The San Francisco call., 1905-08-04


lar actions OF the State Dental Board
yesterday afternoon when those mem
bers of the board known as the "sOlid
five"-Drs. 4. II. Maybew, c. A. Her
rick. &. A. White. l.. j. Howard and +.
q. Baird-brought forward testimony
which directly accused DIR. j. Nj. Dunn,
one of the opposing faction in the
board, with giving out some of the
questions I'm anatomy TO a young man
I'm his employ who was about to take
the test so that he could apply for n
dentists license.
This young man is DIR. Richard ID.
Papandre and he says in a sworn affi-
davit that he was given three or four
questions by his employer. member
of the state board. To back this tesd-
mODy up the solid FIVE introduced DIR.
George ID. O'COnnelI, who stated before
the commission yesterday afternoon
that Papandre gave him these questions
a few minutes before the examination
and that four of them were embodied In
the questions written on the board by
DIR. Mayhem. He, too, had made an
Rffi daVit swearing to these facts. By
this evidence the black hand of sus-
piciOn is made to turn from DIR. May
heW. the first accused, and point slowly
in the direction Of DIR. Dunn.
Furthermore the solid five" through
that they will introduce other witnesses
and other afidavits to firmly intrench
this accusing information. One of
these witnesses, DR.. Minor, a member
of the recent graduating class from
the University of California, will be put
on the stand at nine o'clock this morn
ing He is alleged to have heard Pa
pandre give the questions which seem
TO entwine DR.. Dunn into the muss.
g,,C Co,
Francisco. but on his arrival he Will be
brought before the commission at once.
SWEARS DUNN GAVE QUESTIONS.
The affidavit of DIR. Papandre is Civ
en- in part as follows: Before l saw
examination ! had a conversation with
Dr. j. NJ. Dunn in hallway of the eX-
animation rooms. In all, my best recol-
lection is that he suggested three or
four questions TO me and informally
gave me the answers to them. DR..
Dunn knew that ] had been preparing
for these examinations for three
or four months past because l had told
him so. (Signed) Richard D. Papandre.
No. S.
DIR. O'ConneII, to whom Papandre Is
alleged 10 have given the questions and
answers, swOre as follows in his signed
affdavit made on the first Saturday
after the examinations were given;
"On Tuesday, June 13, 1905, saw DIR.
Dunn. who was talking to an applicant
for license. have since been
Informed that his name is Richard ID.
Papandre. The conversation between
him and DR.. Dunn took place in the
small hallway on the ground floor OF
the building In which the examinations
took place. i went into the examina-
ton rooms and Immediately upon said
applicant coming into the room ana
taking his seat j said to him, 'Nhat
did you get-pass 1T OUT and the applt-
cant said Define what Is osteology''
He then proceeded TO define Ii. Then
he told me what the second question
was and what was the answer to IL,
what the third question was and what
the answer was and then put another
question to me in a little different form,
which he told that he Dunn could
not answer. i then asked said applf-
emit how he did it, meaning how he
got the information, and he said that
Dr. Dunn was a friend of his.
GEORGE ID. O'C0NNELL."
DID NOT LIKE TO TESTIFY.
DR.. Papandre however, was a disap-
pointment to the solid five" when he
took the stand. He did not want to
give his testimony and he could not
seem to remember some of the things
which he swore to in the affidavit He
would only state positively yesterday
that DR.. Dunn had given him the first
question that appeared in DR.. Mayhew's S
examination, and he did not rememb mber
having told O'Connell that he had OBJ
tained the questions direct from this
source. Papandre told the commission
that he did not attend the University
OF California, but that he had assisted
DIR. Dunn in the latter's office and had
I'm cro n
dentistry. DR.. Dunn and he were very
friendly "I was not impressed at the
time of the examination, he said,
with the similarity of the questions
given me by DIR. Dunn and those on the
board. except in the first one. That 1
did receive, but / regard 1t as coin
cidence and not an evidence of fraud.
Dunn stood back of my chair and spoke
to me once. but 1 did not hear what he
said to me"
DR.. OConnen was the star witness
for the faction to which DR.. Mayhem
belongs, the solid Ave" He gave in
every detail the conversation that he
had with Papandre during which the
latter gave him the questions and told
him the answers. His evidence was
what cast the suspicion on DIR. Dunn,
although it in no way explained the set
of questions which Dr. Lew Smith said
were the real dope"
PAPANDRE GIVES ANSWERS.
Il saw DR.. Dunn on Tuesday. June
49," the witness stated. Immediately
before the anatomy examination 1 en-
tered the bunding with Flood and Mi
nor. AS we passed through a small
way my attention was called to Papan-
DIRE and Dr. Dunn talking in the little
hall DR.. Dunn held a paper in his
hand.
Il sat down and Papandre entered.
When he sat down next to me ] asked
him what hes got, and to come through
with it, He then gave me some ques-
tions and some answers. I asked him
where he got 1t and he told me that
Dunn was his friend and had told him
the questions, and that one Of them
Dunn did not know the answer to. DIR.
Minor was there and he received the
benefit of this. Then DR.. Mayhem be-
gan to write the questions on the
board and we had to stop talking.
II kept still about what knew because
did not want to get mixed up in a fac
'tioual war which had heard was going
on within the board Especially did ] not
want to get into any friction because 1
was a candidate for degree. The fact
r.