The Washington bee., 1891-06-13
GREAT SCOTT, BILL SMITH
AND HENRY JOHNSON.

GREAT SCOTT, BILL SMITH
AND HENRY JOHNSON.
PROF. GREGORY AND THE SMELLING
COMMITTEE. BEING TRIED BY HIS
ENEMIES AND BACK NUMBER EX-
TRUSTEES CASINO BILL AND HIS
MAN FRIDAY. HENRY JOHNSON
SITTING IN JUDGEMENT ON AN
HONORABLE MAN. JoHNsON's AND
SMITHS RECORD.
On Wednesday evening when a
representative OF the BEE called
at the Franklin Building. to his
surprise he found the room where
the trustees meet filled with Coun-
ty teachers, who had been sum-
moned by order of the Commits
sioners, to answer certain false and
ridiculous charges made by Bruce
Evens, at the instance of his broth
er in law, Daniel Murry, an an
cient applicant for the trusteeship.
From what the BEE could learn,
Bruce Evens was the only man
who attempted TO know something
and what he said was to the effect
that Smith was going 10 resign or
be removed from the school
and be stood his indebtedness to
the amount of two hundred dol
lars aHd when the note came due
he refused to pay it, which is the
cause Of the investigation. AT a
table in trustee Powell's office,
were seated Bill Smith, otherwise
known as Casino Bill, Henry
johnson, whose record did not
stand he calcium light at the time
the BEE preferred charges. against
him. andwho is the same individ-
ual who married one of the white
clerks in the Recorders office.
This same Johnson is the individ>
ual who has been in several esca-
pades in this city, but, never was
knocked out until the BEE got
after HIM.
Daniel Murry, the other individ-
ual on the committee Is originally
from Baltimore. He some few
years ago kept a place for Henry
Butler in New York. The histo-
ry of that place would make
interesting reading. Bill Smith,
otherwise known as Casino Bill,
is too well known by school teach
ers aud the public for comment.
This is the jury that is sitting in
judgement on one of the most
learned Negroes of the colored
race. 1t is a
MOCKERY ON MORALITY
was the expression of lady teach
er on Wednesday night. The
testimony of the first witness was
that she knew Prof. Gregory: that
he was not indebted to her; that
she had known him for several
years and at no time has she ever
had any inducements from him;
that one of the membsrs of your
committee (she meaut one OF the
members of the smelling commit
tee) was indebted to her to the
amount of one hundred dollars.
Just think of it, one of the mem
bers of the committee that is Sit
ting judgement on Prof. Gregory
and an ex-trustee, borrowed one
hundred dollars from this lady
teacher. Is this not mockery on
justice and morality? This was a
set back to the smelling commit
tee She was asked what rate of
interest Prof. Gregory paid and if
he owed her any money now. She
deemed the question an imperti~
nent one and declined to answer.
The smelling committee got
enough of this witness.
The next witness was Bruce
Evens and be told a long tale,
which was no doubt revised by
his brother in law, Daniel Murrv.
who has been an applicant for the
trusteeship for 20 years and the
individual the BEE paid it's
spects to several years ago. About
20 witnesses were examined and
no one but Bruce Evens, knew
why he was summoned.
KNOCKED OUT.
One of the smelling committee