142 W. 107th Place
Chicago, Ill
M.
Comer, .Julia
Swift Run, va.
t.
Dean, wesley A.
Elkton, Va ..
Dean, W. F., Jr.
Elkton, va., R.#3
Haney, John K.
Swift Run, Va.
c.
G.
Harrironburg, va.
Harnsberger, J.
o.
Elkton, va.
Harnsberger,
Harnsberger, A. L.
Mt. Airey, Md.
Harnsberger, Nannie T.
McLean, va.
I~
�--2--
w.
va.
Harnsberger, Clinton T.
Elkins,
Snapp , Kate W.
Elkton, Va.
Bishop, J. c.
Greensboro, N. C.
Davis, A.
c.
do
Forrer, A. Florence
_ Harris@n, Mrs. E.
w.
Richmond, Va.
Island Ford, va •
Harrison, M. H.
Island Ford, va.
Heard, J. T.
Elkton, Va.
Hedrick, Annie E.
Is land Ford , Va •
Hensley, John A.
Harrisonburg, Va., R.#3
Hensley, Layton
w.
Broadway, va., R.#1
Strickler, Luther J.
Harrisonburg, va., R.#3
George s. Harnsberger, GUard ian ad
litem for Mertie Hensley, Toe
Hensley, Giles Hensley, Owen
Hensley, Louise Hensley, and
Lucille Hensley
Harrisonburg, va.
Herring, Edward
Elkton, va.
Herring,
w.
T.
do
Hinkle, J. W.
McGaheysville, va.
Keezel, A. Lovice, EXecutrix
Penn taird, va.
Kite, G. Luther
McMullen, Greene Co., Va.
c.
#4 Logan creek
Washington, D.
Lam, E. E.
swift Run, va.
Lewin, J. H.
McGaheysville, va.
Long, M. H.
Elkton, Va.
Mace, John J.
Port Republic, Va.
Mace, James G.
Grottoes, Va.
Via, Elizabeth Mace
do
Mace, R.H.
do
Spitzer, Julia Mace
do
Mace, Charles M.
do
Lam, E.
c.
3\U
�-
...
-- 3--
Miller , Robert T.
Grottoes , Va .
Moubrey , A. L.
Elkton , Va . , R. #4 , Box 92
Moubrey, J' . F .
do
Mtm.dy, Margaret
swift Run, va.
Naylor, Cassie M.
Elkton , va ., R. #3
Nizer , R.
o.
do
Patterson, Herbert G.
Bridgewater , va .
Patterson , Hovard H.
Harrist on, Va .
Patterson , David Ir.
do
Roadcap , John
Grottoes , Ya •
Saunders , Wallace
c.
w.
Leigh s t.
Rm hmond , Va.
330
Shifflett, Ho sea
Elkton , va ., R. F . D.
Shipp , Maude M.
swift Bun , Va .
Upp , sarah L.
providence Forge , Va .
Wyant, Mary E .
Elkton, Va.
Yancey, Thomas L .
Elkton , Va.
Gibbons , EIIlI!la V .
do
Yancey , F . M.
McGaheysville, va.
Mauzy, Nettie I .
do
Estes, Julia
Barboursville , va.
Yancey , A.
s.
Charlottesville, va.
Ya nc e,y , Frank W.
McGaheysville,
Alexander , J' . A.
Staunton , Va.
Kemper , A.
s.
va.
Lynwood, va •
Elkton , Va .
Kite , sallie A•
ATTORNEYS
Bader , Ralph H., Attorney
Ha.rnsberger, Geo .
s .,
Attorney
Haas, Hamil ton , Attorney
Harris on burg, va.
do
do
�--4--
Irwin, Ethel, attorney
Earman,
n. w.'
Conrad, L. L.
Ott, E. D.
Hanmer,
c.
A.,
White, Geo. B.,
"
"
do
ff
do
"
do
"
501 Law Bldg.
Richmond, Va.
do
walker, Geo. E.
Tavenner, F.
s.,
Harri son burg, va.
Charlottesvi lle, va.
J"r.
Woodstock, va.
Williams, Walter A.' Jr.
1101 E. Main st.
Riehm.and, Va.
Given under my hard this 25th day of October,
1932.
------- ------- - ,
Clerk.
312
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Jan. 16, 1932 - Dec. 10, 1932
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
certificate-of-clerk-listing-objectors-attorneys.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Certificate of Clerk Listing Objectors Attorneys
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/baeafae818a3f38363cb11546383ab91.pdf
002b017e29b67244d4f6ecc88ce80f4b
PDF Text
Text
VIRGINIA: I
THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM
CoUNTY1 ' the Clerk'. 0 nc
.· .ckingham County, Va.
The State Commission on Coneerv tion and Develop~~
of tho State of Virginia ,------------------Poti t~ .-
V.
OCT J-fl 933
U
Aw~erk
AT LAW N0.1829 .
Cassandra Lawson
t kins and other ,--------Defendants .
TO THE HON. H. 1N. BElfTR
, JUDGE OF S ID COURT.
Your respondent , Sallie A. Kite, owner of Tracts No .3 and
No . 372-I , J. T. Heard, owner of Tract No . 41-a, W. F. Dean , Jr.,
owner of Trao1s No. 53 and 53-a, Annie R. Begoon, owner of Tract
No . 242, J . ir. Hinkle~ owner of Tracts No . 244 and 326-III, hkun
n•nauxatiua:.a Herbert G. Patterson, owner of Tract No . 335,~
"9 · ~
/
Howard H. Patterson, and David H.Patterson, owners of Tract No.337,
Elijah Catterton, owner of Tract No . 357, R.O.Nizer, owner of
Tract No . 40, C. G. Harnsberger, owner of the mineral interest in
Tracts
o. 41 and 42, John
. Hensley and others, owners of Tract
No . 56, Luther J . Strickler, owner of a mineral interest in Tract
No . 56, J . O. Harnsberger and others, owner of Tract No . 70-I,Sarah
L.Upp, owner of Tract No . 71, W. T.Herring and others, owners of
Tract No. 145, and J . H.Lewin , owner of Tracts No . 256 and 256-a,
respectfully represent :
That Sallie
Kite has submitted her claim to arbitration,
and, as the gre ter portion of her land lies in Greene County,
her oase wi ll be heard before the Arb1 tra tion Board sitting in tha~I ,
County.
That J . T. Heard has submitted his olaim to arbitration,and
the same is now set for hearing before the Arbitration Board a1tti g
in Rockingham Cou.nty .
That
. F. Dean has submitted his claim in connection with
Tract No . 53 to arbitration , and that same will be heard in RockLAW OFFICES
GEo. s.HARNssrnGrn
HARRISONBURG . VA .
ingham cou.nty, but , aa to his claim in connection with Tract No.53 .. ,
�---2--he has not submit ted
this claim to arbitra tion, and , as this land
lies outside of the Kelsey line, he has been inform ed that the
same will not be taken. He here reques ts that this suit be dismiss ed as to Tract No. 53-a.
That Annie R. Begoon has submit ted her claim to arbitra tion, and that this case will be heard before the .arbitr ation
Board sitting in Roclcingham County .
That J • .• Hinkle has submit ted his claim to arbitra tion,
and that this aase will be heard before the Arbitr ation Board
sitting in Rockingham County .
That Herber t G. Patter on and Herber t G. Patters on,How ard H.
atterso n, and David H. Patters on, have submit ted their severa l
claims to arbitra tion, but , as the greate r portion of their lands
lies in Albema rle County , their cases will be heard before the
Arbitr ation Board sitting in that County •
.
That Elijah Catter~ on ha
submit ted his claim to arbitra-
tion, but. as the greate r portion of his land lies in Greene Count ,
bitrati on Board sitting in
his c ase will be h eard before the
Greene County .
That your respon dents, R. O. Nizer, c . ~.Harn sberge r , John
•
Hensle y, Luther J . strick ler , J . O. Harnsb erger, Sarah L.Upp, w.T.
Herrin g , nd J.H. Lewin , are informe d , believe , and aver that all o
their respec tive lands or minera l intere sts lie outside of the
Kelsey line and will not be taken for Park purpos es at this time,
and your respon dents therefo re pray that an order may be entered
in this matter dismis sing the pending suit as to them .
This answer is filed pursua nt to an order entere d by
day of
Your Honor in the above entitle d matter on the
--- --
0c to ber, 1933.
LAW O FFI CES
GEO. S. HARNSB ERGER
HARRISONBUR G. VA.
_Jl
�- - ~ - - - - - - - 3--
..
."':.f
.,
,.
