Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-01-30

hr s1pStttute Nae auoptcd Dy u Fo'o -
81 TO "a.
Mr.. Saunders offered the following reso-
luton. which was adopted
Resolved, That the committee be d.
rected to report their suggestions as to
retrenchment In the form Of separate bills
as to each subject dealt with
RECOMAfITTED AND DISMISSED.
The bill was then recommitted, with
the Instructions. as adopted.
Mr.. Pitcher said IL was very apparent
that there we're many men on the floor
who were anxious to defeat any bill on
the line of retrenchment and reform. and
he therefore offered a resolution to dis
charge the special FONT committee. The
latter had just been given instructions,
he said, as broad aa the universe" and
when they again went to work and sub
mitted the result OF their labors, the
same tactics would be renewed to defeat
the bills. The resolution was rejected.
and Bill No. GAG was taken up. Mr.. VIM
borne moved that as this measure was a
companion bill to No. 2i5. that 1t be dis
missed, which was done.
THE FEES OF JAILERS.
Bill No. 247, in relation TO the fees or
jailers, was then presented to the House,
and Mr.. Anderson moved to recommit.
Mr.. Winborne opposed this motion, as did
also Mr.. Saunders. Mr.. Anderson said
that the measure affected Richmond. Nor
folk, and few other cities, and that the
officers interested wished hearing be-
fore the committee. II the bill was voted
upon to-day, these gentlemen would DC
treated with gross injustice. Mr.. Murphy
asked IL the taxpayers should not be
treated with, justice; they were affected
more than the jailers. and should be con-
sidered. DIR. Winston said that he would
take the contract under the proposed re-
duction, and give his bond to carry II out.
Mr.. Churchman offered an amendment
to the bill, increasing the number or per-
sons for which Is cents should be allowed
from 10 to 30. and another amendment TO
make other parts OF the bill conform TO
the change.
Mr.. Hicks spoke in favor Of recommit-
ting the bill. as did also Mr.. Wallace. The
latter stated that various items OF ex-
penses borne by the jailer OF Richmond,
which included lights, fuel, water, provi-
sions, stationery. etc. DR.. Winston WISH
ed to know why these expenses had TO De
borne by the taller of Richmond, when
such officers were not required to pay
them in the counties. Mr.. Anderson an
swered this question by reading the sec
| ton OF the Code in relation TO the care OF
prisoners, and many of these items were
| embraced therein. Mr.. Wallace then con-
| tinued by further outlining his opposl-
| ton to the bill, as amended. MT. Digs
asked If any Of the prisoners In the city
Jail of Richmond were there for violating
city ordinances. Mr.. Wallace replied that
he was not prepared to state, but sup
posed there were. Mr.. Wallace ridiculed
the idea of running up the salary OF inc
City-Sergeant of Richmond to s2O,Uo, when
It could be shown that his entire re-
ceipts only reached $4,000, and out OF tnat
he had to support 200 prisoners, on an
average.
THE EXTRA FEES.
Mr.. Dlggs asked further If the officer In
question did not receive further fees, ana
to this Mr.. Anderson asked to reply, ana
said that while he did they were COM
paratively small, as he did not have tne
fees for arrests which county sheriffs
have. as these were instead paid In sala-
ries TO police in the cities. Mr.. Digs
asked if It was not a fact that the city
charter of Richmond failed to provide
for the salary Of it's Sergeant and mat
a bill was pending to amend the charter
in this particular. Mr.. Folkes replied
that he was not the patron Of that Dill.
A motion to adjourn being lost, MT
Folkes took the floor in advocacy OF the
recommitment of the bill. He scored the
county members for directing all their
efforts at retrenchment against the cues
This he termed unjust interference es'
pecially in the case Of Richmond, whicn
| pavs one-seventh of all the State taxes
In closing he urged that the bill be SEM
back to the committee, in order that thC
officers affected by it should be given
chance to be heard.
Mr.. Anderson's motion to recommit BIZ
NO. 27 was then put and refused, and an
other motion to adjourn being refused
the amendments proposed by MIR. Church'
man were put and defeated.
The House finally adjourned, on motlor
OF Mr.. Jennings, upon a recorded vote Of
SO to %.