Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1897-08-25
KEEPER NOT BLAMED.
MIR. KRACKE NOT RESPONSIBLE
FOR POISON IN BOYS EYES.
CAUSE OF THE DISEASE NOT KNOWN
Doctors Say II Probably Started
While the Lads Were I'm swimming.
The Testimony Adduced-Report TO
the General Committee.

subcommittee to thoroughly inquire into
the causes OF the poisoning OF the eyes
of Ave boys who reside in the West End,
and who, it Is claimed, contracted the
disease while playing in Monroe Park
on the afternoon of July 26th.
This subcommittee met last night in
Room No. Of the City Hall and per-
formed the duty thus assigned to it.
report to be sent to the general commit
tee states that there is much doubt as
to the cause OF the disease which afflicted
the lads referred to. and that no
blame therefor, so far as could be learn
ed from the testimony adduced before
that body, attaches TO any one. 1t is
therefore, recommended that the subject
be dropped.
HEARING THE TESTIMONY.
The members of the subcommittee
present were Chairman Gunst, and
Messrs. Briggs. Brock, and snead. City
Attorney Meredith. Colonel Cutshaw, the
City Engineer. and Mr. Kracke, the
Keeper of Monroe Park, were also in at
tendance City-Clerk Ben. Il. August
had sent out letters to all persons who,
il was thought, could give any informa-
ton concerning the unfortunate occur
iSlce. inviting them to come before the
subcommittee at last nights session.
only a few Of them however, responded
personally. Drs. John Dunn and Joseph
\. White. who attended young Wilbur
Gentry. the boy who was more seriously
injured than any of the others were pre-
sent. Both of these specialists told OF
the condition in which they found the
Gentry lad. DR.. Dunn said it had been
necessary TO remove one of his eyes and
the other was in a pretty bad condition
He had heard Of the theories advanced
relative TO the manner in which the eyes
Of the boys had been injured. 1t was
possible for the trouble to have been
occasioned by throwi ing an old rag, filled
with water. i'm the faces OF the lads, as
was claimed had been done while the
boys were playing in Monroe Park, but
Or. Dunn was rather inclined to the
theory that ihe little fellows had their
eyes poisoned while bathing, or rather
by their "pranks" after coming out Of
the water. Dr. White agreed with Dr.
Dunn I'm this. These gentlemen admitted
that the trouble was a very serious one,
and would have resulted worse than II
did for all the boys had not medical
skill been called upon as promptly as it
was.
PARK-KEEPER NOT BLAMED.
City-Clerk August read a statement
from Mr. Davis. father of one OF the
BOYS. in which he said he did not care
10 have his son appear before the sub
committee. lie deplOred the publicity OF
the matter. and attached no blame what
ever TO the park-keeper.
The next witness was Glen Heiter,
IL. ~
poisoned. lie said he was getting over
his trouble. and that his doctor had
discharged him one Of his eyes stll
looked very badly Glen told the story
OF how the boys, seven or eight or
them. were playing in Monroe PARK
when a shower came no, and they ran
into the Keepers house. one OF the
boys with him picked up an old sock
few feet fgom the watershed and slap
ped another I'm the face with 1t. Ihe
water from the sock splashed into the
faces and eyes of several OF them, ana
one by one they were taken with the
same affection Of the eyes. This wit
ness went on to state that. according
TO his recollection the Davis boy was
first to develop any trouble. He was
followed by the Myers boy. Wilbur Cen
try. and then by witness. Heiter
thought his eyes began to be sore about
two weeks after the Davis lad was
taken. In answer to question pro-
pounded by Mr.. Snead. the little wit
ness said that these boys were in the
habit of playing with several large boys
or youths, and that they had probably
been in swimming together. Heiter mad
heard recently that two other boys were
afflicted i'm similar way to the five
already referred TO-
PARK SHOULD HAVE BEEN CLEAN.
Mr. Thomas c. Gentry, an older
brother of the Gentry lad. who Is stlll
i'm such a deplorable condition, read
statement of facts concerning the case
as he had gathered them from the boys
themselves and from the physicians. lie
did not attach any blame to the park
keeper but thought the park should
have been cleaned thoroughly by that
hour i'm the afternoon-3:3O o'clock.
From all the testimony it appeared that
the only two boys positively. known to
have been struck in the face with the
Old sock had not had any trouble at
all with their eyes.
Park-Keeper Kracke made brief
statement III which he cxpl1'ned that
he burned up all the debris in the park
every two or three days, and that all
old rags were burned daily. He had
driven those boys from under the keep
er's house at least fifty times, ne de-
cared
After little talk over the evidence,
the subcommittee, at the suggestion OF
the City Attorney. adopted report TO
the general committee, which states the
uncertain character Of the testimony,
the fact that the boys were taken with
this disease at different times exone-
rates the park-keeper and all others,
and recommends that the matter De