LAW OFF IC ES
GEO . S. HARNSBERGER
HARRISONBURG . VA .
�IN THC CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKnlGHAJ, C mr11Y, VIID lNIA:
STATE cor. ...n s s moN ON CONSERVATION AND DEVELORrnNl'
OF
!I!; STATE OF VIRGIUIA
v ..
Petitione r
At La\7
# 1829
CASSAE IDA Lil. SON ATKINS , ETC .
Defenlant s
Certifica te of Clerk
I , J . Robert Sui tzer , Clerk of the C1rcui t Court of
Rockingham County, do hereby certify that on October 30 , 1933 , I
mailed to each or the objectors . exceptant s andmovan ts whose
names are set forth below a copy of' the order of the said Court
entered on October 25 , 1933, and that I further mailed to their
res pective attorneys
or record a copy of said order,
in accord-
ance vrith the direct.ion s in so.id order contn1ncd , as follows :
Conrad & Conrad , •. ttornsys
s.
Geo .
Harnsberg er,
E'arrisonb urc, Va ..
fl
tt
R. I . Keyser,
ll
Luray, Va .
D.
fl
Harr !son burg , Va. •
Ralph H. Bader,
ff
rt
tI
E. D. Ott .
n
ff
u
n
ft
n
"
"
tr
"
•
Ha ilton Haas ,
Liss Ethel !min
ff
1~rs • Sa211 e ~ . Ki te
Elkton , Va .
;r. T . Huar
"
Vernon
GroOe Hill ~ Va .
• l!'ol tz
lesle y A. Denn
:1 . F . Dean , Jr .
tt
Elkton, Va..
ff
u
Annie Laurie Baugher
"
ft
Jo-l)n K . Haney
Fern Hill , Va .
.. . c .
Lam
$w1ft Run, Va •
E. E.
L8.m
ft
"
tt
"
:Maude H. Shipp
"
1-1
�......... 2 .....
Elkton, Va.
1•• L . Uoubroy
J .. :'-. ......ou
rs .
rey
n.
l.!lD.10
fl
nosoon
n
·eGahcynville • Va .
"
J . 7. Hinkle
"
John J . Mace
Grott
Jamos J . ? nee
"
"
llrs . Eli~c.bo-th dice Via
"
ft
R. ll. ~ace
n
Mrs .Julia .a.co Spitzer
n
Chnrl cs 1' • ...:ace
n
rn . A. Lov1cc Keezel
II
fl
u
e/o Geo . S . Hamsbergcr, attorney
r:rarr is on burg , Vo...
Gro ttoos , Va •
iller
R. T.
o, Va .
Herbert G. Patterson
Bridge ator , Vu .
Hone.rd H. Pa ttorson
tf
David
n.
Patterson
Harr is ton. Va .
Charlo ttesv illo, Va .
Elijah cattcrton
rs • flar
re t
tt
~undy
Fern 1:111,
Va .
G. Luther Ki to
Elkton , Va .
R. o., !11zer
ff
c.
Harrisonburg , Va .
G. Harnsherger
c/o '"'rs . Conrod T. LornY1
• M. Jarman hairs
Harrisonburg, Va .
Ha.rrisonburc . Va.
John Hensley
Layt en
B. 2 , Broadway• Va.
Hensley
Luther J . Stric
"
r
~rs . Cassie H. Naylor
R. il3, Harrironburg , Va .
Elkton, Va .
n
J. O. Harnsbercer·
t1
r~rs . Sarah L. Upp
Providence ilOrge. Va .
Mrs . Julia L. Comer
Swift
n,, Va .
Eduard Herring
Elkton._
va.
• • T . Herring
"
"
11
"
tf
M.
n.
Long
llosea Shifflett
"
�.......3 .....
Thomas L . Yancey
Elkton, Va .
Mrc.
ti
;-,. .o.V. Gibbon::;
F • l • Yancey
rs. Nettie I . I::Uuzy
Urs . Julia Estes
A.
s.
Yancey
)
)
)
e/ o
"
c.
A. Ila!l.mer , attn rney
Harrisonburg , Va .
Charlottosvillo , Va .
Frank · . • Yanooy
Uc<l:abeysvillo ,
E . J . Car1ckhoff
Elkton,. Va .
Mrs . :C. II. Hnrrt son
M. H. Hnr·r i
S:> n
"
"
Mrs . Lnnie
n. Hedrick
Island
J .. H. Lewin
A.
s . Kemper
vn.
"
2
1;-0 rd ,
Vo. .
l oGaheysv ill e , Va .
Lyn rood , Va.
D. !I . Clnrk
c/o Hamilton Haas , attorney
Ho.rrisonbure, Va .
John
Grottoos, Va .
!
oadco.p
A. Lovice Kce3el
c/o ' • D. tt, at1Drney
Harrisonburg. Va •
Given under my hand this 30th day of' October, 1~33.
_______________ , Clerk .
\3\
�.-~
,.
IN THE cmcurT COURT OF ROCKmGHA.M COUNTY, VIIDJNIA:
STA TE COMMISS(IION ON CONSERVATION AND DEVELORIBN.r
OF THE STATE OF VIRGINIA
v.
Petitioner
At Law
#1829
De-fem.ants
CASSANDRA LAWSON ATKINS, ETC.
Certi f1 cate o'f Clerk
I, J. Robert Switzer, Clerk of the Circuit Court of
Rockingham County, do hereby certify that on October 30, 1933, I
mailed to each of the objectors. exceptants and movants whose
names are set forth below a copy of the order of the said Court
entered on October 25, 1953, and that I further mailed to their
respective attorneys of record a copy of said order, in accordance with the directions in said order contained, as follows:
Conrad & Conrad, Attorneys
s.
u
u
tt
Keyser,
"
Luray, Va.
F.arman,
lf
Harrisonburg , Va.
Ralph H. Bader,
tt
tt
"
E. D. Ott,
tt
tt.
tt
c. A.
ft
tt
tt
u
"
"
Geo.
R.
D.
w.
w.
Harnsberger,
Hamner,.
Hamilton Haas,
Miss Ethel Irwin
I Mrs.
I J. T.
Sallie A. Kite
Heard
Vernon
I
Harrisonburg , Va.
w.
Foltz
"
"
tt
Elkton, Va.
ti
"
Grofie Hil.l, Va.
Wesley A. Dean
Elkton, Va.
w.
"
ti
Annie Laurie Baugher
tt
tt
Joij.n K. Haney
Fern Hill, Va.
F. Dean, Jr.
I E.C.Lam
Swift Run, Va.
J E. E. Lam
n
tt
n
"
"
tt
Maude M. Shipp
25[,
�--2-A. L. Moubrey
Elkton, 'Va.
J. F. Moubrey
"
( Mrs.Annie R. Begoon
( J. W. Hinkle
"
tt
Grottoes. Va.
James J. Mace
"
"
"
-
R.H. Mace
Mrs.Julia Mace Spitzer
tt
Charles M. Mace
tt
Mrs. A. Lovioe Keezel
/ R. T.
Miller
/ Herbert G. Patterson
Howard H. Patterson
I David H. Patterson
1 Elijah Catterton
tt
tt
n
"
tt
"
-
n/o Geo.S.Hamsberger, attorney
Harrisonburg, Va.
Grottoes, Va.
Bridgewater, Va.
"
"
Harriston, Va.
Charlottesville, Va.
Mrs. Margaret Mundy
Fern Hill, Va.
G. Luther Kite
Elkton, Va.
I R.
o.
Nizer
I C. G. Harns berger
M. M .. Jarman heirs
/ John Hensley
Layton Hensley
I Luther· J. Strickler
Mrs. Cassie M. Naylor
/ J. O.Harnsberger
i
McGahey sville , Va.
John J. Mace
Mrs. Elizabeth Mace Via
~
tt
ti
ft
Harrisonburg, Va.
c/o Mrs. Conrad T. Loggn.
Harrisonburg, Va.
Harrisonburg, Va.
R.#2, Broadway, Va.
R.#3, Harri:nnburg, Va.
Elkton, Va.
"
"
Mrs. Sarah L. Upp
Providence Forge. Va.
Mrs. Julia L. Comer
Swift Run, Va.
Edward Herring
Elkton, Va.
W. T. Herring
lt
"
M. H. Long
ti.
"
Ho sea Shi ff le tt
"
"
�--3--Thomas L. Yancey
Elkton, Va.
Mrs.. :EinmaV. Gibbons
tt
F. M. Yancey
Mrs. Nettie I. Mauzy
Mrs. Julia Estes
A.
Y
s.
Yancey
)
)
)
"
c/o c. A. Hanimer, at1n rney
Harr-is onburg, Va.
