Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1884-02-12
AFTERNOON SESSION.

| AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Board reassembled st / P. N. ant
waited till 2:2G for the complainant to pre-
pare his affidavit of grounds for q continu
ance. The affidavit gave the names of somt
| eight witnesses, usol whom ih3 prosecutor
relied to Prove the allegations SCI firth in hi
complaint, and additional charges agains
Captain Chambers, to the effect that durinl
tbs last campaign he had left the prison tt
work for his political fiends The address,
Of the witnesses were no. given. Mr.. Sulii
van stated that he had seen tie witnesses
named and asked them to testify, but they
| had all declined to do SO, unless requested by
the Board, consequently he wished the B1arC
to continue the Investigation and request thei
attendance.
Mr.. Mcclure objected to the aft iavit OF
| the ground that it was insuffici Mt of its |
and cor tanned new matter that was entirely
irrelevant to the subject-matter Of the com
plant.
MIR. Hinkson claimed that thu parts of the
affidavit referred to were included in the gel
eral allegations of incompetency and neglect
of duty on the part of the Warden, who ir
retaining Captain Chambers III Office, with
the foil knowledge of his offense, had brought
himself within the sccps of those charges.
Mr.. Sullivan, in response to a question by
Mr.. Boggs, said that he had been appraised Of
the shooting Cf the cattle at the time it oc
Cured, he being consulted By Mr.. Grace, the
owner, as his attorney. He was also advised
| in reference to the levying by the Warden Of
the political assessment at the time it oc.
CURED. DR.. Grover had also complained GO
him of the administration of prison Aff airs
while Resident Physician.
Mr.. Boggs said that the failure Of the wit
nesses for the prosecution to appear, simply
| because they had not been directly Notified
| by the Board, indicated rather an excess
of punctiIious courtesy and formslity on
their part, considering the fact that
he 1.-THE ChairInaD) had asked Mr.. Sullivan
to desire their attendance. They had been
Jealous in making charges in the first ic.
stance, and yet declined to testify when the
opportunity 1ss aft, rdei them. He doubted
very much whether they would appear if q
| continuance was granted. It seemed unres-
sonable on their part to expect the Board to
meet and adj urn, and thereby put the State
| to unnecessary expense, IL order that their
| formal caprices might be erati6ed.
Mr. Mcclure said that his client courted q
speedy and thorough investigation, and re-
minded the Board that the complainant had
already been given more thsr twenty days to
prepare his case. He was in greater haste 10
conclude the investigation btcause the charges
against the Warden had b5en scattered broad
cate himself.
Mr.. Sullivan said thst, while he was NOR
ally certain Of the truth Of everything he had
charged yet il he was compelled to proceed
without further time he would utterly fail to
sustain his charges.
Mr., Hinkson argued that it was the duty
of the Board, even if witnesses had been in
fault, to do everything in its power to make
the investigation thorough. Ii the Directors
refused to grant continuance they would
yirtuslly smother the investigation.
Director Van Fleet said that the members
of the Board owed it as a duty to themselves
IS we'll as to the people to make the investi-
cation thorough, and he was satisfied that
thst was the sentiment Of the whole Board.
They were not responsible for the law SIS they
found it, nor for the neglect on the psrt CT
the prosecution to produce its witnesses, and
he thought the imputstisn conveyed, perhaps
unintentionslly, by Mr.. Hinkson was unjust
{ , the Direct r.
Mr.. Hinksoa dissvowed any intention Of
rejecting on the Board.
Mr.. Hendricks laid stress upon the de.
morslizing effect on the prison discipline
caused by such charges against the Warden
being known to the prisoners, and the longer
they remained unsettled tha worse it would
be. He no longer felt secure in walking
through the prison. The lives of both officers
ard prisoners were ENDANGERED, and insurrec-
tion among the convicts had just been sup
pressed.
After further discussion the Board went
iatO executive session. After elaboration,
Mr. Boegs announced the deci len Of the
Board, as follows The Bossd are aaanimous
in their decision, and it is, thst while
we b,,;eve that we have been s5ubbed
by the witnesses, that we have no