The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1898-07-07

kALEiaH. y. e. Jane "a. ISIS.
J. II. Soaihgafe, 4 q, Prssident
Beard Truste~s;
DHAs SiR: Tae day OF miracles
has returned: The dumb Are made
to speak" Information abruptly de-
MED 10 me has been Qu parD con.
c<ded TO an outraged public opin-
ion. but With Sd little elearuess that
the miracle vas hardly worth work
ing.
Your theory Of defence that u Vas
DR.. kilgo. and not myself Who Vas
on trial does credit 20 your Ingenuity
and would be convenient II correct
The verdict and Judgment shou uho
Vas INTENDED to DO tried and con-
dewped. Read your resolution:
1--WE the committee, TO whom VAS
referred the matter Of correspond
enes between DR.. John &. kilgo and
Judge Walter Clark. respectfully
submit the following:
"RKsoLvID >. That we dsprecAte
and CONDEMN the uucharitable and
unfair spirit manifested by Judge
Clark in his correspondence with
aid charges against DR.. kilgo.
"REsOLvED 4. That it is the sense
Of the Board of Trustees that Judge
Walter Clark ought 10 resign as
Trustee Of Trinity College"
IL Vas not on trial, then without
. trial you deprecate and condemn"
me, one Of your associates. and find
that ] have been guilty OF being
unfair" and "uncharitable." II
you did not find me guilty upon what
Was it that you based your resolu
ton that l fought to resign" /
would like to be informed. IL only
DR.. kilRo was on trial, the resolu-
tons expressing your satisfaction
with him would have ended the mat
ter. But when you 60 further and
condemn me you either did SO by
trial without notice (as ] complain
ed) or without any trial, As You now
assert, which is making the matter
worse.
/ nOtice that you deny none of the
material points Of my complaint.
I'D Though the telephone in the
building in which your committee
sat 10 Immediately connected with
the telephone in the court room in
Raleigh, where was, and three
trains . day went from Raleigh to
Durham, no summons, nor even a
whisper ever came to me, 10 that or
any other way, during your sessions
of three or four days, that l was be-
ing Investigated and condemned. 1t
will not do to say that because ! knew
the Board would be in session that l
was "constructively" fixed with no.
tice that DR.. Kilgo's threat to lay
the matter before the Board would
be followed by my trial and con-
demnation. AS we'll as say that be
cause every citizen Of the county
knows when court will meet, that
when one man says to another 81
will lay the matter before the grand
jury that the latter can be tried by
the jury and sentenced by the Judge
without notice and without chance to
offer evidence or argument.
CD You give no excuse why, on
my application, after judgment. you
refused used me even the limited in
formation You now give the public.
90 You have shown no jurisdIc-
ton in your Board to sit In judg-
ment on me. And il your only OBJ
ject was to endorse DR.. KiIgo,
did he want "whitewashing" only,
for it is nothing more when no one
is given q chance to be heard in op-
position.
"a If your Board is empowered 10
sit in judgment on the views of its
members, you do not answer Why il
did not try your views on the mat
tiers Of public importance as we'll as
my private views as to Dr. kilgo.
o) You say nothing az to the
lsudatory declarations of DR.. Kilgo
that the possessor Of wealth, who
gives money to the college which
pays his salary, the greatest posi-
BILE object of respect. These degrad.
ing views are lot proper to be tapght
college students in North Carolina
without rebuke and ] know the
Board by its silence would not be
taken Is endorsing them.
Auoe0 lungs yOu w not answer
AS to the new matter. that after
DR.. Kilgo introduced tho recon-
mendation for . four years term,
that in reply to NY obi sction he
stated verbally that it did not en-
brace himself, l solemnly aver that
l never heard it. 1.-The written
word abides" and proves the fact
! asserted. The Recommendation in
his report, is broad enough to en-
brace the President, and II he did
not wiAh to include himself, Why did
he not exclude himself. II he made
= verbal exclusion of himself why
did he make no reference to it in ali
ms correspondence with me and
leave 1t unasserted till now.
In my first letter to him / stated
that the conversation was miscon-
ceived for my remark was not as to
his motive, but upon the fact that it