Charlottesvi lle, Va.
Frank W. Yancey
McOJe.heysvil le, Va.
E. J. Car ic.kho ff
Elkton, Va.
Mrs. E. H. Harrison
tt
tl
M. H. Ha.rris:rn
"
!
v Mrs. Annie R. Hedrick
Island Ford, Va.
vJ". H.
I A. s.
Lewin
McGaheysvill e, Va.
Kemper
Lynwood, Va •
il'D. M. Clark
c/ o Hem!.il ton Haas, attorney
Harrisonburg , Va.
John Roadcap
Grottoes, Va.
A. Lovice Keezel
c/o E. D. Ott, attorney
Harrisonburg , Va.
Given under my hand this 30th day of October, 1933.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Aug. 16, 1933 - Mar. 8, 1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
certificate-of-clerks-mailing.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Certificate of Clerks Mailing
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/62f00f1409eee69aef4aed6a1444f5d4.pdf
37ea6c7f87d0c32db06415deb85c3d66
PDF Text
Text
OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY .
VIRGINIA : IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
rva tio n and De vel opm ent
The Sta te Co mm issi on on Co nse
- - ·- - - Pe tit ion er .
of the Sta te of Vi rgi nia - - V . AT LAW NO . 1829
oth ers and Fif ty- Two Tho usCa ssa ndr a Lawson At kin s and One
(52 , 561) Ac res of Lan d ,
an t and Fiv e Hu ndr ed Six ty- cou nty ,
more or les s in Ro cki ngh am
- - - - De fen dan ts .
Vi rgi nia - - - - - - - - - - -
STATE OF VIRGINIA
}
( ss.
COUNTY OF VlAR REN
the 27 th day of
I do sol em nly sw ear tha t on
of tne 1ie rei na fte r
, 193 4 , I ma ile d to eac h add
Jan uar y
res s set op po sit e
ice
named per son s, to the po st off
of the ord er of the
the name of eac h , a tru e cop yCo unt y, Vi rgi nia , ent ere d
Ci rcu it co urt of Ro cki ngh amv , 193 4, in the abo ve sty led
on the 26 t h day of Jan uar
pro cee din g .
�N.AME
POST OFFICE ADDRESS
Foltz, Vernon w.
Haney, J . K.
Lam , E. E.
Shipp , Mr s. Maude M.
Begoon , Mrs . Annie R.
Hinkle, J . :r .
Mace , John H.
Ott , E . D.
Miller , Robert T.
Patterson , H. G~
Patterson , H. H.
Patterson , D. H.
Mundy, Mrs . Margaret E.
Kite, Mrs . Sallie
Kite , Luther
Lam , E. C.
Catterton , Elijah
White , George :e .
Kanawha National Bank
Tavenner, F. s ., Jr .
lilliams, Walter A.
Saunders, Walla ce c.
Williams , Walter A. - Attorney
"
Walker , George Eo
State Planters Bank & Trust Co o
Feuchtenb erger , N!rs . Ida Irene
National Bank & Trust Co .
State & City Bank & Trust Co .
Home Loan & Building Asso .
Burnett, Harry
Stanley , va .
Fern Hill, Va .
Swift Run , Va .
Swift Run, va .
Penn Laird , va .
McGaheysv ille, va .
Grottoes, Va .
Harrisonb urg , va .
Grottoes , Va .
Bridgewat er , Va .
Harriston , Va .
Harriston , va .
Elkton , Va .
Elkton , va .
Elkton , va .
swift Run , va .
Charlotte sville , va .
501 - 4 Law Bldg., Richmond , va .
Charlesto n , West va .
Yoodstock , Va .
1101 East Main st ., Richmond ,Va .
330 West Leigh street , Richmond , Va.
Richmond , Va .
Charlotte sville , va .
Richmond , Va .
Charlotte sville , va .
Charlotte sville , Va .
Richmond , va .
Staunton, va.
Clerk of the Circuit court
Staunton , va .
%Rudolph Bumgardne r- Attorney
Staunton , va .
Elkton , Va .
Alexander , John A.
Dean , Wesley A.
Given under my hand this 6th day of Februar ~~-::~J '7
~tv:4~/
STATE OF VIRGINIA ) TO-!IT:
COUNTY OF W.ARREN )
On this the ..2.1b... day of February , 1934 , before me , a
Notary Public in and for said County and state , personally appeared
Emma K. stokes,wh o , being first duly sworn, made oath that she is
the Secretary to s . H. Marsh , superviso r of Parks of the state
Commissio n on Conservat ion and Developme nt of the state of Virginia ,
and that as such Secretary she has charge of the office of said
Corp.mission in the town of Front Royal , Virginia , and of the records
and files of said office; and that the matters and things set forth
in the foregoing statement are true o
Given under my hand this 6th day of
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES ON THE
DAY
•
\9S
�DRESS
N rE
POST OFFIC_t1.;
Burke , .....> . B .
Det" n , rhon~ s L .
•
Her-slev , ...T.
LL::71 , Y rvey
~hifflett , L . r
!:cG heysville , -.rirc;inia
Fern _:ill, Vir _;ini a
s·:1if t ... un , ·nrginia
Elkton , Vir~ini&
Fern 1 ill , virgini
H rrisonbur,.; , Virgini a
STift un , Vircinia
Sryift Run , Virginia
Suif t Rµn , Virgini
swift .un , Virginia
suift Run , 'Tir 0 ini
S'.ift Run , Virgini
S11ift Run , Virginia
Swift Run , Vir-gini
suift un , 7irgini
S~ift .un , Virgini&
$7if t Run , "Tirgini ·
•. • D . 3
Elkton , 7ir ini
_ . D. 3
Vircini
,
Elkton
7ircini'-'
,
El::tor1
Snif t Run , "Tirgini
S~ift Run, Vir~inia
Sui ft Run, Vir ini ·
206 Co.li1pbell ctreet
Harrisonburg , "'rirgini
S".'lif t Run , Vir ~ini
eldor , 7ir 6 inia
suift Hun , Vir_;inia
SYiift Run , 7irginia
S\ift _un , 7irginia
Suift un , "rirginia
s·,rift . un , 'Tirginia
Swift Run , "'lirginiE
sv:ift Run , lirginia
S1ift Run , ~ircinia
H rrison~urg , Tirgini '
Sui t Run , Ti:\~inia
swift Run , Virginia
. Tiift Run , /ir~inia
STiift un , Virginia
Priddys, Virginia
_ ar-ri so nnurc; , Virginia
swift Run , Virsinia
s·.rif't Run, Vir.:;ini
Fern ?ill , Virginia
Elkton , 7ir 0 inia
si.1if t Run , 7irginia
602 1"' . street
ryl nd
Sp rrous Point ,
s1ift Run , hr3inia
~ .~ton , 7ir __;ini
Penn~ ird , !ir 0 ini.
·.:y
nt ,
:r.
Smith ,
v•
.
T.
.w .
• :1 .
• Ieado- · s , L . C.
Hughes , J . E . F .
Baugher , Joseph : .
B ugher , r~rs . Sarah ..., •
Shipp , ·:rs . :Daisy
~~ylor , rs . Jessie J .
Naylor , Ramuel L .
Bau:;hcr , •• D.
B u~h er , G. S •
Hensley , .:rs . Lottie
_ens ley , Teddy R .
Sn pp , 1:. . te . •
Shipp , 1.rs . Ethel C.
Crider , Jetson J .
•
S ~pson , _rs • • :rcry
Gr .... tton , T!l·s • .1.1 ranees R.
Bau her ,
~
Davis, ·rs . Julia ·- ·
lyc.nt , _ . E .
D1:. Vis ' D Vi d s .
D·· vis , IIrs . Gladys
Lawson , J-ro rge S .
Davis, ~ohn ; .
r:aiden , J . Luther
Jilli ms , :i. .wdg r
illi ns , !:rs . Jordelia
illiw·1S, frs. Lizzie E .
,yan t , :erbert : o
La~1son , ~s . Ros'-- ~ o
Coyner, ·..rs . June J .
Shiffl~tt, George : .
Ba.usher , ~ _. s .
Po:rnll , C. D.
Ott , -'-" • D . - _ttorney
LaiTson , :rs . H.. lind
B ugh er , _... J .
Baugher, uideon 1.
Uller , Jernon C. - • ttor-ney
Laws en , __rthur
•
B ugher , ~ .
Collier , ~lorence E.
Shi:flett , ilbert I .
Diehl , C • .J .
.
-(,'..,-
�N.AlIE
POST OFFICE : ..DDRESS
Shiff l e tt , : trs . Ha ney ./;••
Sh i ff l e tt , L. B.
