The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-04-05
THE APPOINTMENT
MAY NOT STAND III No.
irhc Nomination Of George =.
Hart as Postmaster Of Eoa-
rokc Being Held Up.
ABOUT A REAL ESTATE DEAL
The friends Of Harris Hogc,
Whom Hart Succeeded, Get
Busy. l.

rr-,o,n Our Regular COrrespondent)
UNSATISFACTORY. Y. ca April Alt 's
understood that there IL u strong prob
ab,litv OF the nomination OF George u.
n1llrt appointed BY the President to
succeed Harris Hogc MS postmaster OF
roanoke, being withdrawn. The no1li"I
nation, which went TO the Senate some
limo ago Is being held up In tho corr
ml,tcc on postofllccs and post roads'
III was stated Mt the comnlttec-rooln
to-day that there had been no written
3 chnrrcs filed against Mr. Hart, but that
for so,nc reason unknown to the clerk
tic nomination had not been acted acted on
and had been referred TO Senator Nathaf
u scott, OF West Virginia, VINO -
,res,lmed to be investigating charges
which have been made in an inforinui
way.
Thc matter which Is being investigated ale'
~ the West Virginia senator, refers ~
land deal in which Mr.. Hart plaseu
nromitcnt and according TO tno,e
Who make the charges Against nm,
not an entirely cerdtablc part. re was
the Roanoke representative or IN E's . l'ai
syndlcute when purchased certain ~,
estate IN Roanoke during .he a uoo,
a days." 1t is stated that the synulcu,e
,,,,rrhase,l when prices were very nearly
at their highest. ,,,,o,,
q, nny rate, prices have been much
lover for several years. Some noh.nS
ago, Mr. Hart advised the American ~, -,
{crney OF the syndicate to sell MS clien1s
property at Roanoke saying he couia -.
$1,000 for IT. The attorney, whose nome
is in Philadelphia, directed that the sue
DC made. /,
The transfer was effected AZ inc price
quoted, and Mr.. Hart Is SAID 70 nay
RENTED the $4,000 TO his clients. possipiy
i1cd,,ctinr Ills commission, to which he
was fairly entitled. 'rne property was
sold very short time afterwards for
Inc sum OF $4,000, fact which, II IS
said viii be shown by the real csthte
records at the City Hall in Roanoke
III Is charged that q man VINO Is very,
high In the councils of the Repuol'can
marty In Virginia was interested IN inc
4 first sale, probably as the person, OF
one OF the persons 10 whom the lana was
granted.
B Be this as it may, soon after the con-
summation Of tho last deal, Mr.. iiart
NJ recommended by the Republlcah
referees for appointment 70 me pos...o o,
nj postmnster OF Roanoke. to succeed
Harris Hoge, brother OF the late Jonn
@iIampton Hoge. ex-Republican# candidate
FOR congress and one OF the most &C
i've men In the Republican party IN
Virginia. Then Mr.. Hoge is said 10
Nave got busy. he informed the. Ph fli
adelphia attorney OF the fact that the
property OF his English clients. which
had been sold for $4,000, had been trans
ierred q few hours after the first SAFE
the consideration being $4,000. he q {
~. al .~,,ftf a., \ I
Immediately informed the attorney that
TIC latter sale had been made at the
price named. and enclosed a check for
$4,000 representing the difference be-
tween the price realized at the first
sale ond that received at the second.
less so,coO, representing Mr.. Harris COM
missions. 4,
The foregoing story has been told the
committed Senator Scott, who was a
warm personal friend of the late Colonel
J. Hampton Hogc, has the story. ana IS
the subcommittee of the Committee on
postofrccs and Postroads OF the Senate,
considering the nominations. Neither Of
tho Virginia senator's Is taking any part
in the investigation of the case, as u mas
not been referred to them.
II Is understood that the friends OF MIR.
Hart claim they can show that there was
not the sNGhtk't fraud In the transaction,
and that he had no Intention Of Will
holding the difference between the price
received at the first sale and that paid nj
the second. While IT. Is true that the
name of Mr.. Hart for the postmastership
may be withdrawn. for 1t should be re-
nembercd that Senator Scott. who is
looking into the case, Is quite friendly to
Postmaster Hoge, who Is to he succeeded
By Mr.. Hart. the lntter's friends are un-
derstooh to hold that they can prove that
tho transaction did not reflect IN the
slightest degree upon the Integrity of
any OF the parties concerned.