Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1885-07-07

|
| counsel would refer in argument to the pay roll
| OF the second division for April. 1885.
W. smoaaa appear also In the record said Mr..
West, that these pay rolls were certified to by
Mr.. Lovejoy."
1T will be well, also" said Mr.. Perry. "to have
nom Commissioner who sits, or, suppose,
expects TO sit as judge i'm this case"
,r Yes Yes said Mr. West .and he will judge it
Mr.: George White. formerly trustee of the
Iourtn DIVISION, alter testifying. to his good
fled to a case in that division where !; sick
teacher was borne upon the rolls for several
months, while her school was taught by a sub
stttute.
WHAT MR.. PERRY EXPECTS TO PROVE.
Mr.. Perry stated that this would close Mr.
IIovejoy's case, with the exception of testimony
which they desired to get from Mr.. VIM. H.
Baum and Mr.. Burton r. Ross who had been
sent for, but were not then present. He said
that he desired TO prove by those witnesses as
he was advised he could, that when the mill
tary company was organized at the High school
1t became desirable to have some competent
person there to drill the boys and Capt Ross
was, with the knowledge of Commissioner
W est, employed as drillmaster. AS Mr.. Ross
vice, ana could not draw two salaries it was
arranged, as he was informed by Mr. Vests
suggestion, that MIR. Frederick Sohon should
sign the payroll, but that the money should be
paid to Capt. Ross
1t was arranged that Mr.. Willoushby should
Introduce his rebuttal testimony and Mr. Perry
snoulu examine Messrs. Baum and Ross when
they came in.
Mr.; Wiioughby then put Miss Blackston on
service as a substitute In Mrs. Rodler's school.
Mr.. Willoughby then submitted for record a
paper setting forth the principal points claimed
10 nave oeen proved against Mr. LOvejoy.
COMMISSIONER VESTS STATEMENT
+ Mr.. West, In response to a request by Mr. Will
loughby, stated how the Commissioners first re.
celVed information of these charges. Mr. West
said that about the 18th of March last five
charges against Superintendent Wilson and
Mr. Loveloy were submitted TO him with Mr.
Birney's letter. Mr.. West said that at that time
these matters could not be looked into without
creating school scandal. and it would be bet
ter TO suppress them. When on the oath or
25th OF June he returned the papers, the name
OF Mr.. Wilson had been stricken out and sixth
charge had been added against Mr.. Lovejoy.
dcred
MIR. West, in response to question by Mr..
Perry, made long statement, criticising Mr.
Wilson's action in regard TO the Bartlett case.
He said that Mr.. Wilson, when asked if there
WAS such fund as the Normal school fund.- dis
posed OF the residue of the fund spoken OF, and
then answered that there was moi. 1t was evil
dent that the Intention of MIR. Lovejoy that the
money should go TO Miss Bartlett had not been
carried out He said that when it became nee
essary to cover up an illegal transaction the
necessary retroactive order was passed by the
board and the money was given to Mr. Wilson.
How lie accounted for it or what he did with il
was matter for the judges to consider. Mr..
Nest Illustrated STR his position by holding up his
fingers: "This he said, tapping one finger, ..is
the old system OF Northumberland not in
tended, psrhaps-collusion, bad practices, the
accommodation of teachers and not the rights
OF schoiaIs: He put up another finger To
represent Mr. Lovejoy, another to represent Mr..
Birney; another, honest practices. As long as
he held his present position, he said, he would
require every dollar to be accounted for,
whether 1t Was i'll IL copyrighted school book or
in worthless hand-brush. When any trustee
found IL necessary TO question the acts of his
trustee, the commissioners would make Il care
ful examination.
MIR. Perry protested against this eAtraordin-
airy statement made by Mr.. West under the
gulse OF au answer to question. 1t was, he
said. an agreement which absolutely misstates
the facts as auduced in testimony here. 1t was
an abuse of official position for the sake of at
lacking an absent man, which attack is based
upon absolute misstatements OF testimony
taken here.
Mr.. West said that his colleagues understood
exactly the powers and authority which he had
here.
Mr. Perry said that this appeared. from Mr..
Vests statement, to be a contest between Mr.
West and Mr. Birney on one hand and Mr..
Lovtjoy and Nj. Wilson on the other This
was an Investigation OF charges made ostensf-
bly, by Mr.. Birncy. 1t appeared now that the
charge was made by Mr.. Birney and Mr.. West.
This was not the inquiry which would be made
ultimately. 1t would be another method and
before another forum that this question between
Mcssrs. West and Birney on the one side and
Mr.. LOVeJoy on the other would be tried.
TESTIMONY OF CAPT. ROSS.
Captain B. r. Ross was then examined, and
stated that he received $25 month as drill
master of the High school cadets As he under
stood it, Frederick Sohon drew the money.
signed the payroll and paid the money to him.
He was employed, ostensibly, by Sohon.
Commissioner West said that in this case as
in Messrs. McQueens, the commissioners had
ruled that SOhon, who Was supposed to perform
the service, could do what he pleased with the
money.
1t was agreed that Mr.. Baum;s testimony
should be taken hereafter by the Commits
sioners.
The investigation was then adjourned fndefi-
ntely.
MR.. LovEJOYs COUNSEL TO THE DISTRICT COM
MISSIONERS.
The following was sent to the District Com
missiOners this afternoons:
WASHINGTON CITY, D. c., July 9TH, 1885.
To the Commissioners OF the District Of Columbia.
Gentlemen: AS counsel for Mr.. Benjamin IL
Lovejoy, in the matter OF the charges preferred
against him by Mr.. William Birney, we desire
to De informed as to your intention with respect
to the argument by counsel for Mr.. Lovejoy and
for MIR. Birney Of those charges, and of the evil
dence taken in support or in contradiction of
them. VIII you hear argument? If so, shall
such argument be written or oral? You will
oblge us by giving prompt answer to these
inquiries, and by specifying the time and place
OF these arguments, should you conclude to
hear them. You will permit us to say that we
insist upon the right of counsel to be heard in
this matter, but it is immaterialto us whether
the argument is written or oral. Very respect
fully, K. Ross Perry, Reginald FendaIl, OF coun-
sci.