Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-01-26
THE SCHOOL SITE INQUIRY.
Mr.. Taulbee's Committee Begins it,
Investigation.

Mr.. TaulDee's Committee Begins its
Investigation.
TWO WITNESSES ExAMNED. ro-DAY-rHE puR-
CHASE OF SITE FROM NIB. DoDaE-wHY He
THOUGHT THAT HE COULD DEAL ONLY THROUGH
Mr. cox.
The special committee, Of which Representa-
tive Taulbee is chairman, appointed to investi-
gate the methods employed by the District
Commissioners in making purchases of real es-
tate for sites for school purposes, met in the
room of the committee on civil-service reform
All the members were present-Messrs
Taulbee, Rowell, Baker, Chapman, and
Lee. District Commissioners Webb and
Wheatley came in, accompanied by
Col. Moore, the chief Of police, and Mr.. Davis,
the assistant attorney for the District Mr.
Petty, the auditor Of the District, also joined
the party. Mr.. John F. Cox appeared later
and was accompanied by his attorney, Mr.. Jas
G. Payne, the auditor of the court. This off,
cial party occupied one side Of the committee
room. In the examination that followed the
direct testimony was elected by questions by
Mr.. Taulbee. Then members Of the committee
cross-examined the witnesses, and finally Mr.
Davis and MIR. Payne took a part in the ques-
tioning.
hhfohTEh As WITNESS.
The first witness examined was Mr. II. P
Goodwin, reporter of The EVENING STAR, who
wrote the articles that originally led to the in
quiry. He was questioned as to the sources of
his information respecting the statements
made concerning cases in which it was alleged
that the Commissioners paid more for the
property than the owners received and that
the difference was pocketed by an agent or per-
son who was acting for the Commissioners.
ThAA AkA T.
as to instructions received by the reporter
from The STAR Office. The witness said that
his only instruction was to be careful to obtain
the facts. The witness was excused from the
stand, with the understanding that he might
be recalled for examination by Mr.. Cox's coun-
MIR. W. G. DoDaE's TESTIMONY.
Mr.. w. G. Dodge, who was present, was
called next, and his examination was opened
by MIR. Taulbee. His testimony related to the
sale. in April, 1887 Of the property on G street,
between Sd and 4th streets southeast, by Mr..
Thomas Scrivener to the District for school
site. Mr.. Dodge, who is Mr.. Scrivener's SON
in-law, represented the latter in the transact
ton. Mr.. Dodge was examined first as to
statements attributed to him in an interview
published in The STAR, and stated that the re-
port was substantially correct
Mr.. Dodge stated to the committee the facts
concerning the sale as he recollected them.
He said that Mr.. Scrivener, his father-in-law
had told him that Mr.. Cox came to him and
made proposition to purchase the property
for the Commissioners. Mr.. Scrivener author
lied witness to act for him in the matter.
In their consultation they fixed as limit 81, 900
that is, they agreed that they would sell the
property at $4,000, not expecting, of course,
that the Commissioners would purchase at that
price. In that letter he stated to the Commits
sioners that 1t was unnecessary to employ an
agent or middleman or incur expense of that
kind. A day or two after he went to see Mr..
Webb and spoke about the matter. Mr. Webb
told witness that there was some objection on
the part Of the citizens living in the neighbor-
hood to the erection of colored school there.
He gave no satisfaction to witness but spoke of
Mr.. Cox. Witness asked who this Mr.. Cox was,
and MIR. Webb told him he was a son of Lawyer
Cox, of Georgetown, and clever fellow.
MR.. COX COULD SELL 1T.
Mr.. Cox then came to see witness and gave
him to understand that he could sell the prop
erty through him. He said that if witness
made an offer to the Commissioners through
him to sell the property for so cents a foot,
he thought he could sell the property to the
Commissioners. Witness told Mr.. Cox that they
would pay no commissions. Witness there
upon wrote a letter to the Commissioners Of
fering to sell the property at so cents foot,
which amounted to 81, 1888. With IS agreed
to give Mr.. Cox all the money he received over
$1,000. The proposition to sell at so cents
foot he said, was made by HIM at the sugges-
ton of Mr.. Cox. He thought he received
note from theCommissioners accepting the Offer
He actually did sell it for 1000. In answers
to questions by Messrs Baker and Chapman
the witness said he thought the District was
made to pay the Sl8S.39 unnecessarily. Mr..
Dodge having repeated that he was convinced
hv-+ ha into NJ obi hat he
not make a sale except through Mr.. Cox, he
was questioned closely on this point. He said
the impression was obtained more from the
fact that he could receive no satisfaction from
Mr.. Webb at all, and that soon afterward Mr..
Cox came to see him.
Mr.. Webb, the witness said, did not talk to
him at all, he did not make him any offer at all.
He thought the price, so cents foot was good
fair price, not excessive. Mr.. Dodge, in an
swer to a question whether he thought there
was any wrong in the transaction said he did
not think there was wrong so far as he and his
father-in-law were concerned. He did think
the Commissioners were wrong in dealing in
manner that required the District to pay
S1S8.39 unnecessarily. Mr.. Baker asked the
witness whether he had hesitated to be party
to such transaction. Il did not hesitate !"
the witness said, Ito be a party to the sale
when l felt convinced that it could not be made
in any other way"
MIGHT HAVE HAD IT FOR $1,000.
The witness insisted that if the Commission
ers had shown any disposition to purchase the
property from him or deal with him, or made
him an Offer they could have had the lot for
$1,000. The witness was cross-examined at
considerable length by members of the COM
mittee and by the lawyers. Mr.. Davis pro-
duced the two letters relating to the transac-
ton written by the witness to the Commission
ers. The first letter showed that Mr. Dodge
offered the property for $500, instead Of
$4,000, as he stated orally. Mr. Dodge said
that he recollected the sum was about IS, 0OO
Neither of the two letters produced said that it
was unnecessary to employ an agent Mr..
Dodge insisted that he made this statement,
saying that if he did not make it in letter. he
made it orally.
MR.. DoDaE's RELATIONS TO THE COMMISSIONERS.
Mr.. Davis questioned the witness as to his
relations to the District Commissioners, asking
him if he had not freely criticised them. The
witness said he had frequently criticised their
management of affairs. When asked if he
was not opposing Mr.. Webbs confirmation, he
said he had taken no action to oppose him.
although he was opposed to the appointment,
believing he was not a suitable person for the
Office. The Commissioners and himself, he
said, had always been on pleasant personal re-
lations. When asked if he had not been men,
toned prominently for the Office of Commits
sioner, Mr. Dodge said his name had not been
used with his consent. 1t was, he said, against
his protest.
MR.. DoDGE's PAPERS.
Mr.. Taulbee produced some papers sent to
him by Mr.. Dodge when this investigation
was first proposed. One contained an account
of the aala of the Scrivener pronerty except