The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-12-16
THURSDAY. DECEMBER ls, 1897.
rHE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE.

In the review we made yesterday of
Colonel Stubbbs' card, there was one view
of the case that we omitted to present
hat attention ought 10 be called TO. Col
onel Stubs complains that the prosecu-
ton of him was prepared and set on foot
in the dark, as IL were, and he also COM
plains of no investigation having been
made of the way Womack's checks came
10 be in the hands Of those who pre-
scented them.
Now Coionel Stubs cannot surely COM
plain of Major Brander's offering a reso-
luton for an investigation in Camp Lee
after he had seen one of these
checks Major Brander might, OF
course. have gone to Colonel
Stubs and told him he had seen
this check, but If he had done so and Col
onel Stubs had given him the account of
Il ne gave the Investigation Committee,
Major Brander you'd still have felt com
peried 20 offer bis resolutions after that
explanation as much as he did before it
was made. The same thing exactly is to
be said Of an enquiry as to how the
checks came into the possession Of those
who produced them before the Investiga-
ton Committee. If 1t had been proved
that they were stolen from Mr.. Womack
that could not have in the faintest degree
affected Mr.. Stubs liability TO explain
why he Grand Commander OF the Viz
ginia Camp of Confederate Veterans and
a member OF its History Committee,
should have been accepting money from
the agent OF a book company that has put
into our schools a history that ISLANDERS
Confederate soldiers. The Investigating
Committee was therefore perfectly right to
refuse TO allow an enquiry to be made
into that matter, because the result OF
that enquiry could not by any possibility
have influenced the judgment thai they
were TO form in the case. II Colonel
Stubs could satisfy them that he got
Mr.. Womack's money properly. they
would acquit him, however Mr.. Baughman
came by the checks. II he could not sat
isfy them that he came by it properly,
they would condemn him, even though
the checks had been stolen from Mr..
Womaok.
Finally Colonel Stubs whole objection
TO the matter goes to what relates 10 the
procedure in the case But procedure is
only governed by rules that the party
may not be surprised-that ne may have
full notice Of what Is alleged against him
and a full opportunity 10 show what the
real facts are.
Now when the checks were produced
before the committee it gave Colonel
Stubbbs until the next day 60 ascertain
how ne came by them. When he came
into court next day he did not complain
that the time was TOO short and ask for
moro time. Nothing OF the sort. lie
came in and said in substance that
ne then recolIected how ne came by the
checks. and he gave his version of how he
got them. If he had asked for more time
the committee would undoubtedly have
given It to him or they would have been
liable 60 grave censure II they had not.
But he asked for no moro time. He said
he knew how he got the checks. 1t is
true that when Mr.. Womack afterwards
came to the stand and gave a different
version of the matter Colonel Stubbs
abandoned his own account OF It and
adopted Womack's But ne cannot now
complain that sufficient time was not
given him, for he did not ask for more.
The committee had therefore all the
facts In the case and all that any one
desired 10 say in explanation OF them.
How then was any injustice done any.
one? The whole purpose Of rules of pro-
cedure Is to get at the exact facts and
n they are got at, how is any one hurt?
The whole purpose OF the investigation
= then answered and nothing remains 70
- done but 20 form Judgment. Colonel
otubbs perhaps formed one judgment
Upon the facts. while the committee form
ed another. That is nothing more than
what happens in almost every contro.
versy. There Is hardly a disputed case
to bs found without partisans upon both
sides Of H. But neither side can complain
n both admit that all the facts OF the
80 are known to both sides. The rest Is