The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1866-11-10

Tas Hams Ooarus cAss or fBI New
POLICE Coxx1ssroxEss or BiIrrxosE.-
This case stitl possesses some interest fbr
the general reader. We therefore give,
from the Sun, synopsis Of the proceed.
ings on Thursday: ~ 49,
The return on the writs of h1beas corpus
in the case Of the two new police commits.
sioners, Messrs. Valiant and Young, aud
Sheriff Thomson was made by the warden
Of the Jail yesterday morning before Judge
Bartol, Of the Court of Appeals. The
commissioners and sheriff had been arrest
ed on warrants issued by Judge Bond, OF
the Criminal Court, last Saturday, for al
.iesedcriminal proceedings att hsinstanceo OF
parties acting, - 10 veil known, 10. the In.
terest Of tho old commissioners, Messrs.
Hindes and Wood, removed by the Co.
vernon for cause, but refusing to yscate
their ohlce. Il appears BY the proceed
ings of yesterday that two sets of commit.
ments had been made out in the cases re.
spectiyely OF. the commissioners. In add.
ton to those Of Saturday, another, or
amended form Of commitment, was made
in each case on Monday.
The amended commitment chargesthe
with having unlawfuily conspired together.
and with unknown persons, by force and
arms, and with strong hand, to expel, re-
move, and put out Samuel Hindes and
Nicholas L. Wood, police commissioners d
the city Of Baltimore, from the Office
building and property now occupied By
them as such police commissioners. The
return In the sheriff . case recites that he
is held by virtue Of commitments issued
by the Criminal Court changing him with
attempting to incits . rout and riot, and
with conspiring with others to incite arOut
and riot, by calling an unlawful assem-
blage. To these charges counsel had to
plead, and on the part Of the commission
ers, it Is asserted il the papers, that they
were not engaged in any unlawful proceed
ings, and being the regularly appointed
police commissioners, were performing
their duties as such commissioners. On
the partof the sheriff the plea denies that
he was engaged in exciting any rout and
riot, etc., but that he was performing his
duties as sheriff, obeying the orders Of the
police commissioners, regularly appointed.
There was considerable delay in the
preparation Of the pleadings, and the coun-
sci for the old commissioners desired to
stand upon the commitments, but the court
decided that evidence should be offered by
the respondents to prove the sufficiency of
their returns, and numerous witnesses We're
examined by them. The petitioners Of.
fered counter evidence. The testimony on
both sides was concluded, and the case
will be argued to-day by their counsel on
each side, the petitioners to close the ar
gument.
1t will be seen that proposition for a
compromise was made by respondents, on
the basis of the discharge Of the new CON-
missioners on their own recognizance, pro-
vided they proceed only by mandamuS to
assert their title, but their counsel de-
clined it, asserting that their clients had
only been in the rightful exercise of the
duties of their Office. They would, how
ever, advise the pursuit of the remedy by
,nandamns instead of force, as mode of
obtaining possession Of the property apper-
tanning to the police board.