The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-10-03
'sh'' CONTESTED BY COUNSEL.

when 1t was QCSlIletl ~ Ioiioih hSPS w
do go, and had finally won after hare
. :" CONTESTED BY COUNSEL
At this point Mr.. O'Flaherty, of co,nl-
sci for MIR. Hechler. interrupted to say
that he and his associates wished 70 con-
fer and may determine not to admit the
r jurisdiction of the committee IN the
! case. -, a.,
This put stop to all proceedings until
tho confcrees returned On their re-
anpeerance they stated that they APP
peared to contest the jurisdiction OF the
Safe committee III the case we 40
not know what position the county com
mittee will take said he. "lf mat
committee accepts this committee deci-
sion as binding, then we VIII ace, asrept ~, :.
cheerfully. We are here to deny the
right of the State committee to award
the certificate 20 Mr.. Brauer. we are
here IN n negative way to contest MI.
Brauers position, but we do not repre-.
sent the county committee ana no hot
know what their action Will be-
MIR. Parker: '.will Todd or Hecliier
run against Brauer If this committee ue-
clares him the nominee7
Mr.. O'Flaherty: We cannot speak Tor
tho rentlement on that point In advance
OF the county committees action.
Mr.. Patton Where do the counsel FOR
the appelees stand? If this committee
declares Brauer is not tho nominee, Io
they contend that Hcchler or Todd "ouio
be? &4GF .n,
Mr. Fulton: Charges have been filed
AGAINST Mr.. Hechler, from which he is en-
cited to generation. nRIt's up TO tne
county committee to decide what II WIN
do before our clients answer that cues
tlon finally do not know what tnes
will do: whether they VIII bow 10 .n ,
state committees decision or not II t,to
county committee accepts ms co'. ',,,,nt
tees decision we do no know yet WHAT
we will do. ,,,r, 60
would be assuming appellate jurisdiction
thov do not possess in this case II thes
declare Mr., Brauer the nominee.
ANOTHER NORFOLK COUNTY.
NJ parker; did not think there was
rut one Norfolk county m the o.a.s'
hnt see was mistaken. mere IS . az.
other. It is Henrico. J GU my. ..,.i,r r.
into a mess there and we are .i.i ,s to,.
81 .,,ghten YOU out and to do what Is io'
the best interests of the parry. ,.,,,,,.
NJ watkins thus stated the sllua.ioi,.
,rhn notit,on filed here asks for remeuy
ne an alleged wrong. AS 20 "ne WIFI
Hcchler or Todd is entitled 70 ,lie .,,hat-
nation this committee has no'n.ns p mn,
ever to do. We are neai rs 80, onnaar
ose and nothing else. II you nppva,
s ,.ase and make charge against brauer
,o,, have made your appearance any
80: 80 the jurisdiction OF this coI1l,,ii''te
49, I1,,en vou appear and undertake ~
.,,,a n,rt In this case you are oouliu
vour action and must aploe INC
We have nothing to do WIN ma 1ne g 10 an
whether Mr.. Hechler or MI ~ w irving
~ "a the nomination. we aFe ~, ,,, C
titlea " VIC case on his appear; nothing
more. e,r+her legal fenc-
srr patton offered the loi'o"'"s'
.ns vas adopted unanimously.
..pssolved. That after such 'nSes. aSa
+,on az this committee decloes " ,.ation
- ands that the certificate OF ho Nv prou.
.hould have been awarded 10 w. h,o, +he
CT, !. Gov trea surer of Henrico county.
o1assrs OFlaherty, Fulton and the otne'
,ttornevs accepted this, and the O.. ~
.a,t ~ the case on its merits was eoo
into ra,th resumed his
maria opening statement OF the Gase
for the appellant, in which ne was me-
rupted. .,a lotion Of the
A. w. romn,,ttee in finding Mr.. Brauer
lit. an two counts of violating the pro-
s,t.,ons of the Barksdale law. he re-
,,.ewed the circumstances OF TINS ana We
,,iaa mat Mr.. Brauer had committed any
orfense. In one case he had mercy tiaue
,nan "a a man who desired funds Win
urich to get to Norfolk, and hao done
his nurely as an act of charity. AS 70
tho charge that he had given y Win
which to buy drinks for votes the spea fI
or claimed that the testimony sho"ea
that he had given this sum LOT rem. o. %
a hall. AS to the charge that MT. Brauer
had treated those whom he met IN par,
roon the speaker declared that he hau
courteously invited all who were IN the
bar when he went in to drink with NM
and assured them that 1t made no diner
ence to him whom the beneficiaries or tho
treat favored for treasurer. This was
merely courtesy
MATTER OF TREATING.
Mr.. OF'laherty then took the moor 70
make his opening statement. he re,.er-
ated the action of the County Committee
in the case, charging that it had, AFTER
full testimony sustained the charges OF
violation of the Barksdale law. he de-
ncunced the action of Mr.. Brauer in treat
ing. and claimed that 1t was just what
man who desired to win votes would
do when Mr.. Brauer set EN- up to all IN
the bar. He declared that the testimony
sustained the charge that Mr.. Brauer had
given a man money to expend In his be-