Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-07-04

| attorney for CHM 90.
IL was with these gentlemen. and went
10 the office Of the Superintendent OF
Public instruction. and they went UP be-
fore the board, and l remained down in
the public Office or the main Office; ]
don't know which II is called
BYRD ON THE STAND.
Mr. II. L. Bird. OF Winchester, the
! agent and attorney OF CHM d CO., anu
| author OF the alleged libelious article
was called, and testified that he had been
| Commonw aaith's Attorney Of his county
| for the past eleven years. He was also n
member of the State Central Democratic
| Committee.
"Do you know j. F.. Massey's personal
and political reputation for honesty!
II do, sir"
The line Of examination was mere
! changed by Mr.. Wise, who interrosa'eu
| the witness Regarding his transactions
with Mr. MAJ ~ MIR. Byrd explained
how he became engaged by the firm Ot
| CHM & Co., and when Colonel TazeWeH
| Elicit and Mr. Flood were retained 10
! appear before the board. He told on MS
efforts to get due notice OF the meeting
OF the Board OF Education, in 1871. wheh
| the books would be adopted. and OF MS
! failure to receive such notice untlI the
very day OF the meeting, when ne re-
ceived a telegram from Mr.. McGllvray'
| which stated that no oral statements
| would be heard. This he said, entirely eN-
| cluded his firm from submitting pa.
! He telegraphed then to Colonel Eliett
| 10 go TO the board meeting and demand
| 10 be heard. He said that ne wished 10 be
| perfectly frank. and would state That ne
| had been directed by MessrE. CHM * co.
10 make an investigation of the award
OF the book contracts OF 1879 and lSl lie
! smoke OF his endeavors to see the contracts
| OF March 18th. He said that he went 10
| see the Attorney-General, and found nm
out. but Messrs. McGilvray and Carter
| Scott were present. He asked Mr.. Me
| GilyTay about the contracts, ana that
| gentleman turned inquisitively 10 Mr.
Carter Scott. who said abruptly: Don't
| let him have them" Witness than said
that he had a statutory right to see the
| contracts, and left these gentlemen. How
| ever the book-list had been sent 10 MS
| hotel when he got there. in the evening
Mr.. Byrd then referred AT length to
the meetings OF the board after the book
adoption OF 1894. At these meetings be
| endeavored to get two additional books
on the list, but was unsuccessful, as Nj.
Massey said the contracts would not allow
IT, After this the witness went into an
| investigation of the book contract mat
ter He mad thought OF giving 10 The
/ press what he had learned about these
adoptions. but decided not to do 50.
OBJECTION RAISED.
Mr.. Byrd continued by referring to
| contracts Of book concerns with other
States, but counsel for the plaintiff OBJ
| iected. and the objection was sustained
| by the Court. Witness then said that ne
! found out in the latter part OF NOFembef'
| 1894. that this book matter was being
mcoted about. and that some references
10 il had been made In the newspapers
/ Of the state. He then went 20 New YORK.
| conferred with CHM & 60. upon this
! point who directed him TO DO as he chose
| about publishing what data he had col
! lected He returned to virginia, and
/ after a conference with Mr.. Small pub
lished the article which appeared in the
| Pilot He added that he received 10
pay from CHM Il Co. for the article.
| but they paid for his services and eX-
| penses in connection with the examina-
ton. The firm also bought some copies
OF the issue Of the Pilot containing the
| article.
THE QUESTION OF BRIBERY.
Here Mr.. Wise took up the issue Of the
| Pilot containing the data prepared by
Mr.. Byrd. and questioned the witness "a
TO his belief in the truthfulness of each
specific charge in the article. When Mr.
Wise reached the point in the item which
had reference TO an alleged attempt on
the part of Womack to bride member
of the Educational Board in Washington.
Mr. Wake wanted to know what the OBJ
ject Of counsel was in reading and ques-
tioning the witness here Mr.. Wise re-
piled that he wanted to prove that the
witness was prepared to establish by
another witness. who was In court that
Womack was arrested on such a charge
in Washington. and that Mr. Massey
knew about this arrest, and yet went of
travelling through Canada with Womack.
Mr. Thorn objected TO bringing this
Washington matter into the case, ar
guing that Mr.. WCmack came here with
a clear record and that the record could
not be impeached.
Mr.. Wise said that he could prove how
this case was finally dismissed alleging
that a friend Of Womack's got into Office.
and that the book agent skipped out
through this influence. After some fur
Their wrangling Mr.. Wise got down to a
letter from John Il. Massey to the Rich
mond Dispatch, under date OF July ..
1850. in which Mr.. Massey admitted
having read an article in the New York
World concerning the award Of book
contracts that year. and intimating cor
ruption on his part. Mr.. Wise here de-
sired TO read the World article. but the
Court would not permit II. Counsel eN-
planned that he wished 10 put the World
article I'm evidence, because OF an allusion
in It TO the arrest of Mr.. Womack, and
because in having read the Item Mr..
Massey was bound TO have learned or
Mr.. Womacks arrest.
Finally, Mr. Wise got his answer By
intcrrogating the witness as TO whether
or not Mr. Massey knew OF Womack's
! arrest on the charge Of bribery Mr..
Byrd said that when he spoke to the Su
perintendent concerning his travels with
Womack. who had been charged with
so grave n crime. Mr.. Massey expressed
no surprise. and did not in any way in
innate that he did not know Of the Wash
ingtOn matter.
Mr.. Wise continued his reading from
the Pilot, questioning the witness con-
corning the different allegations of the
article.
LAND-BOOM TRANSACTION.
state what Mr.. Massey said to
YOU" continued Mr. Wise. concerning
his land-bOOm transactions"
Mr.. Byrd said that Mr.. Massey told
him that in 1890 he had invested $500 in
the stock of the Virginia Land and I'M
provement Company. Sl.500 in the Sher-
wood Company, and $lj In land at Big
Stone Gap. This sum exceeded the
amount Mr. Massey was said 10 have
Invested in such enterprises in the Pilots
article. In the conversation between Mr..
Massey and the witness the latter said
Mr.. Massey remarked that the companies
In question Were better receivers than
disbursers.
Reading further from the article. Mr..
.glfa1 no ,-f,p ha hefiaraI