Hensley , Bl anche
Shi ffl e tt , Lrnest
Sh i f'f l e tt , Hrs . Reta
Shifflett , Claude
Shi ff l ett , Ce cil
Shiffl ~tt , Oliver
Shiff l e tt , : ~i ss . . :ar geret
La ughe r , S-e erge ·.r.
~:orri s , .r1ichard
r10rris , ::rs . Lucy
Ott , I:rs . :8.osa L.
Conr· d , Geor ge ~ .
Crawford , R. L.
Shi ff l e tt , Tiose~ L.
Phelps , tr:rs . Ida H .
Yost , J a cob - Trustee
Beldor , 7 ir 5 ini tc. .
.B eldor , Vir gini fa
Beldor , Vir gi ni a
Deldor , Vi rgini u
Bela.o r , Virgi ni a
Beldor , Vi rg i ni a
Belter , Vi rgiL i u
::-, eldor, Virginia
bel dor , Virg i ni ~
S\-:ift ::tun , Virgini r.
El k ton , Virg i ni e
:El k ton , Virgini <!;:.
Har risonbur g , Virginia
H&~ri s onburg , Vi rg ini a
Elk ton , Virgini a
El kt on , Virgini a R. n. - 3
El k t on , Vir gini a.
416 Uebster street
Pa l o _,.lto, Cal i forn i a
St a unton , Virgi nia
Waynesboro , Virg ini a
I s l and Ford , Virginia
Bumgardner , Rudolph - Attorney
Uo s si r , Mrs . Anni e H.
vJyant , Hrs . Mary E .
Trustees of the Fern Hill
United Brethren Churc h
Shi ff l e tt, Ber na r d
Herr;tng , J . R.
Herring , Mrs . Annie
Burke , Robert r.r.
Coleman , W. W.
Coleman , D~ c~ (Mrs . )
Sellers , W. We
Shifflett , Alexander
Shiffle tt , Ambrose w.
Sellers , E . B.
Eiler , H. R.
Eiler , F . D.
Davis , Cl!l.arles
Shifflett , George M.
Shifflett , Fred
Baugher , :Mrs . Elsie B .
Harris , John T.
J ame s , Mrs . Carrie E.
Davis , Mrs . Rebecca s .
Davis , W. H.
Davis , A. C.
Jenkins , Mrs . Pauline
Turner , Mrs . Reba F .
Fu:}.. tz , Mr s . Dorthi na E.
Maiden , ~Ir s . Juli a
Be ar , Mrs . Cora
Dav is , H. J .
Davi s , Vernne
Fern Hi l l , Virgini a
Beldo r , Vi r gini a
Beldor , Virgini a
Beldor , Virgi ni a
McGa heysville , Virgini a
Beldor , Virginia
Beldor , Vi rgi ni a
El k ton , Virgini a
Smithsburg , Virg ini a - R. D• 3
Beldor , Virgini a
I sl and Ford , Virg ini a
Penn Laird , Virginia
Penn La ird , Virginia
Bel dor , Virgi nia
Bel dor , Virginia
s wif t Run , Virginia
Fern Hi l l, Vi rginia
Harrisonburg , Virgini a
Elkton , Virginia - R. n. 2
El k ton , Vir gi ni a - R. n. 2
Elkt on , Virgi ni a - R. n. 2
El k ton , Virgi ni a - R. D. 2
El k to n , Virgini a - R. D. 2
Elkto n , Virgini a - R. D. 2
Elk to n , Virgi ni a - R. D. 2
Elkton , Vi rg ini a - R. n. 2
Elk ton , Vi rgi ni a - R. D. 2
El k to n , Vi rgi ni a - R. D. 2
El kt on , Vi rgini a - R. D. 2
- 3-
�I
~
NP.ME
POST OFFICE ADDRESS
Bank of Elkton , Incorporated
Davis , . . [orris
Davis , Leon
Cover , Hrs . Mary R.
f i lli b.:".'1.S ' ;.,_ . E.
Elkton , Virginia
Elkton , Vire;inia
Elkton , Virginia
Elkton , Virginia
General Delivery
. artinsburg , 1 • Va .
Stanardsville , Virginia
Swift Run , Vir 0 iniu
swift ,un , Virginia
Swi :'t Run , VirL;inia
Swift ";:{un , Virginis.
Elkton , Virginia - R. D.
Elkton , Virgini - R. D. 4
Elkton , Virginia - R. n. 4
-l_ton , Virginia - R. D. 4
Harrisonburg , Virginia
Ellicott City , 1 rylund - R· D. 4
Ellicott City ,u-c.ryland - R. D. 4
Ellicott City , ~ aryland - R. D. 4
Elkton , Virginia - R. D.
Elkton , Virgini
Elkton , Virginia
Elkton , Virgini .
Lynmrnod , Virginia
suift Run , 7ir inia
suift Run , Vireinia
S'iift Run , Vir 0 inid
Bro duc.-y , Virginie.
Elkton , Vir5ini· - R. D.
S':Iif t r.un , Virgini
i cG_heysville , Virginia
cG heysville , Virginie
Fern ~ill , Virginia
I3eldor , Virgini
The Hone Life rnsur'"'nce co .
7 9 - ..: 1. natl . B nk Bldz .
1i chr1O11d , Virginia
:;.,;lkton , Virginia
Elkton , Virginia
Beldor , Virginia
Nimrod , Virginia
1'·.:imro d , Virginia
:t-:imrod , Virginia
l""iI'lTod , Virginiv.
. .amrod , Virr-;ini::1
ieldor , Vir.sinic.
Penn Lv.i7d , Virginia
Elkton , Vir3inia - R. D. 4
·~aynesboro , Pa .
S7rif t Run , Virc:;ini
Beldor , Virz;inia
Bickers }, otor Company
illia'lls , .... . J .
.~orris , s . G.
Shifflett , Trice
Roach , Scott D.
Shifflett , ...haz
Tii ckle , Geo I\;;e •
Hickle, .!rs . Lul .. .
Hickle , Ernest D.
- ader , Rtilph - ttorne y
hifflett , ~tts . Mamie B .
Sellers , T. Al~red
Sellers, Cl rence H.
LO% , C½.arles
Ybncey , T. L.
Y ncey , 3 . P .
Sipe , J . H.
.[orris , rilliarn
Roach , Ch rles
~~orri s , Sam
S~i-~lett , D~niel
Helbert , J . T.
Lon(;ley , I . D.
Roach , Rooert
Funkhouser , John 1.
Funkhouser , rr s . .,f ~i e ~ •
""orris , ..-:_leigh
Collier , .... shby J .
t'unter '! . Gibbons
Snapp , rrs . :.! ry
Gibbons, !rs . Broma V.
ShiJ. !'le tt , . !rs . Pearl
s·1ifflett, 'trs . U'delia
Shifflett , r-rentiss
S~ifflett , ....:rs . Pevgy Jane
Shifflett , "'':r·s . Reva
Shifflett , ~rrs . Ruby
Davis , D. c .
. .rm.stronc , ;; • c.
Shifflett , George E.
Shi:'flett , ,,iLYJ1.er C.
Herrir.g , rs . Ellie
Shifflett, Je.es l .
- 4-
Z..1/J
�DRESS
N IB
POST OFFICE
Moore , ars . Ui nnie E .
Shiff lett , Irvin s .
Shiff lett , Hayn~ rd M.
Rossen , .!rs . wnie
Rossen , Ciddie
ossen , Enoch
Rosser : , i!iss Etta
Rossen , fi ss Dora
Rossen , i~s Lydia
Rossen , Leste r
Rossen , Hiss ~~amie
Rossen , Chest er
Dutro" ! , J . Paul
Du trow , D . .a. •
Coffm n , :Hrs . idna Du tro:r
Dutrovr , L. J .
Dutro·'! , :.rrs . Paulin e Kent
Brook s , !rs . 1 argar et Dutrow
Palme r , c. !I.
Shl':',ver , !.iarvi n S .
Shave r , Charle s lilliam
Cup~') , J . R.
Gibson , Jc es J .
Gibson , rrs . Franc es
Bc..ile~r , R. L.
Baile y , C. .. ~.
New York Life Insur& nce Co .
Burro 'l , _4. J .
i cG-...heysvi lle , Virgi nia
··.hi tesc~ rver , Furm n B.
Horne , _Irs . ~eulch F .
Finke , Jesse
Finl<:e , S-ilhe rt
Finke , st nley
Glaseo w , L. B.
Egger , :!Irs . ::_->ertha L.
Lanca ster , R. V.
