Maryland State Archives

Baltimore City Police
msa_s1894_02-0431

   Enlarge and print image (799K)     

 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS   NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space


 

Maryland State Archives

Baltimore City Police
msa_s1894_02-0431

   Enlarge and print image (799K)     

 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS   NEXT >>
371 Gambling Investigation. -----000----- In the matter in of investigation into the subject of the existence of alleged gambling houses in the city of Baltimore,as referred to in the proceedings of Friday,March 2Oth,1903, the following named persons appeared before the Board, in answer to its summonees, and were examined by the Board,a report of which examinations was made stenographically and will be found filed in connection with this minute as Exhibit No. 991;- ..rthur K.Darby, City Editor of the Baltimore Hews, John Bennett, Reporter, Baltimore Evening News, Clinton Lie.Cabe,Reporter,Baltimore Evening News, Albert Goodman,Reporter, Baltimore Herald, Lynn R.Meekins, Managing "ditor,Baltimore Herald. Captain John A. G. Shultz, Northwestern District. The secretary was directed to issue summonses for the following named to appear for examination on Wednesday, March 25th,1903;-Isador Goodman, City Editor, Baltimore Herald, Edgar Goodman, Baltimore American, Captain Edward Schleigh, Central District, Captain Bernard J. Ward, Northern District, Sergeant Frank H.Bromley, Northern District. Captain'Shultz, Northwestern District,—Newspaper publication as to alloged connection Tom Smith. Opinion of Counsel upon the statements in said publication. In answer to the Board's inquiry of March 20,1903, Mr.Alonzo L.Miles, counsel of the Board, submitted his opinion with respect to the publication in the Baltimore Herald of February 16th, 1903,headed,"THE BUCK CZAR IN NORTHWEST BALTIMORE",as referred to in the proceedings of March 20th, 1903, and filed as Exhibit No. 990, which opinion concludes as follows;-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx "I have no difficulty,for the reasons and upon the authority above cited,in reaching the conclusion that the article referred to,so far as Captain Schultz is concerned,is actionable,if not proven. If the charges imputed to Captain Schultz are not true,I think it is the duty of the Board to see that he Lndic >'. . If they are true,it is correspondingly the duty of the Board to vindicate itself by his dismissal or by some other severe punishment."