The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-03-31

sonterence eolnl #, and lts report
as to whut tic rontending pnrtles viii
give and take 80 az to Soinu to am agrevii
upon and signed, has to be ratified anu
Approved by both branches Of the Legis-
lature. l may say further that, as! as y
n n Of h9 for
thing that Il chose III that report ana
seyeis lainendnehts TINT 4 nag III openly, my
then, with me III tho cotnnilttee. !, 4, /.
When we mot III conferences senator
Rsyson. aid Hobbs came IN and stated e, d
minute, and thereupo,, loft, and my recol;; !
lection Is they did not come back until
tlhsy n and sEnea az, the IL reP1r rcd No
Mn Mn ro .,' md 81 Sid: tGin thnt some
claims n'rhe Supreme Court Of Appea,ll!s
lad a fow days previous rendered = ~.
Asylum vs. Graves, reversing the &C.. &c,
cIslo IN The Mcclanl1,nn case ,; rem 'a
several years ago, which iielu INA. , tni
claims due tic nsyllims. Thlis you vii
observe tic decision in the Graves, case
made all past due claims coectnble, saw SAY.
wa o m N tha otRcr senate con-
ltfcrrees In tho Committee md that Soma
tor Chapnan THOUGH he had rec rn ea1lv
ed the Senate substltue %as ,I practlca ~.
VIII VIII th ico understandhE That they would
| TX the n,lgatory clause above rcterrem
Senator Chapman. Mr. Howle8 nnd my
self as 10 the language to be used 10
arrange this. and Senator Chapman pm sug1
Il had MT fI II
for my other amendments which I offered
on tho floor Of the House. What | was "
asked to draw vas s. only NY lntcmoe md a s,s.
cussed by all conferrees betorc
After fixing the nugntory part, L l, t q
UP the question OF compens s tlon -,
| shown above. he being the. only mcn1 ll,,,,
present, I believe, at that time YOU WI VII
observe In the report an cnarseu W' e.,
attem,ptin ~ 1T, to oS hganwriing IN the
p mH OF Mr.. iiowle, and with his cor. ,
sent; the other gentlemen were absent az \
the time Of their oW mseora 4 un he Time
MIR. Howlc and myself dlscu 8! ca tn n,
| provisions or when + wrote the recon-
mendntion OF the change IN me ii co'ipe''-
station. Y, d " !,
| What Occurred in Committee.
n Yns a rePog en WoT s65sa ~
an, quite sure by Mr. iioWlc l5elore 81 ~
had in opportunity to discuss the ma a;IteT
with Senator Ghapman sc We nlp,nea
camc in, who CThomas) picked up one
of tho reports and began reading IT and
stated that he tThon,as) wont, agree e ~
| Thomas have to do with this not !, being
a member OF the committee? 'Ihcn ~ was Is
that Senator Chapman chimed In, nna
said hG had not aT Ioas . 70 r SAY tht
r r. was surprised at his position on this
point does not express It. Yo,l VIII re &
member lie is the gentleman =, Who fa rrcg thc
s50S dssSsted /" VIII Senator GhGpmRan sn
position in the whole Slrra tier, havln 7, nGe,
G t.,a MAI Vas friendly 10 the substitute
! biii: that he Chapman recommended
|tbat, I said, we'll gentlemen,if YOU don ~ !.
diinerence 10 me; ST; rhomas,ls mistaken mi sn
marked ''AIy God. r don like anything.
Ike that what does thls mean me a.: w =
| It, and T am SURPRISED that It is IN here.
or words to this effect. OF course nc
/ (Chapnran) had notngrced 70 1t as ne &c. nag
not read or signed 1T. did not like i
either, ard left tho committee disgusted:5
and net Mr. Sa"He In the hall md asked
s,,i,n If he considered Senator Chanman
him him what took place in the committee;
}kind fa
/ he says the other Senate conferrees were .
| called I'M The fact is they never came
back into the conmi, tee after signing
| the report.
| to say that T did not have perfect 1ight /!
TO get the compensation. changed II
could I thought whoever the Governor
| should appolnt should be compensated to
that extent. and from my experience Is 2 I
I{lnwver still think the conpnnsatiorg
smnll--very smal-at 10 ner cent. when
suit is necessary. But what more co, VIC
tforc he signed and so had the othrrs II
I + had Intended a fraud Is 1t possible that
I could have escaped detection when ~, inc
Again: IF I had intended to do wrong
had I any right to suppose thnt the sew
| elal gentlemen would not read n r'Dor.
| cl,ar"ad c'hir-. ortcrsit v,ce slered.
Had No Rightto Criticjse.
Mr.. Chapman may have been surprised
when he read that report contained 70
per cent instead Of 10, but he had no
right TO criticisc the change certainly
10 The provision. but even lftI had,know,nlg
that he objected to 1t (Which I did noD6
! It would have been of no consequence
He had not signed the rnrort W 70 !, tm a.
objected: r. he did not object surely ne
had no right to blame me. ~ any. event.
/ he had fun ChanCc TO read me Itpo'tH
land did read It, before he signed II. a
Senator Chapman's evidence on this.
! point in answer TO questions asked him
\ Mir. Pullcr: Were Won not on tho sub
| committee of the Finance Committee that
| recommended the Senate substitute TOR
| House Bill No. u?
Mr. Chapman: Yes, sir.
Mr.. Pulcr Is It not fact that the
recommendation carried compensation
Mr.. Chapman: That Is right
! Mr.. Fuller: Is It not II fact lint the
90 per Co. was stricken out in. the Son
| ntc.# as tho journal will show, by Judge
| Phlegar ana 10 per cent. substituted in
| place Oft?
Mr.. Chapman: am mot prepared to
| sneak from nry memory about that. but I
rccollcct distinctly that Senator Thomas
ana Senator$Phlegar both objected to tho
| amount or compensation. and ] was Of
/, tho opinion that tho Finance Committee
reduced that TO the 10 per cent. 1t may
have been done on the floor Of the Senate,