The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1894-04-27
CRUELTY Is REFINED.
Hitchcock Made Boys Bend Over
With Hands on Toes,
IN THIS POSITION .LASHED THEM

Others He Kicked-The Testfm0nyAII
and More Than Was Expected by the
Investigators
The evidence of Robert Heart in the
reform school investigation yesterday,
further than that published in last even
ing's STATE JOURNAL. revealed in his
cross examination that Superintendent
Hitchcock had talked with him regard
ing his prospective testimony at the exs
animation and had rehearsed his side of
the story to the witness and had further
been extraordinarily kind to him since the
examination became an assured fact
Also that Hitchcock had given orders
that Justus, the ex-teacher, should not be
allowed to talk with the boys at all
nor visit the premises. Two other boys
were examined in turn and their stories
were similarly damaging to the defense.
The history of the bathroom incident
was reviewed in detail and it was shown
how when the squad of "a boys was bath
ing Hitchcock had entered the room in
anger at the noise of splashing and
laughter, and had beaten some of the
boys upon their naked bodies
Henry w. Justus, the deposed teacher
and officer, and the most important wit
ness for the complaining side was then
called and testified, after the usual pre-
liminary questions that he had been a
school teacher for the last 10 or IL years,
that he had occupied positions as super
intendent of schools with about five
teachers and 300 or 400 pupils under him
for about four years; that since the first
of February last he had held a position
in the Reform school as family officer of
the east family and teacher; that he had
not been at the Reform school at any
time prior to the Saturday before the
Monday on which he assumed his duties;
that he had never received any instruc-
tions from the superintendent in regard
to his duties; that he had never received
any written or verbal rules from the
superintendent prescribing his duties as
officer or teacher either general or other
wise; that he sometimes applied at the
office, but the superintendent was seldom
there and he did not get the necessary
instructions.
"When did you cease the charge of
that family?"
81 think it was week ago last Thurs
day that was summarily dismissed and
ordered off the premises"
did you have any school connected
with your family?''
81 did for about five or six weeks after
l came here. Then the school was sus-
pended by the superintendent. The
condition of the school was good and the
boys were intensely interested
"What interest, if any, did the superin-
tendent take in the schools?"
HE never conferred with me in any
instance with reference to it. He would
look in at the glass door until he saw
some pupil in momentary idleness and
then take the offending boy into the par
Ior and cowhide him without saying any
thing to me about it. 1 had the best of
order. OF course the small boys of the
(baby) family were not expected to be
very studious. My boys were from to
and IL to 13 years old"
.'How often did he do that?"
"Very frequently"
"What would his manner be and what
would he say?"
"Nothing. He would deliberately take
the boy out and fog him. If I have any
idea what good discipline is L always
had it. l saw nothing in the boys
worthy of punishment. 1t is my custom
to appeal to the better nature of the boy
and teach him to be good from a love of
duty rather than from fear of punish
ment I don't remember anything at
any time that / would have given a similar
punishment for. At different times he
gave me to understand that l was not
severe enough and wanted me to be more
SO. When l first came he had three boys
stripped of their coats and whipped with
strap if to instruct me in the mode
of punishment expected of me, reQuir-
ing the boys to bend forward until their
fingers touched their toes and then the
officer administered the strap accord
ingly."
The witness then went on to show
that the superintendent was domi-
neering and overbearing to him
and cruel to the boys, and re-
lated instances in which Hitchcock had
kicked and beaten the boys |
without provocation. The testimony
then proceeded to the bathroom incident,
and showed that the witness was not
with the boys that were beaten, because
it was customary to divide the family
into two squads for bathing, and while |
the first squad was washing, in charge |
of the first guard (Heart), the officer
would remain in the play room in charge |
of the second squad, and go out occasion
ally to look after the conduct of those in
the bathroom. The officer (witness) said |
he did not remain in the bathroom be- |
cause common decency forbade it under |
such circumstances. He thought it bet |
ter to teach the boys self government by |
placing them as much as possible upon |