The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1897-12-15

| what was the difference In the pay OF
the two positions?"
ut was SIS per month"
How much did you have to pay on the
piano?"
Fifteen dolalrs per MONTH"
Cross-examined by Mr.. Meserve, Mrs.
Smith stated that Salyer had not ex-
actly stated his authority for assuring
her that lit would be all right" but he
had said that he would see Mr.. Bart
lett" She stated that Webb's name had
not been used by any person during the
negotiations for the purchase, and she
did not see him. She only remembered
his name having been used once, and
that was when Salyer told her that
Webb had informed him Of her having
been given dictatorship. Mr.. Poor
brought out the fact that the witness
had made application for the position
she now has in June. She also stated
that she had purchased the piano Octo-
Der Sth, and that she was notified Of her
promotion october 18th.
WHO WROTE THE LETTER?
Allan Kelly, city editor of the Times,
was the next witness. A letter signed
lone of Them" making. long-drawn-
out appeal for fair play in the investiga-
ton, and at the same time attacking
Mr.. Gibbon. had been published in that
paper. and Mr. Kelly was asked as to it's
authorship. He said he did not know
who had written 1t. A man named Eiler,
who claimed to be an employee of Bart
let's music store, had claimed to have
written 1t. Later a man named Sloan,
who signed himself "Bookkeeper," had
claimed to have written 1t. Now Eiler
asserted that he had written 1t and had
induced another employee named Brown
to sign 1t.
The bearing that this matter has upon
the case was not brought out last night,
but its connection with the scandal will
develop later.
Prof. j. D. Emery. principal Of the
Eighth-street school, related much the
same story as is contained in his affl-
davit, which was one Of the first to be
filed in the case. He had been approached
by Davis, who told him to see Axtell.
He had gone to Webb, and the latter had
given him assurance that he would be
reelected to his position, so he did not
see Axtell. He had also seen Bartlett,
from whom he received the same assur-
ance. He did not mention to either of
them that he had been approached
Janitor E. E. Cooper was next called
He told his now we'll known story of how
he was held up by Axtell to the amount
Of $50. The purpose of introducing him
as a witness was to corroborate the ev-
idence in his case given by Axtell
PROF. FosHAY'S STORY
Prof. James A. Foshay, superintend-
ent Of the city schools, then took the
stand. He and Webb had made the trip
to Milwaukee last summer for the pur-
pose of securing, If possible, next years
session of the National Educational as
sociation for this city. Prior to their de-
parture the board had passed a resolu-
ton allowing the superintendent $3.50
and Webb $500 for expenses, the express
provision being that they were to re-
turn to the school fund all Of this money
that was not used. Prof. Foshay, al
though he paid the headquarters ex-
penses, only used s15o17. While there,
Webb had suggested to him that they
make out their claims for expenses in
lump sum without itemizing the account
Webb stated that he intended to do so,
and desired that both do the same. The
meaning that Prof. Foshay got from
this was that Webb wanted to claim the
whole of the allowance. Neither Of them
had as yet put in their accounts, al
though his was prepared and ready to
be handed in. The examination OF the
witness then took a different channel.
"Since January list is 1t true that there
has been a dominating influence in the
board to which all others had at times to
yield in one way or another?" asked Mr..
Gibbon.
The witness admitted that such was
the case and said that domination was
from Mr.. Webb.
Then Adams statement about his
being held in an Iron hand was true,
was it?" was the next question.