Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1897-03-11
Statement of Facts by 3. R. Goggins


about James Goggin's death we re-
quested his brother, Mr.. B. R. Goggins,
who had investigated the matter, to
give US the truth in a statement of facts
as he found them. We append them
as follows:
Doctor Goggins and myself, deter
mined to make thorough investigation
of all the circumstances surrounding
the last three or four weeks that our
brother, james, spent at the Oshkosh
Normal school. All statements so far
made, positively assume the truth Of
the following propositions:
FIRST That student Of the school
had been robbed of a sum of money
while in the bathroom of the Normal
School building, during the afternoon of
a certain Saturday.
Second. That on the morning of the
Saturday in question, Brother James
had his bath privilege in the building
together with his cousin, Victor Nina
han; that in the afternoon, he (James)
came to the man in charge of the bath
and asked to 90 into the room again;
that the man reminded him that he had
had his bath, and be said yes, but
wanted TO take another; that he was
denied the privilege on the grounds
that the demands of the other young
men should have precedence in order
that the hot water might not be eX-
hausted; that he, nevertheless, passed
in against the protest of the janitOr III
charge; that while he Was III the bath
room he took no bath, and that said
"robbery" was co-incident in time with
his presence there
Third. That James ''was never
charged with stealing the money and
was simply summoned before the board
because he was one Of those in tn,
bathroom at the time the money was
taken"
Fourth. That why he went to Mil
waukee instead Of going home can never
be known.
The second proposition is not a cor
rect statement of the facts in any mate
rial particular. The truth is in substance
as follows: James and Victor MInahan
had a bath at the same time on the
morning of the Saturday in question
The 'janitOr" and attendant" men
toned is also the barber of the build
ing, through whose shop it is necessary
to pass i'll entering or leaving the bath
room. In the afternoon James and
Victor came again, james, being in the
lead passed directly into the bathroom
without addressing a single word to the
attendant, and without the attendants
addressing a single word to him. Vic
tor, however, stopped by the BARRIERS
chair, and near to the door entering the
bathroom proper, and spoke with him
about taking a second bath, and it was
he, and not James, who "was denied
the privilege upon the grounds that
other young men should have preCe
dence, in order that the hot water
might not be exhausted" Thereupon
Victor, and not the attendant, stepped
through the door and into the bathroom
and informed James, who, at the time,
was talking with two fellow students III
the bathroom, that they would not be
permitted the privilege again that day.
Victor returned to the barber shop al
most Immediately, but James remained
short time talking with the boys be-
fore returning. This was Victor state
ment to us, but he was James cousin,
so we saw the attendant and his version,
frankly and candidly given, CORE
spOnded with NictOr's. Said attendant
further volunteered the information
that he was at tie time Eot personally
acquainted with James, that he did not
then know that James had had a bath
in the forenoon, that he had no talk
with him whatever and that the first
time he ever knew him 10 distinguish
him from others was. sometime later
when James was pointed out to him, by
tie student who claimed to have lost
the money, as one of the persons In the
bathroom when the money was alleged
to have been stolen.
The third proposition is also not
correct statement of the facts. James
and Victor were both positively charged
with stealing that money before the
have been ''robbed." We saw and
talked with him, and he stated that he
believed at the time that James stole
the money from his pocket, that be
still believes that to be a fact, that be
SO reported to the council, that he ap-
peared before the council and 50 testi-
fed, positively charging James with the
theft, but that he could not prove it.
Both James and Victor were by the
council arraigned on that charge and
required to plead thereto, while the
rest ''of those who were in the bath
room at the time the money was taken"
we're simply called upon to testify, as
any witness might be, concerning the
acts OF others. This charge was indus
triouSly circulated among the students;
an attempt was made to impress upon
Victor, who was younger than James,
that it would be better for him to con-
fess; 1t was falsely asserted that James
and Victor were unusually flush with
money, and finally, directed to James,
came lot of valentines, consisting OF
pencil drawings of hand stealthily eX-
t,,,I,,l Ill Il,
design and work of a single brain. Is
it any wonder that James should feel
that there was d special stigma against
him" and that she brOoded over it
great deal" He bent every energy in
an effort to clear up the matter he per-
sOnally interviewed all that he learned
had made charges against him or who
pretended to have any knowledge Of
the affair, including the young man who
claimed to have been robbed; he per-
Sonally laid the matter before President
Albee; he appeared before the council
and with choking emotion and tears in
his eyes pleaded for fair hearing and
for final determination of the matter,
either by conviction or eXOnOratiOn
that he might not be kept under a cloud
before the school. This the council re-
fused to do. Can anyone explain why?
Is it any wonder that thencefOrth he
never entered the schoOl?'
On the fourth proposition I have this
to say. When the charge was first pre-
terred against them, James and Victor
both withdrew from school work, the
latter remaining out one week; but as
the progress Of events showed that
James was considered the real cUlprit,
he and others persuaded Victor to re-
enter school. James, however, was firm
in his 6ntnrrnn1 M ton u