The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-06-07
POLLOCK AND WISE
HELD Gull 7LESS
BY COMMITTEE:
CONTINUED From First page)

NSObt'thSo y iOlil - % 4 dSt'J
the Common Council of the city OF
Richmond; and whereas, 1T IS deemct
proper, In justice to the reputation
of this body, and is due tho public
no less than the said members, tina,
the matters referred to in said mes
sage should be fulg investigated and
the facts and circumstances concern
Ing the transaction referred to ascer-
taincd and the result of such investi-
cation reported to this body; and
whereas the said George Il. Wise and
Gilbert X Pollock have requested an
investigations;
Now, therefore, Be It resolved by
the Common Council OF the city OF
RichmDnd:
IL That the said message of the
Mayor of the city OF Richmcnd be
and the same Is hereby referred to
special committee to consist VI five
members. TO be appointed by the pre-
siding officer OF This body. AMI such
committee is hereby Instructed to pro-
coed. with as little delay as possible,
10 investigate the facts bearing upon
such investigation, together with their
recommendations thereon.
"2. THAT the said special committee
be and they arc hereby authorized to
order the attendance of any persons
HlliltSSts " ltclils
in making such investigation, and to
require the production by any person
OF all books and papers in their pos
session, which may. In the opinion
of the committee, be necessary or
proper to be introduced before them
promptly commenced the investigation
directed by said resolution and ex-
amined all of the witnesses named in
the message of the Honorable Mayor.
and certain other witnesses whose evil
dence IL was deemed desirable to have
before us. the evidence of all of which
will be found in a copy OF the
stenographic report Of the testimony
herewith returned; and, after four ex-
tended sessions of the committee in
hearing the evidence produced before
them, and after careful consideration.
have reached and beg to submit the
following findings:
Committees Findings.
l. While the evidence shows that
George E. Wise requested Dr.
Reade. member OF the Common Coun-
Gil. TO ask for a suspension of the
rules. by which means he secured the
Immediate action of the body upon the
ordinance. yet the evidence, in our
opinion. does not show that the fee OF
$500 paid to Mess.s. George Il. Wise
and Gilbert *. Pollock members OF
the Common Council. was paid to Sc
cure the passage of an ordinance
amending the ordinance, which had
been In force since 1901. prohibiting
the feeding OF distillery waste TO
mich COWS.
2. we find that tho fee OF $500 paid
to Messrs George r. Wise and Gilbert
X. Pollock. az they admit and as the
evidence shows. was paid hy the
WISE
ard Pollock for services rendered By
them as attorneys at law in order to
secure permission from the Chief
Health Officer for the feeding OF dis
tfllcry waste TO mich cows.
3 In view of the effort of Messrs.
Wise and Pollock TO justify their Hc-
ton by the production of evidence In
tended to show that their conduct was
entirely pEofessionIl and ethical In
rcceiyin instrumentation to obtain from
the cxe,fifive officer of one of the de-
partmcnts of the city government per-
mission for violation of said ordinance
prohibiting the feeding of distillery
waste to mich cows, and In view
also of the fact that the Cit? Attorney
advises us TINT there IL no ordinance
or statute prohibiting the acceptance
of compensation by attorneys or other
peraons for performing services such
ny those which Messrs. Wise and Pol
lock were engaged to perform. we feel
Justified In reporting specially that
we depHcntc, as hurtfui TO the efficient
and faithful representation of con-
ntitucncy, for members of either
branch Of the Council to engage their
services for compensation, as wnn adj
nnIttedIy done in this case. to obtain
pcrmission of such officer for the sus-
pension of the enforcement of an ordi-
nance duly enacted by tho lcgislntiye
branch of the city government.
Make II Unlawful.
We nre satisfied, and so report, that
such practice should he made unlawful,
70 that hereafter there may not he n
recurrence of such conduct ms has been
developed by the evidence In this case.
One hurtfmI effect. mt least, In tails par
tfcular case, was. by the confession OF
the gentlemen themselves. to incnpnc.-
tate them from the discharge of thet.
duty in voting on the
ordinance in question.
We therefore report and recommend
for adoption draft of an ordinance
herewith returned. prepared by the
City Attorney, which, in our judgment,
will meet the situation and be whole
some legislation. and which is in the
words and figures following:
"A OFQlnAnCe
To prohibit city officers from receiv-
ing. or agreeing to receive, any COM
pensation for services rendered Or to
be rendered in relation to any pro-
ceeding or other matter in which the
city of Richmond is a party or is in
terested. before any BODY or tribunal
having under consideration such pro-
ceeding or matter, and to impose a
penalty for the violation of such pro-
hibition.
Be it ordained by the Council Of
the city of Richmond:
l. That no member of the Board OF
Aldermen. or member of the Common
Council of the city of Richmond, after
his election and during his continuance
in Office. and no head of department,
or other officer or clerk. of or under
the city government, shall receive or
agree to receive. any compensation
whatever directly or indirectly, for
any services rendered. or to he rem
dered. to any person, either by himself
or another, in relation to any proceed
ing. contract, claim, controversy,
charge, accusation. prosecution, arrest,
or other matter or thing in which