The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1910-05-24
Course of Councilmen Pollock
and Wise Upheld by Lead
ing Members of Bar
LEVY SAYS ORDINANCE
WAS NEVER SUSPENDED
Members Of Board Also Bear Him
Out i'm Statement That No
Such Step Was An-
thorized.

The investigation Monday night OF
the charges brought against Council
man Pollock and Wise accused of OFF,
csAi misconduct In having accepted
$500 from a number OF dairymen for
services rendered before the board OF
health, was marked by testimony
which sharply confiicted in many i'm
portant details. though much progress
was made II is probable that the TAX
ing Of evidence will close at the hear
ing called for Wednesday night.
II had been the wish Of some of the
friends OF the accused councilman to
have several lawyers examined an to
the ethics OF the question. This priv
iiage the committee gould not con-
sent to, but allowed three letters or
~epfnicns -te-be-A led-f sens-A ttesasys
N. J. Fulton. s. A. Anderson and John
e Garland Pollard.
These three attorneys were unant-
NOUS In the opinion that neither Mr..
Pollock nor Mr.. Wise had v.oated the
ethics Of the profession. They deelar :
ed that the feeding OF mash" was
legal under the old ordinance. while
both the accused eouncilmen had a
perfect right to appear before tho
beard OF health as counsel for the
dairymen.
Not improper Says Pollard.
In summing up the situation, MIR.
Pollard said
Il do not think that the fact that
the chief health officer of this city In
selected by the council OF which you
are members makes * improper for
YOU to appear before the chief health
officer az an attorney because you have
vote in his election. then II would
be improper for members of the Legis-
lature to practice before the court of
appeals of this State or before the
judges of any of our city courts. do
not mean to say that influence in
such cases cannot be improperly used.
but our faith in human nature would
be small II we should contend that
our judges were influenced or con-
troled in their Judgment by the fact
that the attorney appearing In the
Gaze had a voice in their election"
psiryr,sn Testify.
Two dairymen, Messrs w. L. Brit
tie and John A. Deitrick testified. They
told of the employment OF Mr.. Wise
and OF raising the soc. Permission to
use the mash" was TO be procured
from DR.. Levy, they said. The money
was turned over to Mr.. Wise, according
to the testimony Of these two dairy
men. March %.
DIR. Levy fled the circular known
~ the letter of $685." which ha,
b%en sent out to the dairymen notify
ing them that though no action ha,
been taken to enforce the prohibition
ordinance which had been In effec
four years. enforcement would begi,
July 20. 1908, The circular was dates
IHly L. 1903 The letter of -1sas.
was printed In fun In The virginia.
Monday afternoon.
Putt Told Curtis.
The next important witness WI
former Dairy Inspector Harry Curtis
Mr. Curtis gave an account OF how
the rpmor of the councilmen's mis-
conduct had first reached him. Eari
In April MT Putt had told him tina
the dairymen were to be allowed I.
use mash and that money ha'
passed In some transaction connecte,
with the new law. Within a few day
is~ saw Mr.. George Drinker. he SAID
who told him that the privilege ha,
cost the dairymen $500. Mr. Drinke
had contributed $42.50 to the fund
He told Mr.. Curtis what the other
he Iaid. to MIR. Wise. who had retain
ed MIR. Pollock to assist him.
Did Not Suspend Ordinance.
Following this Or. Levy took tht
stand to explain certain points in tn,
cil cuiar which had been understood
- be admission that the ordinanc.
prohibiting the use of dtstIllery WASTE
had been suspended. Dr. Levy saic
that although the Law had been effsc,
tive four years when the circular wa.
written the health department had
been SO busy with other matters tina,
he had not been able to take more
than passing notice Of IL, and the
circular, he said was to notify the
dairymen that they must stop feedlnR
the waste, otherwise their licenses
would be revoked
Or. Levy declared that never for an
instAnt while the change of ordinance
was pending had he told anyone tina,
ne sanctioned the feeding of waste. nj.
though II was claimed that he had told
al least four people among then
Councilman Pollock. that he had mott.
fed his inspectors to ease up on this
6irtiilery waste business'' and not I,
pres the matter too closely rs "thr
Law was TO be changed"
No Suspension Authorized
Two members OF the board follow.
e6---Dr 0ppenhimer and DIR. James n
Gordon. Both said that the board
had never authorised DIR. Levy "a
suspend the ordinance. They declar.
ed that II was not necessary for At
tcrneys Pollock and Wise to appear
before the health officers to convince
them that good food was whole
some.
IN reply 70 this. however. the
datrymen showed that several dairy
men had appealed TO the board and
had been able to get no satisfaction.
They had then employed Messrs Pol
lock and Wise and had gotten all they
desired.