Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1897-12-22

|
pecunIous Judge, who pretends now ana
here 10 be striving to pay his debts. i'm
rneaiatelv set out for Virginia Beach, or
some other resort. The fact afterwards
appeared that he had had pecuniary
transaction with this G. $. Barrow on
that Identical 90 OF July, and transferred
to- Barrow an unearned fourth OF ms
salary as Judge These orders were en-
tered TO the prejudice OF the county III
the absence OF the Commonwealth's At
torney who was attending a meeting OF
the State Board Of Public Works that
week.
Z. His rulings are often viciousiy par
| tiai. I am constrained further TO say
| that the statements which secured for
him the caucus nomination greatly mis-
led the gentlemen Of the caucus.
Respectfully submitted,
r. l.. BUrOKD.
Mr.. Buford said his witnesses lived at
| n distance from telegraph and railway
! stations and he had been unable TO get
them here. Besides he had locked up In
his safe a number of papers needed 10 re-
/ fresh his mind as 10 facts, and no one
could get these but himself. He did not
think ne could be ready to go on to-day,
and objected TO the election being held
to-day.
|
hers of the Legislature were anxious TO
| get home for the holidays, and that the
| committee opposed having TO sit during
that period. They were also DESTROYS OF
| having the case completed in time for
| the election of judge for Brunswick
| to-day.
Mr.. Flood stated that 1t was impossi-
bic for Mr.. Buford TO claim he had no
| idea of what the defence to his charges
would be. as the latter had been pub
! lished in the local paper in Brunswick,
| in reply to the same charges introduced
/ here by MIR Buford.
SENATOR MORRIS WITHDRAWS.
The committee retired for few min
utes to consider the motion for continu
ance Upon it's return MIR. Boykin asked
! Mr. Buford to state whether he objected
10 any member Of the committee. Mr..
! Morris said he desired him to speak
! frankly, for he had stated publicly in the
Senate, as had been reported in the pa
pers. that he thought he could hardly
try the case fairly, his mind being made
up.
Mr. Buford said he felt himself placed
in a very awkward position, but he had
also read Mr.. Morriss statement that he
could be induced to change his mind by
the evidence. If Mr.. Morris was juror,
he would probably object, but he would
not state an objection now.
Mr.. Morris said he could not blame Mr.
Buford but insisted upon withdrawing.
assuring Mr. Buford that he thought he
had acted with perfect propriety in the
matter.
Later, Mr. Maynard asked Mr.. Buford
If there was any objection to any other
member of the committee, to which the
latter replied there was not, and that he
had not objected to Mr.. Morris.
Senator Boykin then asked Mr.. Buford
If he would give the names of witnesses
he needed. and he specified two but
later said he would rely upon his docu-
mentary evidence, but might summon
one witness and have him present to.
night.
THE EVIDENCE BEGINS.
Mr. Buford was then sworn. the oath
being administered by Senator Boykin.
Mr. Buford began by taking up the
fourth charge. alleging that Judge Turn
bull had sold and given what purported
to be a clear title to land upon which
there was a deed of trust. He testified
at length as to the facts in the case, and
presented documentary evidence, in
to the property bearing later date. He
testified that Judge Turnbull had been
sued by the purchaser of the property
and damages had been awarded by the
court, but that he had never paid any
part of It. Witness stated, further, that
Judge Turnbull made no defence to the
suit, though in the later newspaper con-
troversy he had introduced a defence
Mr.. Buford read closely from type
written manuscript in giving his testi-
mony. speaking with great care, and I'm
rather a low tone. The testimony was
very circumstantial. witness giving dates
and days of the week in nearly every in
stance.
Mr.. Buford then testified as to the fifth
churge-that Judge Turnbull was a con-
fessed defaulter. Witness read almost
continuously transcripts of court records
in support of this charge. though seve-
RAJ private letters were read as establish
ing the truth of the charge. During Mr..
Bufords testimony on this point seve-
raj members Of the committee, especially
Senator's Letcher, Maynard. and Mr..
Reddy, frequently questioned him as TO
several matters. He replied with great
readiness, speaking carefully, and gene
rally making his answers very circum-
stantial. The members Of the committee
several times examined DEGREES or the
court, and chancery commissioners re-
ports, from which the witness read.
THE BUILDING OF A BRIDGE.
Mr.. Buford then testified as to the
sixth charge, which referred to the let
ting of the contract for the construction
of a bridge across Nottoway river at
Kcnnedy's Mills. between the counties
of Brunswick and Nottowsy. At the May
term of the County Court an order was
entered directing the Superintendent Of
Roads and Bridges of Brunswick TO con-
fer with that official Of Nottoway re-
garding the advisability of building the
bridge. At the June court Judge Turn
bull approved the bid OF c. S. Barrow.
w. II. Barrow, a suDervisor-elect, who
was greatly interested in the matter Of
the proposed bridge, asked witness to
appear before Judge Turnbull, and have
the order vacated, which witness did, and
the Judge let the matter go over to the
July term. On the very next day. how
ever as appears from the order-book, the
bid of c. S. Barrow was accepted, and
the bridge ordered built. Witness and
Senator Turnbull had united in protest.
ing against the order short while
after ii was entered Judge Turnbul went
off on a long vacation-to Virginia Beach,
he believed.
The witness then took up the general
question of the unftness of Judge Turn
bull for the position of a Judge, owing
to his lack of legal knowledge and cited
many instances which he thought Illus
trated the same.
At 1850 the committee arose, after de-