The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-06-14
Special Dispatch to the standard.

Special Dispatch to the Standard.
Helena. June ~13.-state Superintend-
emit Carleton tonight made the follow
ing statement in reply to the Helena
dispatch in to-day's Standard about
Miss Josephine Harris charge that he
endeavored to pocket part of her sal
airy while she was employed in his Of
Ace:
so Miss Harris has finally succeed
ed in getting her alleged grievance into
print? / nave read her statement as
she has made it over her own signature.
and / only regret that the Standard did
not get her original story and print it
in full. as it is different from the state:
ment published, and gives a more COM
plete history. The story has been Of
fered h press Of this city and denied
publication. There is absolutely moth
ing in the employment of Miss Harris
or her connection with this office which
! am not willing should be made public.
Presenting that the object Of this letter
Is to secure some revenge for the fall
ure to continue longer in the office as
~stenographer. and to lead the public to
believe that something wrong has been
4OAlCs - ~ RAORCh ~ ~
letter. The object Of the letter, IL 1t
can be discovered, Is to cast reflection
upon me. The facts will determine
the matter. They are these:
Miss Harris was engaged temper
arily to do st~enographic work in the
Office at $50 a month. She was not en-
gagged as the regular clerk. In her
original statement she admits the hir-
ing at $50, and she will not deny ii. She
was inexperienced and not worth more
than that mount. Indeed, she never
intimated hat h desired or expect
ed more until pay day. h fully I'M
derstood that her employment was from
month to month, and that while she
might have work for the remainder OF
the year, there was no assurance OF 1t.
i had known Miss Harris and her FAM
lily for a long time, at one time living
as a near neighbor. Both she n her
brother, IL I am not mistaken, have
been pupils Of mine, and 1 had a very
high appreciation Of them.
ut appears from her letter tina while
she had contracted to do the work for
$50, she really intended to receive $125,
the salary of the clerk of this depart
ment. She says: L knew the salary was
$125, and 1 did not understand how l
could fill the position n receive only
$780, If this was her understanding
she should have SO stated to me, but
not an or TINS WAS given uH-
til pay day arrived.
Miss Harris stated many times that
$50 a month was ample compensation
for the work she did. She was study
ing law, using my library. and 1T Is
only fair to say that during the W
months she was in the office nearly or
ouite one-half of the time she devote
to reading law. / had not the slightest
intimation but that she was fully sat
isfied with her pay. But 1t seems from
her letter that she was to walt until
the end of the month n ascertain in
regard to the salary Having agreed
to $50 a month, why wait till the end
of the month and see what the pay
would be? When pay day arrived our
attention was called to the law that no
state officer could be interested in con-
tracts made with subordinates. 1t Is
no excuse in law that we had never
run across this provision of the code.
or had our attention called to it. This
was our misfortune. and affords Miss
Harris the opportunity h so eagerly
seeks to say something of a criticising
nature.
AT the time of hiring Miss Harris for
$50 a month IL never occurred to me
that IL i could. by doing a portion Of
the clerks work for a while. save a
portion of the salary. II could not be
used to make up the deficiency in this
department. The appropriation to this
blanks (all the school blanks of the
state are supplied by this Office. post
age and travelling expenses in attend
ing county institutions is utterly in
sufficient. Miss Harris did not do all
the work of the clerk. A great les Of
this work was one by myself.
Miss Harris assigned her salary. as