Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1896-03-13

vote on the resolution 10 expei Mf.
Grimes from among It's members
He said he wished to give Mr.. Srimes
every chance TO disprove the charges
against him, but did not think another
committee should be appointed to near
the evidence in rebuttal.
Mr.. Diacont then took the floor. ne
said he was not afraid to go pack 70
Marshall Ward IL the resolution was
laid upon the table In order to give Mr..
Grimes an opportunity to vindicate nin-
self. He said II Mr. Grimes couid ciear
himself he for one wanted him to nave q
chance to do It, II the evidence already
taken was good why did the committee
wish to refuse to allow Mr.. Grimes 10
bring In his side? He said II Mr.. Grimes
had been tried in court he would nave
been given this privilege. He was IL
favor of the minority report
WAS GIVEN OPPORTUNITY.
Mr.. Bloomberg said II had never en-
tered his mind that the committee would
be charged with having refused to give
Mr.. Grimes a full and free hearing. Mr..
Grimes had been given every opportunity
TO make any statements and have sum-
moned any witnesses he desired.
Mr.. Grimes here stated that when he
was summoned he did not know what 1t
was for. aud therefore did not have coun-
sci.
Mr.. Bloomberg added that the whole
investigation had been as open as the
MONDAY sun" He said that when Mr..
Lawless came before the committee
TO disprove the charge In regard to the
1000 bushels Of shells that was the first
intImation the committee had OF any
such charge.
Mr. Lawless here asked Mr.. Meredith
IL he had not asked him II any charges
of no made against MT.
Grimes. and II he had not answered mo"
Mr. Meredith said he had not made that
reply The evidence was read on this
point. and Mr.. Merediths reply was
found to be, II am not prepared to so
into that" Mr.. Meredith wished 10 know
what they expected 10 prove by their
evidence in rebuttal. Were they going 10
disprove Mr. Grimes's own admissions
The report had been based upon MI.
Grimess own evidence. declared Mr..
Meredith, while a ripple OF applause went
up from the throng OF spectators.
Mr.. Bloomberg then resumed his re-
marks. He said II evidence In rebuttal
was TO be taken. IL should have pesh
introduced at this meeting. He was op-
| posed to any delay. lie said there was
no necessity for the matter TO be drawn
out. Mr.. Grimes's counsel knew tne
| evidence which had been taken. and ought
TO have come prepared TO combat 1t.
THE RESOLUTION LOST.
The pending question was then called,
which was upon the resolution OF Mr.
| Glover, Mr.. Grimes asking TO be ex-
cused from voting. The resolution was
lost by the following recorded vote;
Ayes-Messrs Caskie, Davis, Diacont'
| DonIeayy. Ferriter, Gunst, Hobson, Law
der. Mcdowell, Seay, Trower, and
| GlJver-13.
Noes - Messrs. Blanks. Bloomberg'
Briggs. Brock. Carter. Cottrell. Epps,
| Jackson, Landerkin, Mayer, Williams
Wallerstein, and Woody-l3
SHOULD ACT PROMPTLY.
Mr.. Wallerstein took the floor. He said
there was an attempt on the part OF the
counsel who represented Mr. Grimes 10
DELAY the matter. The facts were before
| the Council. and action should at once
| no taken. He said no evidence could De
brought In rebuttal of Mr. Grimes own
testimony, and the members OF the ooun-
ell owed II to themselves and 10 the CITY
to act at once. J..
Mr.. Meredith here asked permission u
he heard to give the Council legal ADVICE
| He said the law required that person
| charged with an offence should pe given
| a reasonable opportunity to be nearu' ne
said Il would not besre asonabi- 70 require
any person called to the bar at ,na'
meeting 10 go into an immediate IN.
OF defence. The question resolved itseil,
ho said as TO whether the gentleman
CNr. Grimes) was ready by profession u
on into the matter at once, anu 40 ~
v,bether 3 committee be appointed 10 near
the evidence, or 1t be introduced peioi'
the Council. -, A. ,,o.a n,
Irnon motion of Mr.. Davis, the vote o.
which Mr.. Glover's resolution was los
was reconsdered.
THE DATE'FIXED.
Mr.. Grimes then stated that II the origi
nal resolution was adopted II wouiu ue
nri,,e him OF one OF his counsel, as zap
tain Wise would be engaged IN the bu
nenburg cases next week. An amehaiheh
was then offered. fixing the day LOT com
mencing the hearing or the evidence U
Monday, the 23d. 1t was then ascer 'dlfe
that Mr.. Lawless would not De ~ tne CIT
on that day. However, as Mt. "rtue
had three gentlemen representing MN
Messrs. wise, Lawless, and Muntoru' M'
Bloomberg thought n delay should no
be granted on account OF the inaoihly =
any one of them to appear, as malori,
would still be left. Mr.. Gunst stated ina
he aid think he could be present mex
Monday Another amendment was VI
fered. setting the day THURSDAY the lst,
This was lost. however, ana the amenu
ment fixing the time for hearing the ev
dence in rebuttal from the I'D TO the SVti
was adopted.