Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1918-08-31
n. A. A. c. FORCED TO
WITHDRAW FROM
DIR. BUNDY

makes tho following public statement
concerning it's relation to DR.. Leroy
N. Bundy, Of East ST. Louis with
whose defense against the charge OF
COMPLETELY in the East st. Louis riots
OF July, 1917, the Association has
heretofore been associated. The
statement is signed by Charles H.
Studin, Chairman of the Associations
Legal Committee, and John II. Shil-
lady, the Associations Secretary.
The statement follows:
The National Association for the
Advancement of Colorcd People is
no longer connected in any way with
the further defense Of DR.. Leroy N
Bundy.
Tho st. Louis, Missouri Branch OF
the N. A. A. c, p, under whose i'm
mediate supervision the National
Headquarters had placed all matters
connected with the defense Of Dr.
Bundy, informed the national officers
of the N. A. \. G. p. some weeks ago
that it wished to withdraw from fur
Their responsibility for the defense Of
DR.. Bundy, owing to tho departures
by DR.. Bundy from tho conditions
established by the n. A. A. G.. p. for
the proper management of the Bun
dy defense and for the collection, dis
bursement and accounting of funds.
The National Board Of Directors and
the executive officers of the N. 4. a.
G. p. deferred action regarding the
matter, Notwithstanding the recon-
mendationS of its St. Louis Branch,
pending full consideration OF all
the circumstances Of tho case, includ
ing the opportunity given DR.. Bundy
to be heard in person concerning his
relations with the Associations re-
personalities in st. Louis.
Following a request OF DR.. Bundy
that he be given II hearing by tho
National Board Of Directors. com.
mittcc was appointed by the Board
10 hear and pass upon his version OF
his relations with the ST. Louis
Branch. This committee appointed
II special time, agreeable to DR.. Bun
dy, and mot with him on July II in
New York at the Office OF Charles II.
Studin, Chairman of the Legal Com
mittcc.
At the outset Of the hearing, upon
the alleged ground that he was not
represented by his own attorney and
did not have his own Stcnographer
present, DR.. Hundy refused to make
Il detailed statement in explanation
OF his relations with the ST. Louis
BRANCH. His dcmoanor throughout
tho hearing impressed the committee
as lacking in franlincss and was
characterized by an apparently
strong desire to avoid disclosing the
real facts in the situation to the com
mittee. Based upon the meagrc
statements he was willing to make,
and upon the we'll authenticated facts
in the case, the committee came to
tho following conclusions:
/. That the n. a. A. G. p. had
employed competent and we'll known
attorneys to defend DR.. Bundy and
that these attorneys were and are
ready to defend him whenever his
case comes to trial. The attorneys
in question were employed under the
personal supervision of the Hon.
Charles Nagel Of st. Louis, former
Secretary Of Commerce under Prcsi-
dent Taft, and a member OF the
Board Of Directors of the N. y. y.
G. p.
2. These lawyers were employed
with the approval and consent of Dr..
Bundy and arc among the most
prominent attorneys Of the bar where
the trial is to take place. The N. \.
A. c. p. has already paid them the
sum of $1,000 as fees to represent
Dr.. Bundy.
8. That all tho professional as
sistance required for DR.. Bundy's
trial has been provided by the N
A. a. c. p. Further, the National
Headquarters has at all times stood
ready to raise all the funds ncces-
sary for DR.. Bundy's further defense
needs.
4. That since Dr.. Bundy has been
released on bail, he has been going
over the country collecting funds
Tor the alleged purpose Of engaging
additional lawyers whose services are
in our judgment entirely unnecessary
for the proper conduct Of his case.
5. That, although the N. a. A. G.
p. has provided him with the ser
vices Of two excellent law firms, Dr..
Bnndy now claims that he wants in
addition three more firms to assist in
the trial OF his case; to one of these
he states that a retainer fee of APP
proXimatcly $4,000 is to be paid, to
another $1,000 has already been
paid. and to the third another fee
has been promised. In the judgment
of the committee, assuming that DR..
Bundy's statement is true that he, or
others on his behalf, are paying
money for these lawyers, this multi
pllcity Of lawyers can only mean a
waste OF funds and duplication of
work, for which other retained at
torneys have already been paiG and
which they are prepared to perform.
6. That DR.. Bundy has used at
least part Of the funds collected by
nm FOR the support and maintenance
OF himself and wife, and he refuses
to support himself in any other way
pending his trial than upon the pro
ceeds Of funds raised for his defense
7. That DR.. Bundy has declined
TO account for funds which have boon
contributed to him for his defense
IN view OF this attitude on the part
or DR.. Bundy, there is no method by
which that part of the public which
gives him its money will ever be able
TO compel him to render an account
OF what he does with 1t.
For the aforesaid reasons, the com
mlttee recommends that no further