Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1858-05-31
Removal of DR. BrOoks-Letter from
Councillor Rogers.

|
upon "the removal of DR.. Brooks - not for
the purpose of naming reasons for his remov-
al, for they are numerous and well known to
the Governor and his "useless," ''meddle-
some contemplate council" as you are
pleased to designate it, although they may
not be known to those very few respectable
individuals who have been brooded over by
DR.. Brooks, and to whose untiring industry
the executive department Is indebted tor the
very little knowledge it possesses of the "use-
fulness of DR.. Brooks" Nor is attention called
to the article in question to show that he is
not religious man. yet, if the statements
published in your article, or the language sent
to Boston over the Geographic wires in behalf
of DR.. Brooks, by one Holland, of Spring
field, think ,-were prompted by Brooks, or
if he is accountable for the errors, q will not
say falsehoods,) Of the one, the profanity of
the other, and the ndecency of both, and his
standard of pety is to be judged by them, l
think any moral community would fail 10
recognize in him any peculiar fitness to man
age an institution of that kind in a religious
point of view,-the opinion OF the Republican
to the contrary Notwithstanding.
Nor will l attempt to enumerate the multi.
tude of complaints made to the executive de-
partment, of uncivil aud insulting treatment
TO individuals in private as well as in official
|
torious to admit of any defence, justification,
or palliation. Nor is it nv purpose to show
that he bias neglected his duties at the aims
house; yet Brooks was heard to say-and
that too before the particular indignty of
which / will soon speak, was offered-that
" he spends as much time outside Of the iaStj-
tuition in hWhing up these rOloS against htm as
he spends inside" The proof of this is at
hand if wanted. beg the public to weigh
this declaration and then judge; not whether
his removal can be justified, but whether the
executive OF this common wealth could be
justified in retaining him in office another
day. Nor again, is it my object to show that
he was not a supporter of MIR. Banks last
fall yet it would be difficult to show how
he supported him. 1t is notorious, that at a
meeting of our friends in Palmer short
time before the election, he was present and
chosen to preside but instead OF taking the
chair as he should, he took his hat and left.
In short, he was everywhere and no where in
politics until the result of the campaign was
made certain. This subject is alluded to, not
on account of its Importance, for it had moth
ing to do with his removal, but because great
stress has been placed upon the delusion, that
he was an ardent supporter Of Gov. Banks.
1t dead bodies have not been sold at Mon
son Cand do not believe they have), no one
ought to know it better than Brooks yet l
have high authority for saying, that no sub.
Jects for dissection could be obtained from the
Monsoon almshouse for a certain medical Inst-
tuition in this State, until the demonstration of
anatomy was allowed to pay S15 each, and
then enough could be had, and they could
even be designated while alive. Neither is it
necessary on the other hand to speak of the
peculiar fitness of DR.. Brewster for the place
made vacant by the removal of Brooks AS
surances of his fitness from such men as Hon.
ii. l.. Dawes, NJ. c., Hon. Z. M. Crane, Hon.
John Branuing, Hon. J. W, Boyden, Hon. ].
L. Robinson, Hon. Mark Hopkins, Hon. Ju-
Illus Rockwell, Hon., George N. Briggs, and
many others, will, l trust, be sufficient
guaranty 10 the public of bis qualifications for
the place notwithstanding you in your wis.,
dom should see fit to denominate them, in
your very refined language, as "tuppeny,"
''small potato" men.
But the original purpose in my mind was
only to correct the erroneous statements in
your article relating to my visit and interview
with Brooks ; and this cannot be better done
than by relating the circumstances which led
to the interview, and the conversation which
followed. On the 9th of April last an Ital-
| ian lady came to the State House in great
distress of mind, and told the following sto-
| ry:
About three years ago, when all her family,
consisting of six or seven small children, were
| Nil, being i'll destitute circumstances, she
| found 1t necessary for the time being to send
| two of her boys-one now about twelve and
! the other fourteen years old-to an almshouse
In Boston but having, ae is supposed, no le-
| gal residence there, they were soon sent to
one of our State almshouses, and from thence,
in the month of June, 1885, removed to Mon
! SON. These removals we're made without the
knowledge of the family. On ascertaining
their whereabouts, an elder sister went to
Monsoon to see them. Neither she nor the
mother knew, until conversation was heard
at Monson about binding out pauper children,
that they could be bound out. Brooks was
asked if he intended to have these boys bound
| out, he evaded the question, and asked if sho
had come to take them away. She Replied
that II they we're to be bound out she would
take them away. Brooks then said, /" They
are getting along finely a little more school
! ing will not hurt them-I think they had
better stay little longer" He then prom
Used that they should not be bound out with
out the consent of the family, and thereupon
took their address,
Letters were subseq uently written to Brooks
inqulring if the boys were there, how thew
got along, &c., but he made no reply. After
much labor they succeeded in finding that
they had been bound out during their minor
ity, and also in obtaining the names and
residence of the persons to whom thew are
bound. The mother now says she intends to
return to Italy, and of course desires to take
all her children with her, agd wished to sail
at an early day. From the apparent
honesty and simplicity of her statement and
finding everything she said verified so far as
l had opportunities to investigate, my sympa-
thies became far enlisted that 1 took a
memorandum of the facts stated, and agreed
to write or see the perso to whom the bows
are bound, and relate the circumstances to
them in the hope that they would be induced
to give them up.
On the 23d of April last, in fulfllment Of
my promise, l made arrangements to see the
gentleman in <Chlcopee, to whom one of the
boys is bound, but whose name | had forgot.
ten, and having mislaid or lost the memoran-
dunn, | stopped over one train at Palmer
with the view of getting the same facts there.
l rode over to the Almshouse with DR..
Nichols OF Palmer, and found Brooks near
the barn. was introduced by DR.. Nichols
as Hon. A l.. Rogers Of Worcester. | rs.
marked that had come over, having barely
time between the trains, to ascertain the
names and residence of the persons to whom
the boys describing them) are bound, and
asked 9im II he would be so kind as to fur.
nish the information. He said "no,"
assured him that my only object was to see
these men in the hope that they might be
induced to give them up,as the mother desired
to return her native country, that had had
the information from the mother and could Of
course get it again from the same source, and
| vattld all. M