Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1889-09-30

speak Tor its reputation and the reputa-
ton OF this board with greater force than
nlthlng your committee Hay say In its
behalf
The allegation Of false representation
and the specific instance given i'll the
matter of obtaining money by such means
for the university are grayer matters, and
were so regarded by our former COM
mittee, composed OF Messrs Thornton,
Roy, Ward and Gilbert. In that report
the committee says:
Mr.. Hood admits stating that Mr..
Whitins married daughter, who gave
$4,000 to finish the university building,
did so on the express understanding that
the hall was free from all membranes,
when there was mortgage of $4,000 on
it. The daughter in letter states this
was not true and that she knew at the
time of the existence of the mortgage.
Your committee fully concurs in that
finding, so far as It goes, and adds that
there is not one word or linei n any ofthe
testimony or papers to the effect that Mr..
Laid ever misrepresented in any manner
the object or purposes Tor which he sought
any money in behalf Of the university.
Mr.. Hoods explanation of what he did
say as to such misrepresentation is set up
in his answer. and the truth thereof is
positively denied 10y Mr.. Ladd under oath
and by the letter from the lady men
toned.
Additional Charge No. IA. That Mr..
Ladd had no right to spend any money
for the university or Ramona school the
past year without q special vote OF the
trustees or executive committee.
This statement is admitted by Mr..
Hood to have been made as charged
That such statement was not true appears
by the records of the university in the OF.
fee OF its secretary, which, office Mr.
Hood held when he made such untrue
statements.
Additional Charge No. Is. That the
hall cost $4,000 and could be built now
for 50 ,0O0.
Mr.. Hood denies this but admits he
stated the hall was extravagantly bull
and not adapted to school purposes.
This committee believes that the sworr
statement of Mr.. Ladd that Mr.. HOOD
did make the statement charged, in the
absence of any statement under oath O.
Mr.. Hood in contradiction thereof, fully
sustalns the charge made by Mr.. Ladd
and your committee refers to the price
paid for labor done on the university
building as shown by the records and t
the building itself as conclusively show
ing that the statements admitted by Mr.
Hood to have been made were and arr
untrue. 1t is not necessary for your com
mittee to add that such statements con
corning the university were calculated tt
lnJure 1t, and it seems to your committed
that such statements are remarkable one.
to be made by q trustee who certainly
should have the interest of the university
at heart so long as he holds that position
At the time OF such statement Mr.. HOOD
was secretary and trustee of the uniyer
sity.
Additional Charge No. 16.--This charge
is neither admitted nor denied by Mr.
Hood and there is no evidence before the
committee concerning it.
Additional Charge No. 17.-This, charge
is admitted by Mr.. Hood, but your com
mittee can not see anything specially
wrong in the statements thus made.
Additional Charge No. 18.-That nc
Christian in Santa Fe sustains Mr.. Ladd
etc. Mr.. Hood partially admits this
charge and Mr.. Laid positively states
under oath that Mr.. Hood made the
statements as alleged. Your committee
therefore finds that he did so make il
That this charge was false clearly appear,
by the sworn testimony OF Rev. Geo. q
Smith, pastor OF the Presby terrain churcl
Of Santa Fe; Rev. E. W, Meany, priest il
charge of the Epscopal church of SAINT,
Fe, and Hon. Benz. M. Thomas, secre
tary of the territory, and u ruling elde]
and one of the leading members of tn,
PRESBYTERIAN church in New Mexico
The attention of the board is also callet
60 the finding rs to this charge bv Won
former COMMITTEES, Nessrs. Thornton
| Ward, Joy and Gilbert, which was "a fol
lows:
Mr.. Hood acknowledges making tht
statement that so far as he was aware
Mr.. Ladd's conduct was condemned b,
the Christian church members Of tn,
CITY, While evidence presented shows tina
this was not true to the extent TO which
it would seem to imply.
Your committee asserts that there i.
not one word in anv of the statements O,
| evidence, except what Mr.. Hood state.
in his unsworn answer, in any way sug
costing that this charge was true to an,
extent whatever.
Additional Charge No. 19.-That Mr.
Seligman told Mr.. Hood the Houyhtor
lands would not bring $40 900.
Your former committee. above referrer
to. state their finding as to this charge ms
follows:
"Mr. Hood admits that he understood
Mr.. Seligman to saw that the Houghtol
lands, If sold at forced sale, would moi
bring SO 900, ard that he SO stated
10 that we add that the testimony IN
der oath of MIR. Selgman shows he did
not make any such statement to Mr.
Hood, and that the sworn statement O.
MIR. Ladd, uncontradicted except by the
nnsworn answer of Mr.. Hood. shows
that Mr.. Hood did make the Statement