The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1896-08-19
CAN'T SEE THE REPORT
Counsel for Major Wright Fall After a Stroag
Flight 10 See tho Experts Report.
BUT THEY CAN EXAMINE IT LATER ON.
Lhe Trial Yesterday Got Under Way
After u Very sharp Set To between
tho Attorneys-CIerL McLcon EN-.
amined-There are Forty witnesses
10 Examine fn the Case.

Suffolk. Va, Aug. 1S.-(SpeciaD-The
second day Of the case, Commonwealth
vs. Major G. w. Wright, ex-Town
Treasurer. for embezzlement, proceeded
ausplciously for the prosecution, mas
much as the defense was thwarted In
securing a successful termination to
several motions upon which they placed
apparent stress. Every step in the pro-
rress of the trial. is being contested with
the determination and ability which
might be expected to characterize the
efforts of astute attorneys who enter
n case with the expectation of winning
or of waging q gallant fight to the bitter
end.
Can't. Wise and Col Boykin at 1890
aupeared before Circuit Judge II. r.
Prentis in his office TO argue motion
in favor OF. mapdamus compelling the
Town Council to permit an examina-
ton of the report made by the experts,
who examined Major Wrights ac-
counts. The prayer fills more than
three pages OF type written paper.
After briefly outlining the status of
affairs and the Councils refusal TO COM
plv with their request the petition sets
forth: THAT great wrong and IRENE
diable injury Is done your complainant
bv the refusal of said committee to
permit him to examine and inspect the
report of said expert" and concludes as
follows:
Your petitioner now, therefore
pravs that the Commonwealth per-
emptory mandamus may bespeedily Is
sued directed to the members of the
Council of the town Of Suffolk, directing
them to require the said n. II. Withers
and ]. B. Norneet the committee afore-
said to make immediate report to the
said Council and return herewith the
report of the said expert and that said
Council be required TO enter on record
said report of said expert that the same
NAV be inspected by your petitioner.
And your petitioner will ever pray
The petition was ably argued by
counsel The attorneys claimed that
the Council had no right to appropriate
funds for any except public purposes,
that q conspiracy and combination MAD
been formed to Withhold the report. that
the Commemorative Attorney had no
right to hold tho record, that n refusal
of the prayer meant n suppression OF
records. that the Withholding or the re-
port was injurious to one OF SUFFOLK
citizens. Judge Prentis refused to grant
| the mandamus. holding that the motion
was only demurrer.
After removing the scene Of opera
tions from a law Office to the County
| Courthouse Col. Boykin moved that the
| Council committee be required TO APP
pear In Court and produce the experts
report
| commemorative Attorney Holland
| opposed the motion with force. He said
| that Judge Prentis had just refused
| them; that they were not taken by sur
| prise; that .he report was deduced from
| records easily accessible to the defense
| as TO the Councils expert. The de-
fence has absolutely no right to have
| the report The statement is not yet
| evidence; is not yet public record and
may never be a public record. ] am
Withholding nothing unfairly; am act
| ing with fairness"
| He then proceeded TO vindicate him.
| self with reference to statement made
| by Colonel Boykin, that he was unfair
| In Judgment.
| The Court: II don't know that that
| line of argument is emI.ghtning me on
the motion made"
Mr.. Holland: 81 want to make an eX-
| PLANTATION as Il matter OF personal privi-
| lege | want 10 repei Colonel Boykln's
! statement as 10 my unfair judgment.
| This experts report not being public
| record, the defense has no more right
| to il than TO statement furnished me
as an Individual. l challenge them
| here and now to give the law which viii
| sustain them"
Captain Wise: 81 am surprised Mt that
speech. In all his talk Mr.. Holland
has only given one reason for opposing
| the motion. He has been talking to the
man in the moon"
Mr. Iolland 81 hope the man there
heard me-"
Captain Wise continued by saying
that Mr.. Holland had misguided Judge
Prentis. Judge P!entis never said we
didn't have a right to see the report He
said writ of mandamus was not the
paper to get at what we wanted. That
was what he said. The town of Suffolk
he claimed was not party to the prose-
cution. 1t had no right to be. The
case was Commonwealth vs.. Wright
and the Commonwealth should nav for
its own evidence. The Councils assist
ance would be wrong, and for which
they could be impeached.
Captain Wise here made some scathing
references to Mr.. Withers, a member
of the committee, who he said had
represented 10 him that the report was
not ready. and had afterwards offered to
barter the report for consideration
of some evidence in possession of the
defense. He declined to surrender his
sacred right by swapping a private for
n public record. He urged that the de-
Tense should be allowed the privilege of
inspecting the experts report
The court ruled that they should hsye
the full benefit of the report when the
proper time arrived. At present the in
spection Is denied. The defense noted
exceptions.
Colonel Boykin moved to demur and
uuash the indictment on the ground tho.
II did not descend to particulars ives
vague and uncertain and contrary to SEQ
ton TO- Bill of Rights; that 1t should
set forth the particular kind of money
or nature of money and property stolen.
that II was in derogation OF common