Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1890-07-18
CHARGES AGAINST LIEUT.. GUY.
Omcially Accused by the District Com.
missioners Of Various Serious Offeuses.

CHARGES AGAINST LIEUT.. GUY.
OnlciaIly Accused by the District Com.
missioners of Various Serious Offeuses.
The charges against Lieut. Guy Of the Metro.
politAn police force we're signed by the CON-
missioners today and served upon the leu
tenant They are - follovs:
WASHINGTON, d. c., July II, 1880.
We, the undersigned. board Of Commission
ers of the District Of Columbia, hereby charge
John +. Guy, lieutenant Of the Metropolitan
police force OF the city Of Washsngtou. pistrics
Of Columbia, with:
!. Neglect Of duty in violation Of rules CO, 90
and % Of the Rules and Regulations pages Il,
25 and Is Of the manual, Metropolitan police
foree).
z Neglect Of duty in violation Of rule 81 OF
the rules and regulations page "a Of the
manual Of metropoiitan police forcel-
Receiving money and other valuable con-
alterations contrary 10 the rules and regula-
tons and the laws (pase 10 Of the manual Of
the metropoiitan police force and the statutesl
4. Conduct to the prejudice Of good order
and discipline OF the force.
D. Conduct unbecomins an cf6cer.
sprcIsicATIoSs
1. That John F. Guy did on divers times and
occasions between the LIST day Of January, 1887.
and the LIST day Of January, 1880, and more es-
peciaily between the 10th and 2sth DAYS of
june, 1889. fail to note certain violations OF the
ana to prefer charges ss to the same, b wit:
The violation by one John Hart, member of
said force, while in the precinct OF which the
said Guy had charge, Of she rules
and regulations in that he. the
said John Hart was under the influence of
In IN
day of June, 1889, and the said Guy did fail TO
prefer charges TO the major OF police for his
consideration and action against the said John
Hart for said violations OF said regulations. the
said violations being at that time well known 10
him. the said Guy.
And, further, that the said John +. Guy did,
between the LIST day OF October, 1856, and the
lat day Of March, 1859, fail to note certain vio-
lations Of the rules and regulations by men,
bers OF the force and TO prefer charges against
them, TO wit; The violation by one Robert
b. Smith. member of the said force,
while in the precinct Of which the said Guy
had Sarge. of the rules and regulations in
that he, the said Robert ii. Smith, was at the
said time under the influence Of liquor while
on duty and while wearing his uniform In said
precinct; and the said John L. Guy did fail 10
prefer charges against the said Robert II.
Smith for such violations OF the rules and reg
ulations to the major of police for his con-
sideration and action; the sand violations being
we'll known at the time to the said John n.
Guy.
2. That the said John +. Guy was not dill
gent IN enforcing the laws in relation to lot
teries, policies. the selling OF liquors. and
gambling in the precinct in which he had
charge, in that he did on divers times and occa-
sious between the LIST day OF July, 1887. and
the 9th day of June, 1889. and more especially
on or about the 18th day OF June, 1889. fail to
report 10 the ma or of police the existence Of a
policy shop kept aud maintained by one
Kelley within his the said Guy sprecinct the ex-
istence of which WAS notorious. But that he,
the said Guy, on the contrary, well knowing the
existence of SAID policy shops kept and MAN.
tanned by the said Kelley during the times
above stated, and more especially about the
2sth day of June, 1889. did allow the same 10
be conducted without interference on the part
Of the police.
And further, that the said John F. Guy. at
divers times and occasions, between dates above
stated and more especially on or about the -
day Of, 1890, did fad to report 70 the MAYOR
OF police the existence of q pool room and sly
poker room and maintained by one--McGiae.
and q pool room kept and maintained by one
Henry Lacey the existence of which were
notorious in his. the said Guys, precinct; but
that he, the SAID Guy, on the contrary, well
knowing Of the existence of said pool rooms.
and that the existence of the same was in
violation Of law and public order. did permit
the same to be conducted and maintained
without interference on the part Of the police.
3. That the said John r. Guy on or about the.
to wit, - day Of -, IS, while a mem
Der Of the metropolitan police force. old re-
ceive from certain policy dealers and more
especially one Max Hilton and one - Hill
ton, q large sam Of money, TO wit the sum of
Slo0 in violation of and contrary 70 the rules
and regulations and the laus
4. That the said John r. Guy was guilty of
conduct TO the prejudice Of good order and
discipline in that while lieutenant of police he
was instrumental i'm shifting from their beats
in his precinct members of the force vino knew
OF violations of law and the existence of policy
shops and gambling dens, and the said men,
bers of the force were SO shifted by the said
John F. Guy, in his precinct, in order
to protect the said policy shops and gambling
dets from being raided and interfered with,
and that he, the said John +. Guy. did seek 20
foster and encourage said gambling dens and
policy shops to such an extent that il became
notorious among his subordinates that he was
receiving a salary from the keepers of Said
gambling dens and policy shops, and that it
would be dangerous for any one of his subordi-
mates to interfere Herewith
5. Conduct unbecoming an officer
(Signed J. W. DOUGLASS.
President Board of Commissioners
- - ~