Dm1ns , ,r. J .
Li ttell , J . Frank
Crawf ord , T. ·,alte r
Scott , : • L.
LaBe.une , ~:rs . _/!rs . Lydia H.
Hughes , F . n .
Hug 1es , :rs . Lenor a •
Eutsle !', J . 1:.
Stive r , ~ Ir s • :.-, J e 1 P •
1
Sm:::.rt , John
_
....;;;;...c:..;._....;c::;;_;;_.c....;:.;;....:.;::;.___ _ _ _ _ _ _
Elkton , Virgi nia
Elkton , Virgi nia - R. D· 4
Elkton , Virgin i, - R. D. 4
Elkton , Virginie...
Elkton , Virgi nia
Elkton , Virgi nia
Elkton , Vir::;i ni
Elkton , Yirgin i~
EU:ton , Virgi nia
Elkton , Virgin i~
Elkton , Virgi nia
Harris onbur 0 , Virgi nia
Harris onbur g , Virgin i a
Harris onbur g , Virgin ia
Front oyfl , Virgin i~ - Box 111
Harris onbur g, Virgi nia
Harris onbur c , Virgin it
S:!)rin gfield , T. Va .
Bucha nnon , Virgin i&
Buchu nnon , Virgin i&
Dayton , Vir.:::;ini
Elkton , Virgi nia - R. D.
Elkton , Virgin i& - R. n.
McGc he rsvill e , Virgi nia
~"cG~ hey sville , Virgin ie
Few York City
%F . P . :hites carve r , =tty . - Box 468
Salem , Virgi nia
Sale~ , Vir~i nia - Box 468
sale"'l , Vir :;inia
Salem , Vir\~i nia
Salem , Vir 6 inia
Sale,1 , Vir 6 inia
Salem , Virgin ie
Port Repub lic , Virgi nia
Engla nd,Str eet
• shland , Virbi nia
Port Re:rub lic , Virgi nia
Grotto es , Vir inia
Grotto es , Virgi nia
Grotto es , Virgi nia
2555 - 5th ~venue
San Diego , Califo rnia
Grafto n·, ' . va .
Graf ton , · • Va .
Grotto es , Vir·ci nia
%J . ir~.nk Litte ll
Grotto es , Virgi nia
ELrnir, , reu York
1
0
-5-
z,o\
�NAME
POST OFFICE ADDRES
Harrisonburg , Va.
Harrisonburg Mutual Tele. Co .
Island Ford , Va .
Wyant , E. T.
!\.lexandria, Va .
Virginia Puhlic Service Corp .
Elkton, Va .
Kite, Mrs . Sallie ~.
Elkton, Va .
Breeden, Mrs . Nora
Elkton, Va .
Eppard, J. '\. .
Elkton, Va .
Beasley, T . N.
Elkton, Va.
Dean, E . \v .
Elkton, Va .
Eppard, J . B.
Elkton, Va.
Hensley, Marvin G.
Elkton, Va .
Bruce, L . H.G ornmi ttee
Elkton, Va .
Hensley, Albert L.
Elkton, Va .
Nizer, R. o.
Elkton, Va .
.
T
.
J
Heard,
Elkton, Va .
Harnsberger, C. G.-President
Bank of Elkton, Inc .
Harrisonburg, Va .
H~rnsberger, President,
Rockingham Natl . Bank,
Elkton, Va.
Hensley , Henry A.
Harrisonburg, Va .
Harnsberger, Chas . G. &
Jarman Heirs, M. M. -Elkton, Va.
Lam, L. B.
Stanley, Va .
Foltz, Vernon v.
Va .
Elkton,
Dean, ,-1 • B • -Jr.
Va .
Elkton,
Dean, R. O.
Va,
Broadway,
Hensley, L. w.
Va . Route #3
Harrisonburg,
Strickler , Luther J .
Va . Route #3
Harrisonburg,
Hensley, John "I. .
Va.
Harrisonburg,
Harnsberger, George L. Guardian#3
Route
.
Va
Elkton,
Dean, George M.
Elkton, Va .
Epp9.rd, M. K.
Swift Run, Va.
Dean, J . Millard
Swift Run, Va .
Naylor , Mrs . Cassie M.
Elkton, Va . Route #3
Naylor, H. s .
Ruckersville, Va .
Via, Mrs . Mary F .
Elkton, Va .
BaughBr, Mrs . Annie L.
Elkton, Va .
Harnsberger, J . O.
Providence Forg e, Va .
Upp , Mrs . Sarah L .
Fern Hill, Va .
Haney, J . K.
Elkton, Va . Route #3
E.
Rebecca
Miss
Hensley,
Elkton, Va . Route #3
Hensley, Miss Kittie F .
Swift Run, Va .
Lam, E. E.
Swift Run, Va .
Lam, E. C.
Swift Run, Va.
Shipp, Mrs . Maude M.
Swift Run, Va.
Hughes, J . E. F .
Run, Va.
Swift
Crider , Jetson J .
Va .
Elkton,
Hensley, Marvin w.
. Route #3 .
Va
Elkton,
Hensley, Sigourney A.-Mrs o
- 7-
�-NAME
- ------------------POST
Bader, Ralph H.-Attorney-at-Law
Warren, Miss Williette •
%Mr . Ward Swank,Attorney
Comer, Mrs . Julia L .
Comer, J . ] •
Lawson, Mrs . Lula B.
Collier, Daniel
Baugher , ~iJ . E.
Herring, Edward
Powell , Mrs . Bettie B.
Long, M. H.
Williams, R . J .
Shifflett , Carlo .
Shifflett , George Frank
Crawford, Rawleigh, E
Shifflett, Mrs . Emma J .
Crawford, Mrs . Cla rinda
Yancey, A. s .
Yancey, S. M.
Yancey, T . L .
Yanc ey, F • W•.
Estes , Mrs . s . D.
Ma uz ey, Mrs • \v • L •
Canter, Mrs . Mary V.
Yancey, Mrs . Lois R.
Boice, Mrs . Charlotte T .
Yancey, Kemper 1fJ .
Yancey, \ • B.
Yancey, Robert G.
Yancey, Mrs . Mary •
Moubray, A. L.
Mowbray, James,
Mowbray, A. c.- Agent
Wyant , Frederick J .
Wyant , George H~
Morris, Ashby
Crawford, J . S .
Berry, Mrs . Mattie K.
Lam, George W.
Lam, J . William ~.
Harrison, M. H.
Harrison, E . W.
Harrison, M. H.-Agent
Weaver , James M. % R. M. Weaver ,
Carrickhoff , J . E.
Sellers , O. D.
Hensley, Mrs . Bertha E.
Begoon, Mrs . Annie R.
Hinkle , rr:. W.
Nicewarner , Mrs . Thomas
- 8-
OFFICE ADDRESS
Harrisonburg, Va .
Harrisonburg, Va .
Swift Run, Va .
Swift Run, Va .
Swift Run, Va .
Charlottesville, Va . Route #1
Elkton, Va.
Elkton, Va .
Swift Run, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Brandywine, Md .
Elkton, Va . Route #4
El kton, Va . Route #4
#309 s . Patrick St . ~lexandria , Va .
Elkton, Va .
Charlottesvil le, Va .
Gainesville, Florida
Elkton, Va .
McGaheysville, Va .
Ba rboursville , Va .
McGaheysville, Va .
Harrisonburg, Va .
Harrisonburg, Va .
Harrisonburg, Va .
Harrisonburg, Va .
Harrisonburg, Va .
Raleigh, N. C.
Harrisonburg, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Island Ford, Va .
Island Ford, Va .
Island Ford, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Reynolds Bldg .,Winston Salem, N. C.
Elkton, Va .
Island Ford, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Penn Laird, Va .
McGaheysville, Va .
Front Royal, Va .
�POST OFFICE ADDRESS
--------- ----- Elizabeth B.
Port Republic , Va .
:NAME
Edwards , Miss
Morris , Mrs . Sallie B.
Morris , Miss Myrtle G.
Morris , w. F .
Morris , Jake
Raines, Mrs . Cordelia c.
Morris , Miss Nora E.
Sipe , Edgar - Attorney
Morris, George E.
Hensley, J. A.
Hensley, Mrs . Icyphine P.
Mundy, Mrs . Margaret E.
Lynnwood , Va .
Lynnwood, Va .
Lynnwood, Va .
Lynnwood , Va .
Lynnwood, Va .
Lynnwood, Va .
Palmyra, Va .
Port Republic, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Elkton, Va .
Given under my hand this 6th
ST.. TE OF VIRGINI
)
COUNTY OF V/.ARREN
)
(
day of
February
, 1934 .
