The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1899-07-24

ter. There,was an appeal, but the chair
was upheld. Finally, each delegate was
allowed i've minutes to speak, and the
prosecutor and defendant twenty min
utes for each argument. This ruling
was soon lost sight Of in the heated
discussions.
A motion to keep the names out Of
the press provoked a storm Of debate.
Mr.. Salisbury wanted the public to
know, since so much had appeared Id
the papers, and the chair took this view
Of 1t. The charges were preferred by
Mr.. Bauer, who took the centre Of the
floor at $3.50 o'clock. Conduct unbe-
coming a member OF the assembly was
the keynote of the charges, copies Of
which were in the hands Of Mr.. Bauer
and Mr.. Salisbury, the former having
given one to SIr. Salisbury a few days
ago.
The specific charges were I'VE In
number. The first came up from a
complaint of the expressmen's union.
It alleged that the union had presented
u grievance to the assembly as to Mr..
]. E. Miller, and that Mr.. salisbury
had informed Mr.. Miller that the assem-
bly's arbitration committee had no
Jurisdiction in his case; ''that 1t was
similar to the horseshoers' case
Mr.. Salisbury pleaded mot guilty"
Then Delegate selvey cited Mr.. Mtller's
statement that IAN official OF the as
sembly'' gave him the information; ''the
man who organized the expFessmen's
union" Messrs. Stein and Duffy. other
members Of the arbitration committee,
made similar statements, but none
heard Mr.. Miller Implicate ''Mr. Sails
bury" no name had been mentioned.
Mr.. Greig said 1t wouldn't DO to pre-
sumo Mr.. Salisbury was the party; the
charges specified ''T. V. Salisbury and
the defendant was entitled to the bene-
at of the doubt. Quite a wrangIe en-
sued, and the chair held that 1t was
proper to name the "organIzer" Of the
expressmen. Mr.. RAIDER named Mr..
Salisbury.
Mr.. Salisbury read an afidayit from
8ir. Miller, sworn to before Squire
Peterman, In which Mr.. Miller said he
never said Thomas V. Salisbury gave
him the information"
Mr.. Dutfy intlmated that Defendant
Salisbury was resorting to technieaIt-
ties. Mr.. Salisbury replied that II he
had been charged as Organizer Sails
bury the ahidavit would have been the
same.
Mr.. Bauer questioned Mr.. Arlller's
veracity. whereupon Mr.. Salisbury
arose and asked what weight the pros
ecution expected It's charge to have,
since It was based on alleged converse
tons with him.
Then followed series Of speeches Of
varying length, Ringing on the technI-
callty of the charge. Mr.. dregg's mo-
ton to quash was eventually put, but
the chair was unable to decide. Mr..
Salisbury demanded the ayes and
nays, but somebody raised the point
that It couldn't be granted under the
constitution A motion carried
for standing vote, which
was objected to vigorously by
Mr.. Williams. who claimed The chair
wasn't giving Mr.. Salisbury a fair
show. Mr. Tighe had agreed to an aye
and nay vote, but said In explanation
of allowing the standing vote motion
tina, the former vote was uneonStitu-
tIonnl. Another hot time followed,with
the gavel ringing over the din. II was
very funny for awhile. and points Of
order succeeded each other rapidly.
The air became cleared after awhile
and the motion to quaSh the tirst count
Of the indictment was defeated. there
being 10 to quash and % against Mr..
orelg intlmated that the prosecution be
given until the next meeting to draw
up the other charges more definitely.
The vote to sustain the first specthca-
ton, which was In effect declaring
Salisbury guilty. was carried by % to
10.
The remaining charges were as fol-
lows:
Charge No. THAT Mr.. Salisbury ad-
vised several members OF Local Union |
No. 1Oa Cstreet car men) TO recede from
their demands for 20 cents an hour and |
take IS cents, or they would lose all.
charge No. S-Thas Mr.. Salisbury |
stated TO City Receiver ForEey. that
licenses should be collected from all |
9. -..tt-... 80. ,,,nv, t-uTa hVtrf0u the |