The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1881-03-31
Gen9LewIs Draws Out An Explanation
Editor Statesman:


Editor Statesman:
Referring to Lewis's statement in
your issue of Yesterday have to say:
/. That his charge to the effect
that the directors of the A. Il NJ.
College were opposed to making il
agricultural and mechanical is VI
terly false, as the records of the
board will show. All the appropr;-
atiOns have been made for buildings,
furniture, cabinet, library and agri-
cultural implements. The board
could not use the money for any
other purpose. The joint Legislative
committee, in report of March LIST.
says: The appropriation heretofore
have been carefully and judiciously
expended" Not one cent has
erer been giren by the state
to aid an defdying the rum
ming or current expenses Of
the college. To develop the
agricultural and mechanical features
the board was dependent on the
contingent fund-with the low rate
charged for board, tuition, ETC.. this
has not been sufficient to pay for the
erection Of new buildings, the dig
gin@ Of additional cisterns, services
of laborers, furniture, stoves, table
ware, stationery, postage, printing,
and other things too numerous TO be
mentioned to say nothing of break
ages, necessary repairs, etc. The
minutes Of the board will show that
repeated efforts were made to build
up the agricultural feature of the
college, and that Notwithstanding
the scanty contingent fund, more
than just proportion of it was used
in this way.
2. His charge that washerwomen,
laborers, etc, were made officers OF
the college is false.
3. His charge that the board al
lowed the professors to be abused,
they, the professors, hiding them
selves in cowardly fear until the
force of public opinion demanded a
change, lis also false. The board had
nothing TO do with the disgraceful
feud gotten up by the faculty among
themselves. Both Governor Rob-
erts and myself appealed 10 the fac
ulty to reconcile their differences,
they refused to do so and the change
i'll its personnel which the interests
of the college imperatively demand
ed was the only alternative.
4, His charge that in the second
year of the administration of the
board there was balance of $15,-
900 unaccounted for, is also false. If
there was any such balance it must
have been from the contingent fund,
and the books of the college kept
by one of the faculty show nothing
of the kind. .t.
3. His charge that the change in
the faculty was a political move,
each man nominating his man, etc.
is also false. The professors are
Col. John G.. James, j. r. Cole, c.
p. Estill, III. III. Dinwiddie, J.. L.
McInnis, DIR. ID. Port Smythe, E. u.
Ct. Gartner, G. G Georgeson and F
Van Wrinkle. The two latter were
taken from distant states. The politics
of none of them were ever canvass
ed by the board, certainly not i'll
my hearing. They were selected
solely tor their fitness for their res
pective positions. If any OF them
were ever connected with politics /
do not know it. Most of them are
we'll known to the people of this
State as distinguished educators
who have devoted themselves to
their profession. If there is ''an old
captain ofthe Davis police" connect
ed with the college even as a cook
or wood chopper never heard of it
6. The charge that l asserted that
the action OF the board must be kept
from the people is maliciously false.
L asserted nothing of the kind.
published at one time for
the hoard the minutes of
their proceedings. Newspaper
reporters were allowed, and in
some instances urged TO be pres
ent and to give TO the public all that
transpired. In my report in behalf
of the board, now before the legis-
lature, every thing connected with
the college is fully disclosed. In
that report, for the first time, atten-
ton is directed TO the expense of
the board in the way of per diem
and mileage, and a more economical
administration is urged. 1t is for
the legislature, not myself, TO apply
the remedy.
I In conclusion, may, in Lewis es-
timation, be the "chief sinner" L
never flattered myself that with
such men as Roberts, Hubbard,
Savers, Thompson, Pickett, Bonner,
Cochran. DeMorse, Davis, Scott and
Pfeufler, was able 10 influence and
control the action of the board.
Lewis is mad at me because he was
turned out of the college, and, no
doubt, thought would be candi-
date for reelection (which am not.
and hence his SANDERS.