The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1894-07-31
AREMERELY CHATTER.
SO says the Governor Of the Penl-
Tertiary Charges.
He WILL NOT INVESTIGATE
9On3lIY-He Answers CateE0r1caH1E

sonalIy-He Answers CateeorIcaH1y
the Charges That Have Been Made.
Governor Lewelling. who has gone out
on his campaigning tour has through
his daught given out a statement rela-
tive to the penitentiary investigation.
In this statement he says: There will
be no further proceedings. All this
chatter about the penitentiary is the re-
suit of a conspiracy on the part of a few
fellows who have been discharged and
who have a grievance They served notice
on me last spring that the warden had to
90, and if he was not removed they would
call TO their aid influential friends in the
party and / would have to suffer the con-
sequence. 1 told them l did not wish to
shield the warden IN any wrong doing,
but from all that could be learned the
administration of the prison seemed TO
be a striking success. l reminded them
of the difficulties to be encountered in
suddenly changing the entire working
force of such adm Illustration and starting
Oft toward success with nearly q hundred
untried and inexperienced men-and
that it seemed to me the warden deserved
commentator rather than censure from
general principles.
However, / expressed a willingness to
give hearing to all or any who felt ag
grieved, and charges were filed against
the warden near the close of the month
of NJ y. These charges we're referred to
the board of directors in accordance with
section 3, chapter 152. session laws 1891,
which reads as follows: cit shall be their
duty (meaning the boardl to inquire into
any improper conduct which may be al
legged 10 have been committed, by the
warden or any other officer of the peni-
Tertiary"
"The complainants were notified that
they should appear before the board and
file Qvida0ca this fhdv declined IN IN
alleging that the board would not give
them an impartial hearing, aud further
demanded an investigation under sec So
50, page 1895. general statutes 1889.
Under this statute they doubt
hoped for prolonged trial and witness
fees for an extended period, but / did
not feel justified in mourning an expend-
iture of 81 800 or $4,000, and especially
objected because there was no appro-
priatiOn with which to pay.
when the board sat to hear the case,
the compliments. Notwithstanding they
had been regularly subpBnaed, refused
to appear, few witnesses for the defense
were examined and the warden acquit-
ted. When the charges are analysed, it
is apparent that only two or three are Of
a serious nature, all the facts about the
coal mines were easily obtained by in
spection, and some time ago 1 sent an ex-
pert to make an examination, and now
have his report on file. The testimony
in every instance. he only charges of
Importance were numbers 1, 2 and 3 OF
those brought by the chief clerk
aThe first of these charged that the
warden had taken money from the APP
preparation for boarding purposes, and
Invested it IN hogs-the charge itself
does not state except by an ingenious
inference that the warden received any
pecuniary advantage from this transac-
ton. The warden admitted having made
the purchase of hogs and the testimony
showed that the state had Melted thereby
a profit of $495.32.
1.-THE second of the chief clerk was
that the warden had settled a claim
against the Armour Packing company,
collecting a rebate on the purchase price
Of ten thousand pounds of bacon. The
clerk claimed that the settlement was
recorded, and the inference was that the
warden had received the money. Tho
amount involved in this transaction was
twenty-five dollars. In this case the
board discovered that the chief clerk |
himself omitted to make the proper en-
try upon the books to show that this /
amount was due from the Armour Pack |
ing company. The books of said com
pany did show the proper credit and the /
money had simply not been collected /
The amount was collected on June 8, /
1894
1.-The third charge was, that the war
den's daughter, Carrie, drew pay as an /
assistant keeper, contrary to the rules of |
the institution. To this the warden adj
mitted that his daughter had been en-
ployed as cashier and assistant in the /
Office: and he also showed from /
the records that it had been the /
custom of his predecessors to en-
ploy some one in this capacity. This
to some extent Involves the charge of ne
potisn, which has been made SO general /
IN reference to this institution. His
daughter Carrie as stated was employed I
for few months. and the younger son
carried the mail for while, but neither
of them have been on the pay rolls of +
the institution for some time, and the en-
gineer, John, is the only mem Der of the
Chase family who receives pay from the
state