The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-10-10

If they had been retained there would, of
course, have been consultations between
them and the city attorney When it was
suggested to them that an application de
novo" had better be made they would have
communicated this fact to the board ana an
explanation would have followed. Taggarts
land would not have come in again Just the
same as If nothing had ever been done.
With legal advice as to the operation and
meaning of application de novo," the
board would have known that 1t was be-
ginning over again and would not nave
taken up the land that had been dropped out
not the mayors land, in any event: Messrs-
English and Perry were both emphatlcally
in favor of having a special attorney to at
tend the meetings of the board
The more facts come to light the more APP
parent it is that there was conspiracy OF
pretty large proportions to carry this scheme
to a conclusion. Denials OF its existence
are useless. An investigation by the BOARD
showed what the Journal charged yesterday
that the park records showed the Taggart
bog was ordered included in the park sys-
TEN on April 16 as charged. 1t was by going
outside the written records for evidence that
the two commissioners who attended the
meeting of April 16 remembered what LOOK
place on that date.
zach additional time any effort has Deen
made to account for the mayors BOG lana
by the real parties to the transaction tney
have become more deeply involved. The
nrst attempt to disprove the charge tnaL
the mayors land was being considered by
the board was made by the Sentinel Satur-
day morning, Sept. Is 1897 About two col
umns of space was taken to dlsproVe the
charges made by Mr.. Bookwalter. A re-
porter from the Sentinel went to the Park
Board office, where Mr. Spencer helped him
prepare what purported to be an aostrdct
Of the entire record of the board from Dec
Il, 1886. AT that date the Sentinels record
showed the board had decided to include
real estate in the park system valued at
$4ol' tsO includlng the Iaggart iand. I tniI
s. 1897, E. F. Claypool, chairman of the
board, wrote Mr.. Wolcott. chairman Of the
Council finance committee, that several
tracts of land, including the mayors had
been dispensed with, so as to bring the
tracts that were to be taken within the
$3J0,O00 the Council was willing to appr0-
pirate The next action, according to the
Sentinel, was taken on April IA. There is
date until April q. Whether the reporter
was deceived and left out the meeting of
April 16, when the mayors land again APP
peared, or whether the paper Willfully ut
tered and published a falsifed record, it is
not known. but nevertheless, the meeting
at which Taggarts land was admitted was
not included. Here was an authoritative
statement from the mayors morning organ
that Feb. was the last time the Taggart
land appeared in the park records. This
statement was backed up by the News and
the mayor himself in his public speeches,
said that his land had dropped out in Feb
ruary. Notwithstanding these denals, the
records in the boards office and in the Cir
cult Court showed that on April 16 1t was
again taken up. In addition to this fact,
member of the Journal staff was subse
quently shown the records of Feb. by
Mr. Spencer who, in his b.andest and most
SuaVe manner, assured MIN Inat THIS was
the last time Taggart's land appeared.
What moral difference there is between
classifying records and suppressing them
when they are asked for is not shown.
RECORDS CREATE A PANIC.
When a Journal reporter accidentally
stumbled on the truth by looking up the
court records there was panic in the
Taggart camp. A determination to keep
the facts suppressed was made. Mr. Spen-
Ger, custodian of the records and keeper
of park secrets, remained away from the
park office. There was an attempt to ex
plan away the circumstances and the silly
twaddle about correcting the records" be-
gan and the bluff has been kept up with
stubbor1lness that might have been ex-
pected. No effort was made to explain why
| there had been such persistence in the story
| that nothing was in the records after Feb.
| 8, nor was any reason assigned for hiding
| the truth as to the meeting of April 16,
| when the board took steps to begin all over
| again, Just the same as IT nothing had
| ever been DONE which proposition carried
with it the revival of the plot to carry, the
| Taggart land into the parks. Ii everything
| was open and above board, why repeatedly
| deny that there was meeting on April 16?
| If the strong additional facts of suspi-
| cious character had not been dug up in the
| court records and afterward in the park
| records-which were finally shown-the sup
| preston of the fact that there was a meet
| ing April 16, in the first place, was enough
| to convince any one that everything was
| not right and that exposure was feared.
1t is understood that the board will meet
| again on Friday of next week, unless the
commissioners who are in town decide to
meet tomorrow and direct the city attor-
ney to prepare an amended application as of
April 20, 1897. asking leave of the Circuit
Court to strike from the record all refer
ences to the Taggart land. 1t was generally
understood that the mayor would postpone
his intention OF appointing a successor to
Mr. Holt until after the election in view
of the new developments in the bog scan
dial.
There are q number of important topics
for the board to discuss at its next meet
ing. 1t was rumored over town yesterday
that two and perhaps all three of the re-
naming commissioners on the board who
are in Indianapolis would resign, but they
said they had no such intention.