The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1915-08-10


The recommendation that all police
men be discharged from tine rorce unon
second conviction for drunkenness eas
well as that prohibiting any policeman
from dealing In merhca ndise, were re-
ferred to the Police Board
Though II Too Stringent.
Stating that he believed the resoyu-
ton too stringent. and calculated 10
do injustice to many policemen inno-
cent of wrong doing, Alderman Powers
offered an amendment to the resolu-
tton censaring the Mayor, the Chief
Of Police. the Police Board and the
entire department.
There are a number OF policemen
In the department. said Mr.. Powers.
who l am sure are not deserving
censure. Policemen are to obey or
ders and the responsibility 10 up TO
those In authority. want to amend
this resolution by relieving the innc-
cent members of the force from cen
sure for something they have not
done"
Al this point Mr.. Fuller took the
floor on the question of personal priv
Ileee. He denied in emphatic language
that he had authorised an interview
In an afternoon paper. In which he ts
purported 10 have expressed himself
upon the report.
The special report. referred TO by Al
derman Fuller. was printed In the
News Leader. II placed the Alderman
in the position of expressing great sur
prise and indignation that the COM
mittee should recommend that the
mayor be censured. He was pictured
such a thing.
Denouneem Pubiieaticn.
Every one here knows my position
on this matter" said Mr.. Fuller. II
did not say what la here printed. nor
did / authorize anyone TO print such
an interview. II Is entirely false
Rewriting TO the pending question
Mr.. Powers said he did not think the
Board OF Aldermen desired TO place "a
stigma upon any policeman not guilty
OF wrong doing.
TT would be unfair ana UNJUST hs
said
MIR. Fuller agreed with Mr.. Powers,
and Colonel Grundy explained that
the committee discussed this very
point, but were in dilemma as to
whom TO condemn.
eff anyone can pick the men, Ne
explained, ''it will give me great pleas
ure 10 vote TO censure them. In this
particular we framed tie resolution
so that ell who were .eaiity OF derelic-
tton Of duty couiI be reached. We
had ~ desire to censure those who
are Innocent. had serious doubts
"a to our right TO cersure the mayor.
but when II was explained that a.
head of the government and chairman
of the Police Board IN had knowledge
o. the laws. and failed to enforce them
IN many respects. the co;amtttee felt
he should be censured as wall az thu
chief OF police or any OF the commits
sioners"
Censurea All Responsible.
- sa~ ~ -
mayor. the chief OF police and all mem
bers of the department who failed to
enforce the laws an they knew Them
and who were responsible for the en-
forcemcnt OF the same.
Mr. Mitchell objected to the amend
ment He said that the most humble
policeman on the force was as much
responsible ms the mayor. and while
he did not wish to condemn an inno-
cent man. he could not see why the !
resolution should be amended.
I'VE have no green-horns on the
force" said Mr.. Mitchell. Every one
OF the mon IL familiar with the laws. |
II not, he should not be on the force"
The amendment was adopted vive
voce. There were several dissenting
voices.
The resolution amending the otdi-
nance giving members OF the Police .
Board police powers was referred to
the Council COMMITTEES on Ordinances.
and the resolution recommending the
payment to stenographer Winston the
sum of $500 for transcribinE the evf.
denee In the hearings. was referred
to the Finance COMMITTEES.
number Of spectators were dis
appointed at the action Of the board
while others wars satisfied.
Commissioners Goode said last righ1
that he would take no steps in th
mater until he had conferred With
his counsel
Mr.. We'll could not be reached. n |
vas said BY close friend that he,
TOO. would await results from the
common Council. before taking another
STEP