TO - WIT :
On this the 6th day of February , 1934 , before me a
Notary Public in and---r5r said County and State ,-persona lly appeared
E!!L~a K. Stokes who , being first duly sworn, made oath that she i s
the Sec~etary to s . H. Marsh , Superviso r of Parks of the state
Commissio n on Conservat ion and Developme nt of the state of Virginia ,
and that as such Secretary she has charge of the office of said
Commissio n in the town of Front Royal , Virginia , and of the records
and files of said office; and that the matters and things set forth
in the foregoing statement are trueo
Given under my hand this .....§1h_ day of _ _F_e_b_r=u=a=r~y__ , 1934 .
MY Cm.tIT SSI ON EXPIRES ON THE
- 10-
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Mar. 28, 1930 - Nov. 20, 1931
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
certificate-of-ore-assay.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Certificate of Ore Assay
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne
-
https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/files/original/5703244c811160e839b05adc8295cd96.pdf
1160e9fd818b343d554ec39092599e7f
PDF Text
Text
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY, VIRGINIA.
Th'E STATE COMMISSION ON CONSERVATION AND
DEVELOPMENT OF THE STA TE OF V IBGINIA
v.
)
)
No. 1829 at Law
)
CASSANDRA LAWSON ATKINS, ET ALS.
I certify that on September 23, 1932, I mailed in
the postoffice at Harrisonburg,Virginia, one copy of the
Daily News-Record of August 4, 1932, containing a publication
of the notice in this case, as required by the order en tared
in this case on August 2, 1932, to all claimants and respondents
who have filed claims or answers with the record in the Clerk's
Office, to their respective post office addresses set forth in
said claims or answer, or, to such other post offiice addresses
as may have been subsequently furnished as provided in Section
7 of the Public Park condemnation Act; and a list of such perxons
is attached hereto.
Given under my hand this
23d day of September, 1932.
215
�•
•
..._,/•
•
'-.-/
NAME AF LANDOWNER
ADDRESS
Arrns_trong, J. C.
Penn Laird , Va •
Alexander, Jahn A.
c/o Rudolph Bumgardner, Esq.
Agent and Attorney
Staunton, Va.
Bank of Elkton, Inc., The
Elkton, Va.
Ba.ugh er, W. E.
Elk ton, Va.
Baugher, Jos.
Ba ugh er,
swift Run, Va.
s.
Do
w. H.
w. n.
Do
Baugher, G.
Baugher,
w.
Do
Baugher, Annie Laura
Elkton, Va., R.#1
Bickers Motor company
Stanardsville, va.
Burke, Barbara B.
McGaheysville, va.
Baugher, Geo. W.
swift Run, va.
Baugher, M. S.
Do
J.
Do
Ba ~her,
A•
Baugher, Gideon
w.
Ba ugh er, Elsie B.
Baugh er,
:r.
F.
Do
Fern Hill, Va.
602 F.
st.
Sparrows point, Md.
Breeden, Nora
Elkton, Va., R.#3
Berry, Mattie K.
Island Ford, Va.
Burke, R. M.
McQ-aheysville, va.
Buckner, Washington
Grottoes, va., R.F.D.
'I'
"' Bailey, R. L·. and c. A.
Boice, Charlotte Yancey
McGaheysville, Va.
Harrisonburg,. Va.
caricofe, J.E.
Elkton, Va., R.#4
Conrad, Geo. N.
HaITisonburg, Va.
Comer, J. M.
swift Run, Va.
comer, Julia L.
Do
Collier, Daniel
Charlottesville, Va., R.#1
crawf ord, Ra 1 e igh
Elkton, Va., R.. #4-
�•
•
--2--
curie, Charles
165 Broadway
New York, N. Y.
Cook, Nellie F.
Elkton, Va., R.#3
Cook, W.R.
Do
Crawford, T. Walter
Grottoes, va.
Crawford, J'. s ..
Elkton, Va.
Crider, J'etson J'.
Swift Run, va.
Cupp, J'. H.
Dayton, Va.
Comer, J'une J'.
canter, Mary v.
Swift Run, Va.
Harr ioonburg, va.
Dean, W. F., Jr.
Elkton, Va., R.#3
Dean, Daniel T.
Do
Dean,
s.
Do
Do
A.
Do
nean, J. B.
Do
nean, J'. Miller
Swift Run,
Dean, Annie E.
Elkton, Ba., R.#3
!)ean, E. A.
Do
Downs,
w.
•
Do
va.
Do
port Re p.i bli c, Va.
J'.
Davis, ;Tulia A.
&wift Run, Va.
Dugans, George
Elkton, Va., R .#4.
Dutrow, L.B.
Box 111, Front Royal, Va.
Dutrow, Pauline K.
Harr i s on burg, va •
Davis, n.
c.
Baldor, va.
c.
D.
Penn Laird, va.
Diehl,
Davis, David
s.
swift Run, Va.
navis, G. Thomas
swift Run, va.
Eppard, J' .' A.
Elkton, Va.
Estes, Mrs. B. D.
Barboursville, va.
Eppard, M. L.
Elkton, va., R.#3
Eaton, Samuel G.
Elkton, Va.
Edwards, Elizabeth B.
Port Republic, Va.
Edwards, Mary Elizabeth
Poland, Mahoning Co., Ohio
�--3--
Port Republic, va.
Egger, Bertha L.
n.
Eiler, R.R. & F.
Penn Laird, va.
Funkhouser, J'ohn M. & Effie M.
Foltz, vernon
w.
McGaheysville, va.
Stanley, va., R.F.D.
Gibbons, Mrs. Emma
v.
Elkton, Va.
Gibson, James J.
Elkton, Va., R.F.D.
Grandle, Katie M.
Keezeltown, Va., R.F.D.
Gaynor, N.rs. Chas. L.
Elkton, Va ...
Grattan, Frances R.
Harrison burg, Va.
Hensley, Thomas B.
Swift Run, Va.
Hensley,
w.
Hensley, L.
Marvin
Elk ton, Va.
w.
Broadway, Va., R.F.D.#1
Rarri son burg, Va., R . #3
liens ley, J"ohn A.
Harnsberger, J.
Elk ton, va.
o.
Hensley, Teddie R.
Elkton , Va., R.#3
Hensley, Bertha E .
Do
Heard, J. T.
Elkton , Va.
Harnsberger, Geo. S.
Harrisonburg, va.
Harnsberger, Chas. G.
Do
Haney, J. K.
Swift Run, Va.
Hensley, Mrs. Nicholas
w.
Do
Do
Elkton, Va.
Hensley, Sol J.
R.#3
Hensley, Rebecca E . & Kittie F. Do
Do
Hensley, Sigourney A.
Do
Hensley, Kittie F.
Elkton, va., R.#3
Herring, J • R.
Beldor, Va.
Herring, Edward
Elkton, va.
Hughes, F. H. & Lenora A.
Grafton,
Hickle, Geo. W.
ly
w.
va.
~lkton , va., R.#4
�l
--3--
v.
Hudlow, Nora
Port Re pub·lic, Va.
Hughes, J. E. F.
swift Run, Va ..
Hedrick, Annie E.
Island Ford,. Va.
Hinkle, J.
Harper,
••
Broadway,
T.
Helbert, J.
va.
McGaheysville, Va.
w.
c.
va .
Port Republic,
Elkton, Va • , R .#4
Harrison, M. H.
Hopkins, Mrs. Edwin B.
Blue Ridge Sanatorium
chatlottesville, va.
Jarman Heirs, M. M.
c/o vernon c. Miller
Elk ton, Va.
aof~~-CibrKeeze1, chas. M.
Kemper, A. S.
Penn Laird, Va.
Lynwood, va.
King, J. W.
Elkton , Va., R.#4
tam, E. E.
Swift Run , Va.
Lawson, Lula B.
no
Lough, Garland
s.
Elkton, Va., R.#3
tam, B. H.
tam, J.
w.
Elkton, Va.
Island Ford, Va.
A.
va.
Lam, Geo. W.
Island Ford,
LaBaume, Lydia H.
2555 Fifth Ave .
San Diego, Cal.
Lawson, George
s.
.:>wift Run , Va.
Long, M. H.
Elkton, Va.
Littell, J. Frank
Grottoes, Va.
Lewin, J.
H.
Mc Gaheysville , va.
s.
H.
Lynwood,
Lewis,
Lancaster, R.
v.
va.
England st.
Ashland, va.
I
�II
•
I
'-./
11
--4--
Miller, Robert T.
Grottoes, Va.
Morris, Ashby
Elkton, Va., R.#4, Box 84
Miller, W. B. & W.
