Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-01-23
RECEIVES COPY OF CHARGES
Allegations Against Mr.. Henry E. Davis
q. s. District Attorney.
His Forthcoming Statement to the
Attorney General Outlined-The
SbufcIdt Case.

Mr.. Henry E. Davis, United States attor-
ney for the District of Columbia. today re-
ceived copy of charges that have been
preferred against him by DR.. r. W. Shu-
feIdt. The charges were filed with the
Attorney General, and that official for
warded the copy to Mr.. Davis. The latter
apparently is not at all concerned over
the matter. To a Star reporter today he
remarked that he did not see how any
sensible person could for an instant be-
lieve that he had been neglectful of his
duty, when he had carefully gone over
the matter ii question with Chief Justice
Bingham of the Supreme Court of the Dis
trict of Columbia and with Mr.. Hugh T.
Taggart, who has been attached to the Of
fee of the district attorney for a great
many years. The chief justice and Mr..
Taggart, Mr.. Davis stated, agree with him
! that his declination TO prosecute the par
ties whose cases DR.. Shufeldt desires call
ed to the attention of the grand jury was
entirely proper.
The Divorce Proceedings.
The statement of the matter as given is
that DR.. Shufeldt some time ago instituted
proceedings for divorce against his wife.
The hearing was had in the equity court
of Montgomery county, sitting at Rock
vile, Md. In the lower court decree was
rendered in favor of the plaintiff, but on
the case being taken to the court of ap-
peals of Maryland the decision was revers-
! ed and a divorce granted the defendant.
The decree of the upper court granted the
defendant alimony and also the privilege
of resuming her maiden name, Florence
Audubon. 1t was III connection with these
proceedings, DR.. Shufeldt alleges, that GER
tain OF the witnesses, two women, commit
! ted perjury, and it is against them he
| wants Mr.. Davis to proceed in the Criminal
Court of the District. Mr.. Davis, after
making a thorough examination of the
| facts presented by Dr. Shufeldt refused to
| take action against the women referred to-
and thereupon DR.. Shufeldt appealed TO the
Attorney General.
Mr.. Davis Statement.
| District Attorney Davis, in reply to the
| charges preferred by DR.. Shufeldt makes
| the following statement:
| Several years ago a certain physician
| was sued by his wife for divorce The suit
was brought in Maryland and the circuit
| court of the county issued a commission
| to take testimony in this District on be-
| half of the wife. The District witnesses
appeared voluntarily before the commits
sloners Were sworn and testified. The hus-
! band won the case in the circuit court but
! lost it in the court of appeals of MARYLAND
which granted the wife a divorce
| subsequently, as l recoliect, some nine
or ten months ago, the husband called on
| me and charged that some of the witnesses
| who testified here had committed perjury
and he asked me to present them to the
| grand jury. After patient examination of
! the case | declined to do as requested, for
| the reason that l found the law 10 be that
| false swearing under the circumstances as
signed was not perjury. 1t is needless to
go into the technical explanation of this
| fact but fact it is.
About the list of December the husband
| called on me at my home and asked me if
I would give him and his attorney a fur
| Their hearing in the matter. to which | at
| once assented. Accordingly, on the day
| following his visit, he called at my office
| with his attorney, and they called my at
| tention to the case of Battle Minor and
| Others convicted of perjury in the Belt
| divorce case during Mr.. Wcrthington's in
| cumbency of office of district attorney for
| the District of Columbia. That was a suit
| instituted in Baltimore. and the convicted
persons had testified witnesses in this