The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1898-07-01
ITS POINTS RENEWED
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES DID
NOT SCRUTINIZE THIS
MATTER.'
DR.. klLG0 CALLED A MIXER
Judge Clark Says He is the Only Man Who
Can Get Big Donations From The
Cigarette Trusts.

NiSdicttc iIuSto'
Yesterday, in answer to the letter oil
Mr.. James III. Southgate, President OF
the Board of Trustees of Trinity College,
Judge Clark sent the following letter:
Raleigh. n. c., June 80, 1898.
j. III. Southgate, Esq, President BOARD
Trustees:
Dear Sir:-'The day of miracles has re-
turned THE dumb are made to speak.
Information abruptly denied 10 me mas
been lin part) conceded to an outraged
public opinion, but with so little clear
ness that the miracle was hardly worth
working.
Your theory of defence that it was
DIR. Kilgo, and not myself who was OF,
trial does credit to your ingenuity ana
would be convenient if correct The
verdict and Judgment show who was
intended TO be tried and condemned.
Read your resolutions:
I'VE. the committee. to whom was re-
ferred the matter of correspondence be-
tween DR. John C.. Kilgo and Judge
Walter Clark, respectfully submit the
following:
Resolved .. That we deprecate and
CONDEMN the uncharitable and I'M
fair spirit manifested by Judge Clark in
his correspondence with and charges
against DIR. Kilgo
Resolved 4. That it is the sense of the
Board of Trustees that Judge Walter
Clark ought to resign as Trustee of
Trinity College"
If / was not on trial. then without a
trial you deprecate and condemn me.
one of your associates. and find that
have been guilty of being unfair" and
'uncharitable." If You did not find me
guilty upon what was it that you based
your other resolution that | Ought
to resign" / would like to be Informed.
If only DR.. Kilgo was on trial. the res
olutions expressing your satisfaction
with him would have ended the matter.
But when You 90 further and condemn
me you either did so by trial without
notice tas / complaineD or without any
trial. as you now assert, which is max
ing the matter worse.
| notice you deny none of the material
points of my complaint.
ID Though the telephone in the build
ing in which your committee sat is inn
mediately connected with the telephone
in the court room in Raleigh. where /
was. and three trains a day went from
Raleigh to Durham no summons, nor
even a whisper ever came to me. in
that or any other way, during your SEES
sions of three or four days. that | was
being investigated and condemned. 1t
will not do to say that because / knew
the board would be in session that / was
.'constructively fixed with notice that
DIR. Kilgo's threat to lay the matter be-
fore the board would be followed by my
trial and condemnation. AS well say
that because every citizen of the county
4Iat -l,..,,
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 OF
argument.
90 You give no excuse why. on my
application. after Judgment, you refused
me even the limited information YOU
now give the public.
CD You have shown no jurisdiction in
your board to sit in judgment on me.
And if your only object was to endorse
DR. Kilgo. did he want n whitewash-
ing only. for it is nothing more when
no one is given a chance to be heard
in opposition.
(4) If your board is empowered to sit
in Judgment on the views Of its merc-
bers. You do not answer why it did not
try your views on matters Of public
Importance as well as my private views
as to DIR. Kilgo.
90 You say nothing as to the lauda-
tory declarations of DR.. Kilgo that the
possessor of wealth. who gives money to
the college which pays his salary, is the
greatest possible object of respect. These
degrading views are not proper to be
taught college students in North Caro-,
lima without rebuke and | know the
board by it's silence would not be taken
as endorsing them.
These things you do not answer.
AS to the new matter, that after DR.
Kilgo, introduced the recommendation
for four years term, that in reply
to my objection he stated verbally that
it did not embrace himself. ! solemnly
aver / never heard it. THE writer
word abides," and proves the fact | as
serted. The recommendation in his re
port, is broad enough TO embrace the
President, and if he did not wish TO in
clude himself, why did he not exclude
himself. If he made that verbal eXclu
sion of himself why did he make NJ
reference to II in all his correspondence
with me and leave it unasserted til
now?
In my first letter to him | stated tina
the conversation was misconceiyed fol
my remark was not as to his motive
but upon the fact that it would have Civ
on him a four years term, and that W.
were wise to vote his suggestion down
10 Mr.. Browns query, | had said.
"didn't think he intended to leave him
self ont" In n desire to avoid a squad
bic with him / wrote him it was pri
yate conversation and that he did not
have it reported TO him exactly right
II is his own folly that he misunder
stood my repugnance to controversy as
awe for his Importance.
I'm reference to the advertisement OF
the matter by the Charlotte Observer
the information did not go from me. il
must have gone from some one cogni
zant of the action Of the committee; wh'