Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-07-06

Law Register. j. {. Wysor. Esq. counsel
for H. G. Wadley. answers the article
previously published by the Register under
the signature Of General James a. Walk
er. taking Judge Con- TO task FOR en-
Joining the prosecution OF Ndd.ey on the
charge of embezzlement.
Wadley was sued in the United States
Circuit Court for SisG3i22i which. it wac
alleged, he had appropriated ont Of the
funds OF the Wytheville Banking ana
Insurance Company 70 his individual use
In fraud Of the creditors rights in the
premises After he had been thus sued
these same creditors. according 10 Mr..
Wysor procured his indictment in the
County Court Of Wythe for the embezzle-
ment Of the Identical sum of money. This
prosecution Judge Golf enjoineJ until the
final disposition Of the civil suit. and
until the further order Of the court"
Mr.. Wysor contends that Judge COTS
court was the first 10 acquire Jurisdiction
and therefore 1T could not tolerate in
reference by the courts Of State
II is further stated that the prosecutors
.
Wadley TO compromise al 80 cents on the
dollar They gave Wadley ten days To-
consider this proposition. and lat the
same time had an understanding among
themselves that if be declined thc I'cpO-
stion they would procure his indictment
In the County Court Of Wythe,' and
the money required TO carry On such
g
at the same meeting Wadley declined
the offer Of compromise or whatever It
might be legally termed. based upon
the idea that he was guilty OF a felony"
The Indictment was drawn in the Office
Of the counsel for the creditors" The
five lawyers Of the creditors went be-
fore the grand jury a. witnesses, taking
with them Wadley's deposition in the
civil suit. NO other witnesses were
summoned by the grand jury"
Mr. Wysor insists that such a use Of
Wad. ey's deposition was unconstitutional
and further contends that the five lawyers
were prosecutors rather than witnesses,
ana had no RICH, to intrude themselves
into the grand jury-room.
verted the whole criminal machinery
of the Wythe County Court into a col
lection agency" and he holds that a chan
cellor who would not enjoin a prose
cution under such circumstances would
be unworthy Of confidence or respect"
Then he proceeds to review the law
ana authorities in the case. and justilies
Judge Cons action. saying:
1T was proper TO enjoin Mr.. Gleavcs
Ohe Commonwealth Attorney, under
the facts of the case under dis
cussion. but it was wholly unnec-
essary. Surely no lawyer Will con-
tend for moment that Judge
Gof could not enjoin the said creditors
and their counsel from prosecuting Mr..
Wadley in the premises. ana also prevent
/ tho use of papers on file In his court
! in the prosecution Such restraining
! order in this case would have stopped
/ the prosecution for want OF evidence,
whether Mr.. Gleaves was eni0ined or
! not. SO. practically. 1t is immateriai
| whether Geaves was enioined or not.
| IA the result would have been the same.
/ The rule Of law under which Judge Goff
/ acted is thus stated in his opinion:
THAT an injunction may be issued
under such circumstances u now well
I tstdDuSnti bN AtflS'DNS. anu lNdl II may
/ apply 10 a criminal as well as 4 civil
suit 10 not without precedent. y care
4 ful examination If the authorities leads
me 10 the conclusion that In cases where
/ a criminal prosecution has been insti-
! tuted while civil suit was pending in
/ vOlVine the same subject matter and the
parties procuring the indictment are
The same as those who instituted
The civil suit. the court whose jurisdiction
was first sought. and before which such
civil proceeding Is so pending and undetcr-
mined. viii restrain the parties from
prosecuting the Indictment until 1t can
hear and dispose Of the civil suit"
The Dispatch has heretofore given the
/ salient points Of General Walkers article,
/ and It Is but right. We think, that Mr..
WysOr's side should now be heard.
/ though as his answer is long one. We
/ can only give space for his main points.
But aside from the contention between
/ Wadley and his creditors. II would seem
that the State Of Virginia has some rights
in this case that ought to he respected
rights which no action on the part Of
Valleys creditors could invalidate.
new commemorative Attorney has now
been elected for Wythe county. and II was
understood that the case was 10 have
been called for trial yesterday