The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-04-14
OFFICER LAMKIN ACQUITTED.
Board Finds Him Not Guilty Of Sending
Questionable Letters 10 Miss Layns.
GREAT MANY WITNESSES EXAMINED.
Letter Carrier Curtis Testified That He
Had Left Letter at 4. IL. Williams
DRUGSTORE Addressed to a Good
Fellow"-Other Witnesses.

The Board Of Police Commissioners held
a called session in the office OF Chief-of-
Police Howard, in the City Hall, last
night, which lasted for four hours. in or
der to hear further testimony in regard
to the charges preferred against Health
officer Il. q. Lamkin for writing ques-
tionable letters to Miss Leila Layne. At
the conclusion OF the hearing OF the
evidence 1t took the board just about iif-
teen minutes to decide that tine allegations
had not been sustained, and they were
therefore dismissed MIR. Lamikn, who
was suspended soon after the charges
had been brought against him, Will at
once be reinstated, and Will probably be
again on duty to-day.
Tho board convened Ia the private ONCE
OF the Chief of Police at O'Clock yes
terday afternoon. and heard only such
evidence as had not been previously gone
into. Mayor Taylor filled the chair, anu
all the members-Messrs. BOsher, Jacob,
Laube. Figg. Welsh, and Weinbrunn-
were present. Witnesses for the prosecu-
ton were first called, and the testimony
generally affecting the ease was substan-
The Times regarding 1t.
LETTER CARR1ERS EVIDENCE.
Mr.. Robert Curtis, the letter-carrier.
stated that he had left a letter at the
drug store OF Mr.. T. b. Williams address
cd 10 "A Goodfellow." the name Miss
Layne wrote upon the envelope I'm which
his epistle was inclosed. Further than this
Mr. Curtis knew nothing Of the affair.
A Of ha FOL "a
the First National Bank, WIS called rs an
expert In handwriting. He made a close
examination Of the chirography of the
letters sent TO Miss Layne and some writ
Ing OF Mr. Lamkin and gave it as his
opinion that they were not the same hand
writing.
The board. in hearing testimony, allow
ed both sides a very broad latitude Many
witnesses were put on the stand for and
against the defence, most OF them for
Officer Lamkin. tes,ifying only rs to his
character and general reputation in the
community Some Of those who gave
evidence in behalf of Miss Layne were
her father, Mr.. +. ID. Layne. her sister.
Miss Alice Layne, and herself: Mossrs.
James ID. Thacker, Ike overly, John Me-
Gruder, James Booker. Robert Curtis,
Marion Burnett.
tOK The DEF ENCE.
Those who went upon the stand for the
defence were Messrs. Philip Kelly, James
Rankin, w. 4. Clark, DR.. W. IL. Scott,
Henry Hechler, j. c. Joplin, 5. II. Halves
l.. Z. Morris, +. d. Price, j. T.. Shep-
pard. John +. Mayer, John Mann. Jr.,
John NJ. Higgins. James J.. Botto. James
n. J. Smith. John Lehman,
\. d. LanderlSin, Edward Sydnor. Sam
uel Cohen, c. j. Fowlkes, V. Donat. j.
w Blake, W. II. Baker. Loyin Topp.
S w. Holdcroft. Albert Nollmer, Carter
Via, Samuel Lawrence, and Edward
overly. Mr.. Lamkln made very strong
statement I'm his own defence, and Mr..
Layne. father of the young lady, adj
dressed the board relative to the matter.
CHARGES NOT SUSTAINED.
At the conclusion Of the investigation
the board held a brief secret session for
the purpose Of arriving at their conclu-
sion, which was that the charges against
officer Lamkin were not sustained. ana
were dismissed by a unanimous vote.
The result was announced with open
doors, and was the occasion OF a shower
Of congratulations upon Mr.. Lamkin from
the assemblage Of friends OF the Sanitary
Inspector.
officer Lamkln returned his thanks and |
gratitude TO all who stood by him |
throughout this investigation.