1,
II
Staunton, Va.
Morris, Jacob
Lynwood, va.
Marshall, Mary J.
c. H. Marshall, Jr., Agent
Elkton, Ya., R.F.D.#4
McDonaldson, George
Elkton, Va., R.#4
Miller, Victor
I!
s.
w.
Port Republic, Va.
Moore, Mrs. Minnie E.
McGaheysville, Va.
Mo~r is, Richard
Lynwood, va.
Morr is , Myrtle G.
Lynwood, Va.
Morris, Nora E.
Do
Morr is , Jake
Lynwood, Va.
Meadows, Lloyd Gruver
c/o L. H. Bruce,committee
Elkton, Va.
Morris, George E.
Port Re J:Ublic, Va.
McDonaldson, Thomas M.
Grottoes, Va., R.F.D.
Maiden, J. Luther
Swif't Run, Va.
Morris, Richard & Lucie
Elkton, Ya.
1,
II
I
McDaniel,
z.
?
Swift Run, Va.
N.
Meadows, L.
w.
Elkton, Va., R.#3
Meadows, L.
c.
sw if't Run, Va.
Meadows, Cleadus A.
Elkton, va., R.#3
Meadows, J"ohn W.
Elkton, Va., R.#3
Mace, T. Ashby
Grottoes, va., R.#1, Bax 34
Mace, aeo.
w.
Grottoes, va., R.#1
Mace, J. J.
Port Republic, Va.
Mace, John H.
Grottoes, va.
·"}lauzy; ,~Mrs •
Naylor, Mrs.
w.
c.
I..
M.
Nicewarner, Mrs. Bertha M.
- llcGaheysviJ.-l a·,; .-Va.
Elkton, Va., R.#3
V:lr ginia Ave •
Front Royal, Va.
�...
-
•
I
--5-Naylor, Jessie J. (Mrs.)
swift Run, Va.
Naylor , Reirs, J.T. & Elizabeth
c/o H. s. Naylor
Elk ton, va., R.#3
Nicholas, Carrie T'.
Port Re pJ:bl ic, Va.
Nicholas, F. L.
Port Republic, Va.
Nizer, R.
o.
Elkton, Va., R.#3
Ott, E. D.
Harrisonburg, va.
Ott, Rosa L.
Do
Palm.er,
c.
Springfield, W. Va.
H.
Patterson, H. G.
Bridgewater, va.
patterson, H.· H.
Harriston, va.
patterson,
n.
H.
Do
phelpa, Ida H.
Elkton, Va.
powell, Bettie E.
Beldor, Va.
Powell, C. D.
Priddys, va.
Raynes, Cordelia
Lynwood, va.
Raynes, Arthur
c.
Grottoes, va., R.F.D.
Rea ch, Chas., Mrs.
Elk tan, Va., R.#4.
Roa.Ch, Charles
Swift Rbn, Va.
w.
Swift Run, Va.
Roa.ch, J'ohn
va.
Roe.dc~p, John
Grottoes,
Rockingham Memorial Hospital
Harrison burg,
Rosson, Mrs. Annie
Elkton,
Rockingham county school Board
c/o John c. Myers
Ha.rr:isonburg, Va.
Do
Ro ckin gham National Bank
Shifflett, Emma J.
Shifflett, earl
o.
va.
va., R.#4
309 South Patrick St.
Alexandria, Va.
Brandywine, Md.
Shifflett, Bernard
Beldor, Va.
Se lie rs, Clarence H.
R.#4, Ellicott City, Md.
2.41
�-
..
· 0
--6--
Shifflett, Irene
Elkton, Va., R.#4.
sellers, Mrs. Millie Ann
R.#4,
Striakle r, Luther J.
Harrioonburg, Va., R.#3
sellers, T. Alfred
R.#4,
Shifflett,
c. M.
Shifflett, Mrs.
Ellicott C i t y , - ~ ·
Ellicott City, Md.
Elkton, Va., R.#4
w.
A.
Elkton, Va.,
R.#4
Sampson, Mary E.
swift Run, Va.
Shifflett, George Frank
Elkton, Va., R.#4, Box 89
Showalter, F. P.
Grottoes, va., p.O.Box
Shuler,
J.E.
port Re~ublic,
Shipp, Daisy
Swift Run, Va.
Shipp, Ethe 1 C.
Swi:ft Run, Va.
Shifflett, G.
w.
swift Run,
va~, R.#1
Va.
Shipp, Maude M.
Swift Run, Va.
Snapp, Kate W.
Elkton, Va.
Smith, Q,. E.
Swift Run, Va.
Shuler, C. H.
Port Republic, Va.
Shifflett, Pearl
Beldor, Va.
Shif'flett, Mayward M.& Irvin F. Elkton,
va.,
R.#4
Do
Shifflett, W. A.
Do
spifflett, Hosea L.
Elk ton, Va., H.F.D.
~//!,~.
If
I/
Beldor,
Shifflett, c;eo. M.
Beldor, Va.
w.
II
va.
Shifflett, Nancie A.
Shifflett, James
/f
II
Do
Shifflett, Daniel
dwift Run, Va.
Shifflett, Mrs. Mamie B.
Ellicott City, Md.,
Shifflett, ,4has.
~lkton, va., R.F.D.
Shifflett, John
w.
#5
Port Republic, Va.
Shifflett, Oscars.
Gro ttoe s , Va •
Shi ffle,tt, Wilbert p.
Elk ton, Va.
Shiff'lett, A. W.
Beldor, Va.
R.#4.
�•
--7-Smithsburg, Md., R.#3
Shifflett, Alexander
s.
Shifflett, Wilmer C.
Church
st.
Waynesboro, Pa.
Shifflett, George E.
Elkton, va., R.#4
Sipe, Edgar
Palmyra ' Pa.
Sipe, Luther L.
Port Republic, Va.
Shaver Heirs,
Sellers,
Sellers,
o.
w.
w.
Marvin s. Shaver, Agent
Buchanan, va.
A.
D.
Is land Ford, va.
W.
Elkton, Va.
Selle rs, E. B. & W. W.
EB, Is land Ford
WW, Elkton,
va.
Selle rs , E. B.
Island Ford, va.
Smart, Catherine E.& John
Elmira, N. Y.
Smart, Wm. B. & Ida
scott,
w.
c.
Arnot, Pa.
Grottoes, Va.
L.
united Brethren Church Trustees
of swift Run
c/a
J.E.F.Hughes,.. Trustee
swift Run, va.
Upp, Sarah L.
Providence Forge, va.
Via, Mary F.
Ruckersv ill e,
Via, Robert V.
Grottoes, Va.
Whit~ield, Karl R.
Elkton, Va., Box #2
Wyant, A. E.
Beldor, va.
Williams, R. F.
Elkton, va.
Wagner, N. L ., Agent for
W. F. , R. M. & L. L. wag ne r
port Republic, Va.
Williamson,
s.
R.
Grottoes,
va •
va.
Williamson, William H.
Lynwood, va.
Weaver, Russe 11 M.
Reynolds Bldg.
Winston-Salem, N.
Weaver, Fannie hl.
c/o R.M.weaver
Reynolds Bldg., Winston-salem,N.C.
c.
�.
.
..__,,
"
•
•
..__,,,
--8--
Weaver, James M.
c/o R.M.Weaver
Reynolds Bldg.,Winston-Salem,N.C.
Williams, A. J.
Swift Run, Va.
Williams, James
Keezeltown, va.
Wyant , E. T.
Island Ford , Va.
Williams, A.
Mart ins burg, 'ff. va., ( Gen.De 1.)
:F).
Wyant , George H.
Elkton , va.
Wyant, Mary E.
Island Ford ,. Va .
Wya:n t, -Frederick J.
Elkton, Va., R. #4
Yancey, B. P.
Elkton , Va.
Yancey, B. P.
Elkton , va.
Yancey, A.
s.
Charlottesville, Va.
.t!.olk ton, va.
Yancey, T. L.
Yancey,
s. M.
Yancey,
w.
Gainesville, Fla.
c/o Mrs. Mary A.Yancey
Main st., Harrisonburg, Va.
B.
s.
Yancey, Robert G.
c/o Mrs. Mary A. Yancey
s. Main st., Ha rrisonburg, Va.
Yancey, Lois R.
Harri son burg, va.
Yancey, Mary A.
Do
Yancey, F. W.
McGaheysville , Va.
Yancey, Kem:rer
w.
Yost, Tr., Jacob
Elkton, va.
416 Webster st.
Pa.lo Alto , Cal.
�.
NAME
Bader, A.
.
.
