Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1885-11-03
CHARGES AGAINST BLAIR.
The Grave Charge Which 1t Is said Gan
BE substantiated.


BE Substnntiated.
4 Specia! to he RegiTn:
PARKeRsBURG, November 2.-YouF col
respondent had an interview with Judg
Cyrus Hall, of Charleston, and the Judg
beng one of the complainants in the pet
ton fled in Richie County Circuit COur
recently, for the disbsrment Of Robert )
Blair, a prominent torney, who is vel
known in the State, and who has alWsy
stood high in the estimation of the public
As might be expected, the affair ereste'
surprise here and where Mr.. B is known
Ths charge was denounced as spite work
and that there wss no foundation tor tn
grave accusations set forth in the pelition
But Judge Hall says emphatically tina
thew have the proof for every charge made
and that Mr.. Blair is not only guilty Q
msJpsactice, bot has committed otfeps'
against the common law, the penalty 20
which is punishment in the penitsl ISri
! of sourse Mr.. Blair is presnuec
TO be innocent until these eharget
are sustained By undoubted proof
but the charges are Of very dsmsgInf
character, and Judge Hall claims that h'
mas the evidence which will convict Bial'
on each charge preferred. The com,
plalusnls are Noah Rexroad, Cyrus Hal
and Jacob Clsmmer, and in their petition
sat forth that Robert S. Blair, al attorney
atlaw, and prsclicing iu the Circuit Court
of Richie county, State of Wec Virginia
as we'll as in the Court Of Appeals and
other courts, has been and is guilty OF NAL
practice at law, in the following cases, to
wit: Hauly l. Brown vs. Noah Rexroad
e, al in chancery suit in the Circuit Court
Of Ritcbie county, ard now pending IN the
Court of Appes!s; while the same was
pendisg in the Circuit Court OF Rltchie
county said Robt. S. Blair was employed
as an attorney to manage same fer plain
tiff az attorney, snG did accept fees for his
services in said suit for the plaintiff. Al
the same time he was pretending 10 ac'
for the said plaintiff, he Has employed oy
the defendant, Rexroad, .sad DID accept
fees from said defendant, Rexroad, to the
amount Of $l6O, so thsse comDlainants
charge that Blair was guilty OF maIprac
tice in the above case.
Sscond-They further complain that
Blair is guilty of like offences IN the follow
ing Gaze heretofore pending in the CIRCUIT
Court Of Richie county, torwlt;
McCabs & Co, of Wheeling, Vs. one Of
the complainants, Jacob Clammer, in this
ro,wit: Blair, as attorney for the hrm
named, obtained judgment against Clam
mer for --sum (about SlOO), but be-
fore an execution wss issued Clsmmer
paid the Judgment to Blair, as attorney for
the plaintiff. Said Blair, the complainsnts
allege, did not pay over the amount 80 col
lected and since then has caused an exc
cu,iou to issue against said Clammer for
Judgment 80 obtained, thereby attempting
to collect the second time, and further say
on il for nation and belief that said Blair
has in an ejectment suit Of Cyrus Hall
(sno,her of the coDplainants) vs.. Moses 5.
Hall, in Circuit Court Of Richie county,
aud now pending in the Sdpreme Court Of
West Virginia, made contract with M.
s. Hall, the defendant, 10 act as his attor
ney in The suit, the terms OF which were,
that he was TO carry on The suit fer the de-
feudant, as attorney, for one-hslt the prop
erty in litigation, and further agreed that
said Blair ahould pay all costR-and e<'
pepses that might accrue in ssid suit
against the defendant, NJ. S. Hall. This,
il seems, is an ofense against common
lay, termed champertz, and is malprac.
ticp, aud further the said Blair is charged
with malpractice in the case of Clement x
Odbert, formerly pending in the
Circuit Court Of Richie coun.
", vs. Barcus Ayers: IN this
to wit: Blair brought suit against the
real estate Of sLid Ayers, and obtained a
decree to cell the same He reported to
court that he had sold the property TO one
Noah Rexroad for the sun Of $50, and
succeeded in having the court coutrm the
sale (strsuge as it may seem) TO Rexrosd,
IS the reported purchaser, when In tact, no
sale had been made of the real estate, the
reported purchaser Rexroad never having
bid on The land in question, said to have
been sold to him by Robt. S Blair, as at
,orne7 snd commissioner. Blair then, 1t
is alleged in petition, turns and sues Rex
road for one half the lard in question and
reported TO have been sold to Rexroad and
v hen carried to the Court OF Appeals Of
this State, was upon frsud, as above
charged remsnded to Judge Stealys court
for rehearing. Five other charges Of q
similar nature an outline of which was
pablished in the REGISTER, complete the
pe,ition, and one or two aiddltional dam
ssiDe charges, not included IN those pre-
sented, will he filed with the court before
the case comes up, which will not be until
the February term, 1886. There are many
interesting aud startling features and in.
ciden,s connected With this STAIR, unfor-
,unate and to be regretted as it is,
that will coGe 10 tie surface
before the eud ID reached. The
oueniuS chapter Of the last noted charge,
the Bayeus Ayers case, the mot high
handed and daring attempt at fraud, set
forth in the whole affair, had its origin
here in PsrSersburg This man Ayers, q
citizen of Richie county, with his wife,
we're in the ei'y on Q shopping expedition
and while passing the jeWelry store Of
Clement & Odberi, the good wife suggested
that her liege lord 60 in and purchare her
come iewelry. They entered the store
and tbe coveted ornaments were duly pur'
chased and presented 10 Mrs Ayers BY her
husband. For come reason it became
necessary for Clement l. Odbert to enter
suit against Ayers for the recovery Of the
amount Of the bill for the jswelry in qae.,
lion. Blair is alleged, prosecuted the
case. The property il ssi4 10 have been
worth $500, bui as set forth in the petition
Blair claims to have sold as related above
1t has been several years since the Incl
dent occurred, out Of which this charge
originated. aud Mrs. Ayers still wesra tbs
iden'ical iewelry presented to her on thA
!