The Sunday herald. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1866-1887, 1885-07-19
THE BIRNEY-LOyEJOY CHARGES.
THEY ARE EXAMINED AND DISMISSED AS
GROUNDLESS.
Full Text OF the Argument by Mcssrs. FendsIi and
Ferry.
UNSATISFACTORY, u. G., July II, 1885.

with the argument Of his case, desire 10 protest
against the participation by Commissioner West, rs
n Judge or In any other cipacty, In your delibcra-
tons or conclusions upon the said case.
AS counsel, and individually, we regret 70 he com
PEELED to take this course; hut forced during the
taking OF the testimony 10 oppose. almost from the
outset, the methods adopted by Mr.. West an acqui-
esccncc IN which would have deprived the inycstiga-
ton Of ali fairness, and compelled 10 sec that MIR.
West was really the person complaining OF MT Love.
10y, although IN form the accusations were Those OF
MIR. Brncy; and driven 10 the conclusion that the
person Intended Ia lie attacked Ia not 80. much MT.
loycioy, although his name is alone nsed, ms MT;
\. Ormond Wilson. the late superintendent, we feel
Il to be our duty to reject Mr.. West as Judge In
this matter.
OF the truth OF our assertions In this connection.
This proof We will produce from the records OF your
ce "nn s9 Inc nS espnny ' ne na
had sufficient opportunity TO deny OF explain; much
OF II, however, has come from hts own mouth, and
out Of this he should not object TO he Judged.
Mr. West first appeared In this case as distinct
from hia associates IN consequence OF an order made
by the commissioners that no should take the tes,
niony In the case aud report his findings Of fact.
This order was objected TO by Mr. l0veJoy, on tue
tho ease, aud Mr.. IoycIoy insisted that he had sat
isfac,ory for regarding him as prcjudiccd,
aud hence unnt to adiudicate the. findings IN the
cascv (Scc Mr.. Iovcjoy's letter OF June 20 ulimO)
on the same day the commissioners, through Mr..
Edmonds, assured MIR. iovejoy that inc testimony
taken should he referred 10 full board.
on the ist day OF July d'eng the next day 10 THIS
corrcapondonce) the testimony was commenced.
Almost at the outset Mr. West interrupted me nro-
Mr. Birncy publicly charged Mr.. Ioycloy with
certain ofrcnse, about the nature OF winch we shali
inquire more fully hereafter. All that IL necessary
to consider now Ia that the charge was publicly
had no opportunity OF answering these charges,
public IA they had bccn, until the testimony was
to say TINT they woui admit, all Of the matters OF
fact alleged IN the specifications, ana furher pro-
ceeded to declare what they understood INC charges
them. This was attempted to no prevented by MI.
West Finally, however, he admitted that counsel
were right, aud directed them TO proceed with their
statement. Next thereafter he offered a certain
letter In testimony. lie was asked by Mr. Perry IN
offered L as counsel, to which Mir. West answered,
al am Instructed to make case" Now, counsel 40
not wish to Insist upon the literal meaning OF the
very startling expression when used by quasi
Judge, WinstrIicted 10 make casc.' We of course
Know that MIR. West had no such instructions; nor
words used by him mean. We understand that he
intended only to state that he was there Tor inc pur
pose, not OF classifying tho evidence, but OF looking
at tho ease from one point of view only: and OF
developing the evidence IN no far as he could IN That
direction. This is what he meant by making case;
part. BY this almost unconscious expression OF MS
thoughts and purposes he showed what hisinlenton
was, and as we go counsel viii point out now
completely he was dominated by that purpose 30
completely that he forgot not only what he owed TO
his position US expeciant Judge in this case but also
what he owed to the office that he held aud to hla
colleagues whom he represented there.
,eha as mos S MI /" Which eonse ask you"
attention ia the series OF questions asked and state
ments made by him at the sessions OF Monday, ,ue
9th, and Tuesday, the Jih instant, IN connection
with the disposition OF the salary OF MISS Baftlett
for the months OF January, February, and March,
show a way through which MIR. Lovejoy could e.
cape; that he tWesU was convinced that LoyeJoys
Ignorance hal heen practiced upon by others Mr..