_,
-
ADDRESS
s.
McGaheys ville, Va.
Bader, Ralph H.
Harrisonb urg, va.
Cover, Mary R.
Elkton, Va.
Davis, Rebecca
s.
Elkton, va ., R.#2
Davis, Cora B.
Do
Do
Davis, Willie
Do
Do
Davis, Clarence
Do
Do
Davis, Howard
Do
Do
Davis, Vernon
Do
Do
Feuchtenb erger Estate, E.
Foltz, Dorothy
w. (
The Nat'l Bank & Trust Co.
of Charlot,te sville, rep:resent ati ve
c/o Geo. E. Walker, Atty.
Charlotte sville, Va.
and
Ada Irene Feuchtenb erger, rep.
c/o Geo. E. Walker, Atty.
Charlotte wville, va.
Elkton, Va., R.#2
Harnsberg er, Ge9. s., G.. A.L.
Harrisonb urg, va.
for Randolph Shifflett
Colson Eppard
Otis Eppard
Ruby Eppard
oecil Shiff'lett
011 ver Shifflett
ltillie May Shifflett
Margaret Shifflett
Etta Rosson
Dora Rosson
Ciddie Rosson
Lester Rosson
Mamie Rosson
Chester Rosson
Charles William Shaver
Four infant children of
Ben P. Hensley, dec'd whose
names are uhknown
William McDonaldson
Anna UcDonalds on
Ruby McDonaldson
Wm. M. Tanhesley
Clarence Sellers
Irene Shifflett
Gordon Wood
Enoch Wood
t'V
�...
-
.,
--2--
Dora 'Nood
Mamie wood
Andrew wood
all. infants, and
Lloyd Gruver Meadows
Ashby Mace
insane persons
AND for
Ardelia Shifflett
Prentiss Shifflett
Peggy Jane Shifflett
Reva Shifflett
RUby Shifflett,
infant children of
Generals. Shifflett
Ro bert. C • Lough
Mary- E. Lough
infant children of Garland
s. Lough
Betty Canada, infant
Wilson Knighting
Jessie Knighting
Pearl Knighting
Hazel Knighting
infant children of J"ohn
Knighting
Floyd wood
Lee wood
Lauralene wood
Irene ,oad
infant children of
William V. Wood
Maurie e nav is
Leon Davis
infa.n t children of
H. c. navis
Enoeh Rosson
Lydia Rosson
infant children of George
Rosson
Grace crawr-ord, infant
Richard Hensley, infant
Granville G. Dean, infant
Bernice Shifflett
Nina Shifflett
Georgie Shifflett
Laura Shifflett
Thomas Shifflett
Clarence Shifflett
Lena Shifflett
J"ames, Carrie E.
Elkton, Va., R.#2
Jenkins, Fauline
Do
Kanawha Nat'l Bank of Charleston, w. va.
Jr.
c/o F. s. Tavenner,(Attorney & Agt.
fiocxlstock, va.
Maiden, J"ulia
Elkton, Va., R.#2
Do
2.4(,,
�... ,..
--3--
Martz, Edw. c., Sp'l Com•r in
Chancery cause of Sarah c.
Lam's crs. v. Same, Heirs
Harrisonburg, Va.
New York Life Insurance co. of c/o Rudolph Bumgardner, Atty .
New Yortc
Staunton, Va.
Saunders, Wallace
c.
Le igh St •
Richmond, Va.
330 W.
State-Planters Bank & Trust
Comi:any of Richmond, Va.
c/o Walter A. Williams , Jr.,Atty.
1101 E. Main st.
Ri chmwnd, Va.
Tavenner, F. s., Jr., Sp'l Com. Woodstock , Va.
in Chancery causes vs.
John A. Alexander, et al.
Turner, Reba
Elkton , va., R.#2, va.
Warren, Williette
s.
Williams , Walter A., Jr.
Special Com •r in Chancery
causes v. John A. Alexander, et al.
s. Main st., Harrisonburg, Va.
1101 E. Main st.
Richmond, Va.
White, Geo. B., Sp'l Com'r
in Chancery causes v.
John. A.. Alexander, et al.
501 Law Bldg.
Richmond, va.
Walker , George E., Sp. Com•r
in chancery causes v.
J.ohn A.Alexander,, et al.
Charlottesville, va.
Wyant , Herbert
w.,
Atty.
Harrisonburg, va.
,f
�-
. .
.
~
NAME
ADDRESS
Breeden, Elb-ert
Elkton, va.
Breeden, H. H.F.
Do
Breeden, Doctor
Elkton ,
Breeden, Mary E.
Do
Do
Do
Do
Breeden, Amanda
c.
va.'
R. #3
Begoon, Annie R.
c/o Chas. J. Begoon
Penn Laird, va.
Burrows, A. J.
c/o Furman B. Whitescarver , Atty .
Salem, Virginia
Crawford, Clarinda
Elk ton, Va..
Dean, R. 0.
Elkton , va .
Dean, Dyche
Do
w.
Do
nean, E.
Dean, sarah A .
Do
Dean , George M.
Do
Davis, Charles
Beldor, va.
Dean, Mary (Mrs. Sidney T.)
Ru.eke
Dean, Thomas
Fern Hill, va.
Edwards, James R.
<?---t- ~ ~ .
Eppard, J. B-.
Elkton , Va.
Eppard, M . K.
Elkton , Va.
Fink's Heirs, . J". A.
Horn, Beulah F.
Finke, Jessie
Finke, Gilbert
Finke, Stanley
Salem, va.
c/o F. B. Whites6a.rver, Atty .
Gooden, John
Elk ton, Va..
Hensley, J. A.
Elkton, Va.
Hensley, T. N.
Do
Hensley, Marvin G.
Do
R.#3
rsville, va.
�--2-Hensley, Henxy A.
Elk ton, Va.
Hensley, E • .Emmett
Do
Hensley, Albert L.
Elkton, Va.
Hat n~ber~er,
e. e.
R.#3
Happ i o onb '1:1:Pg , V:a •
Hensley, Thos. B.
Elkton, Va., R.#3
Kite, Sallie A.
Elkton,
Knighting t Lizzie
Fern: Hill ,
Lam's Heirs, Wm . H.
Sarah E . Hensley
B. H. Lam
Harvey Lam
Fannie M. nee.n
c/o
Elk ton , Va • , R • F • D •
Lam, E. C.
#4 Logan creek
Wash ington, D.
Lam, L.B.
Elkton, Va.
Morris, .Jake
Lynwood,
Morris, Sallie B.
Do
Morris , Mrs . Annie
Waynesbor o ,
Jlatr:rri s,,
sam
va.
va •'
R. F . D.
Do
Do
Do
c.
va.
va.
swif't Run, V-a.
va.,
Mowbray, A. 1. & .James
Elkton ,
Mundy, Margaret E.
Elkton, Va .
McDe.hiel , C. S.
Swift Run , Va .
Patterson , H. G.
Bridgewat er ,
Roodcap's Heirs, Robert
c/o C. K. Rea dcap
Grottoes, Vs.
Shif'f lett , L. N.
Fern Hill, Va.
Shifflett , L. M.
Fern Hill, Va.
R. #4 , Box 92
va .
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Rockingham County SNP Records: Miscellaneous Documents
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Series II consists of 1,198 "miscellaneous records" related to the condemnation of land in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the court case. The types of records one will find hear vast, but you can expect to encounter </span>correspondences, newspaper clippings, and legal documents that do not necessarily belong to any individual condemnation case but provides additional context.<br /><br />For more information on the Rockingham County Shenandoah National Park collection, visit the "<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/findingaids">Finding Aids</a>" tab in the menu above.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Shenandoah National Park (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--History
Rockingham County (Va.)--Genealogy
Skyline Drive (Va.)--History
Condemnation of land
Mountain people --Blue Ridge Mountains-- Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1930-1939
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Snp002
Relation
A related resource
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/2">Rockingham County SNP Records: Deed Books</a><br /><a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/collections/show/1">Rockingham County SNP Records: Court Proceedings</a><br /><a href="http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/record=b2286919">Shenandoah National Park Oral History Collection</a>
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
<a href="https://omeka.lib.jmu.edu/erp/items/show/4526"> Shenandoah National Park Records Finding Aid </a>
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
MISC - Jan. 16, 1932 - Dec. 10, 1932
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
certification-of-clerk-for-mailing-list-of-landowners.pdf
Title
A name given to the resource
Certification of Clerk for Mailing List of Landowners
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Rockingham County Circuit Courthouse
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This work has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.(<a href="https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/</a>)
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Pake Davis, Tristan Nelson, Liana Bayne