The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1915-05-01

received replies to the effect that
Chairman Starke was out of the city
and Mr.. Mcclure was awaiting his
return. Mr. Mcguire then read the
resolution adopted yesterday after
noon by the Vice Commission agree
ing to allow the City Attorney, in
company with counsel for the COM
mission to Gull from the papers 'all
testimony whic in their opinion Is
legal and relevant to the pending in
vestigation If there be any such not
already submitted"
Councilman Seaton objected that
this left the committee just where 1t
now is. I'VE already have evidence
that tie commission regards as legal.
want direct answer of yes or no
to my resolution. 1 Insist that we stand
by that resolution" He then moved
that second request be made OF the
Vice Commission. After one defeat
the Seaton motion was reconsidered
and passed with Councilman English
voting in the negative.
That the Vice Commission win not
give to the committee all testimony in
it's possessiea referring in anyway to
members of the Police Department,
without a fight is evident.
he entire Board of Police Com
m.ss.oners, with the exception of Com
missioners Douglas Gordon and w.
H. Parker. was brought under fire last
night by testimony presented to the
Council investigating committee by
city Attorney Pollard last night. With
counsel for the commissioners fight
ing every inch of the way, Mr.. Pollard
won partial victory in his effort to
show that the Police Board refused to
dismiss Officer w A. Harris for injury
10 husband. though the evidence
submitted was later found to give the
injured husband a decree of divorce
Of statutory grounds,
Commissioners Gordon was absent
and Commissioner Parker alone Is re-
corded as voting In the negative. A
rehearing was denied later and the
aggrfeved party then instituted suit
for divorce with success Officer
Harris is still on the force.
other police officials were also
brought in to the case by testimony of
Sergeant Goldsby and Chief of Police
Werner. but was excluded on the
ground that the alleged offenses were
committee after the investigation be-
gan:
.Affidavits Filed.
City Attorney Pollard filed affida-
Wits sworn to by Mrs. Ira Marabie
and Miss Mary Bell. alleging inn
moral conduct between Off1cer Har-
'ris and Mrs. Baroody and placed be.
fore the board by Baroody at the
officers trial. The former testified
when called to the stand that she
gave the evidence contained in the
affidavit to the Law and Equity
Court later, Miss Bell is out OF the
city and could not be reached Mr..
Baroody told of his vain efforts to
secure Officer Harris dismissal and of
his subsequently successful suit for
divorce on the evidence produced at
the trial before the board when he
asked for reopening OF the case.
The evidence given by Baroody
and that contained in the affidavits
OF the woman liz largely unprintabIe.
Counsel for the commissioners OBJ
;ected strenuousiy throughout, par.
ticularly to the admission of the court
records They contended that evf-
dence might have been taken at the
court trial that was not available to
the Police Board and that 1t should
not be admitted as evidence OF mis-
feasance on the part of the board.
They could not dismiss on evidence
they had never heard. counsel con-
tended. Mr.. Pollard declared that
much. IL not all. the evidence produce
sd In ennrt wa.s- produced at the trial
before the board. He further. con-
tended that Baroody offered TO sub
init all OF It and IL the board did not