West next proceeded to put upon record and TO state
ut this puhir session where members OF Tue press
were rresrn, for the purpose OF reporting lne pro
aoner uf The District of Columbia, that the money
then being inquired about To wit. the salary OF Mss
Bartieis school FOR The three months aforesaid, or
for some portion thereof, had been stolen from the
dylug cir "and there could be no doubt IN the minds
of any who heard him that he meant MIR. Wilson
had stolen the money. When this statement was at
the next days session pronounced absolutely 1ase
bv Professor Cleveland Abbc, at whose house Miss
Bartlett died, Mi. West did not rctract this accusa
ton Lastly, when ne was asked u certain question
by Mr. Lov'l"y counsel, after ne haa gohe on we
stand witness, under the gulse OF answering the
question he made the following among otncr extra
ordinary statements:
Joy and Mr.. wilson the one side, Commissioner
West and Nr. Brncy m the other."
Counsel for Mr. lOvejOy protest against Mr.
VESTS conduct in ihis matter as unworthy of his
high once AMI OF the people whom he represents
And they say mat even were they c2my n ,1 s
case, yet after their experience in thisinvcsgaiion,
they could not consent TO submit to his Judgment
the determination OF any question.
Counsel may seem to use harsh language; but
they are convinced that no one can read under
siandngly what MIR. West has said In taking the
testimony, or follow the attacks made by him over
Mr. Lovejoy's shoulders on an absent ana SICK school
teacher broken In health through rd s neS%% %arc
without reaching the conclusion that counsel are
justified In their course.
the case:
The charges which were given to the public press
against MIR. Lovejoy OH the 24th day OF June ultimo
were of the gravest nature as published. They al
legged falsiilcatiOns made by Mr.. LovclOy OF the
were not published then in detail, nor have they yet
been published, save through the testimony taken Il,
the investigation These charges ana r speGca Cn
read by few. Mr.. Brney's published charge was
concise and smplc-it was Justification of pay-rols;
OF ali who saw 1t very definite thing. This charge
was given to the press. and on the morning OF tue
pal cities OF this nation it was published thai Benja
min g. Lovejoy, of the city of washington, d. O..
stood charged as school trustee WIN le ,aSinoa.io
easily understood charge II would have been
grave matter had the publication OF TINS charge
been confined to the city or Washington, where, to
those who knew the two men, both the character OF
the accused and OF the acc,ser would have refulcd
was published broadcast in distant cities ami
among strangers, to whom MIR. lovcjoy,s name
this was grave thing that man who had lived a
reputable life In the community In which he was
horn should suddenly and without notice hnl MIN
self attacked In his integrity and honesty about
master In which he had served the public gra'ni
todsly aud with much labor during the best years
way and by such person, could only be Justified
nv proof of guilt In the sense In which the charge
was meant to be- and In fact WAS understood
Now, let rs SEQ what the proofs were upon trial
Az has been said counsel for Mr. LOvejoy took the
earliest opportunity mt the Investigation Of stating
his answer TO this charge. The Testimony IL now
before Won and counsel assert that not one sclntia
Of nrooi haR been added nv the testimony TO the
abatement made by counsel on the first day of The in
yestgation And vet the counsel for MIR. Birney re-
fused 10 receive these and said: 'Wepro-
nose 10 nrOye our own case In our own way II was
mi Intended 10 allow Mr. I0yciOy the opportunity of
admitting what was true In tho specifications. II
WAS Intended that he should he nut In the false atti
tde al silently standing on tho defensive AMI call
inc for srjct irOOf II was Intended that II should
falsely appear that the allegations OF the Bpeci0ca
lions were denied that thus MIR. Brncy might
annear of regard IA nrOyinp something This at
temnt failed through Inc nersIstcnce OF Mr. Love.
iov,s cnnnsel and Mr. Brney IL of record as insist
inS an the Droof OF what Mr. IOycjoy ad,lltcd on
ina threshold
Now follows matter Ia which counsel ask your
oucntion Mr. perrvs statement il contained IN
mil in Tho record Amer ii mad been concluded, Mr..
Rrncv was comnelicd 10 admit that he could moi
nrnve ANYTHING thai WINS not there admitted by his
ic.nuneci 10 then unid
INF iovciov ,yas moi accused of taking money.
1,hcrn was no Criminal charge against him. As a
trmstec MIR Brncy \. mad deemed IL his duty 10 call
IN" attention OF inc COmlmIssjOners 10 the fact That
IL was Inc nract,cc OF some trustees to certify pay
ros which did not reprcscnt the truth, 10 give
nuplic charity he did not think was the duty Of