Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-03-09
.CARDOzO GUILTY,
BOARDS VERDICT
Dismissal of Supervising Princi-
pal From Service.
ACQUlTTAL ON TWO COUNTS
Conviction Based on Writing Of
Anonymous Letter.
MRS. MUsSEY IN THE MINORITY
Termination Of Trial in Which Official
of Local Public Schools
Was Defendant.
Conviction Based on Writing Of
Anonymous Letter.
MRS. MUSSEY IN THE MINORITY

TIdHClS l.. SdIuOZO, COlOIcu, last
night was convicted by the board OF
education, by a vote of 7 to I, of two
Of the charges preferred against
him, involving the authorship OF an
anonymous letter, and was dis
missed from the school service on
recommendation of the superintend
ent. He was acquitted of the two
other charges submitted to the
board by the Observation-Disclosures
of INSTRUMENTATION and public criti-
cism of an official superior, Assist
ant Superintendent Montgomery.
The board sat from 7:so o'clock until
nearly midnight, most of the time being
occupied by the lawyers for the defense
making their arguments. The board men,
bers retired for private conference be-
fore voting and were absent from the trial
room forty minutes.
The vote for acquittal on the last two
counts of the indictment" was unanimous.
Assistant United States Attorney McNa-
mara, counsel for the board, had advised
the members that in his opinion the charges
in question had not been substantiated. Mr..
Mcnamara laid down the law with regard
to the first two counts and expressed no
opinion thereon. Mrs. Mussey was the only
member of the board who voted for acquittal
on these charges and the only member who
voted against the motion to dismiss Car
dozo from the service.
Aside from that attaching to the verdict
the proceedings last evening were devoid of
interest. The room was crowded to its
capacity, nearly 200 persons being in at
tendance. Many were unable to get in. or
to see in. and were compelled to stand on
the outskirts of the crowd and catch what
they could of the words of the speakers.
The great majority of those present were
colored persons.
characterization and Criticism.
The acquittal of Cardozo on the charges Of
INSTRUMENTATION and public criticism of his
superior, DIR. Montgomery, was voted unani-
mously, in spite of the testimony of Super
intendent Chancellor tending to substanti-
ate the allegations
The authorship and the character of the
anonymous letter were the deciding points
for the board, sitting as judge and jury
in the case. The opinion, which was held
from the beginning by the majority of the
board that CardoZo wrote the anonymous
letter which figured so prominently in the
case, was not changCi by the evidence sub
mitted by the defense.
The motive advanced by the prosecution
was testified to by DR.. Chancellor and was
that Cardozo desired to succeed DR.. Mont
gomery as assistant superintendent. Numer-
Gus witnesses were produced to establish
the contention of the defense that Cardozo
throughout the summer had nothing but
the highest regard for DR.. Montgomery and
had worked in his behalf.
The verdict was a keen disappointment
70 tkn lnfo ont v1yh0 fnlf he q
good chance for acquittal after the sum-
ming up of his case by his attorneys,
Messrs. Mason N. Richardson and James
A Cobb
On Matters of Law.
Mr.. Mcnamara announced when the
board was called to order early in the
evening that he would not argue the case.
but would merely instruct the board in
the matters of law involved. He said he
felt such was all he should do in view Of
the fact that he was the boards official
legal adviser. He made plain that the
board members must decide whether be-
yond all reasonable doubt the defendant
had written the anonymous letter offered
in evidence, and whether or not the matter
contained in the letter was of Hbelous
or slanderous character, such as to create
disaffections in the school SYSTEM
AS to the last two charges of public and
unfavorable criticism of his superior with
schools and of conduct unbecoming an
officer, in refusing to recognize DR.. Mont
gomery as his superior and acting in
disloyal manner toward him. the boards
attorney advised acquittal on the ground
that the charges had not been proved.
The weight of the character evidence
which had been produced was mentioned
by Mr.. Mcnamara, who said the board
was forced to consider 1t and to weigh 1t
against any damaging evidence that might
have been adduced.
He endeavored emphatically to impress
the board that it should acquit II any
reasonable doubt as to the defendants
guilt existed in their minds.
With reference to the handwriting testi-
mony, Mr.. Mcnamara said that the testi-
mony of the non-experts should be consfd-
cred only as that of non-experts and that
particular weight should be given to the
testimony of experts He also directed at
tention to the fact that witnesses on both
sides might be interested in the case and
their testimony be colored thereby.
Regarded as Fair Statement.
Attorney Cobb thanked the boards coun-
sci for what he regarded as a very fair
statement to the board and then launched
into his consideration Of the evidence.
In the first place the speaker declared by
the evidence the anonymous letter was not
libelous and not slanderous, as no testi-
mony had been offered to show that what
the criticism was not properly directed to-
ward the teachers and others mentioned
therein. But, assuming that the letter Is
libeious, he declared. he would show that
it was physical and mental impossibility
for the defendant to have been the author
of it. From the evidence, he held, the date
on which the letter was written must have
been somewhere between August 81 and
September Z. Not until September 4, he said,
was Cardozo an employe of the school
board and subject to it's jurisdiction, and
on the Light of September 4, a few hours
after he learned of his appointment as SUI
pervising principal lie left for Atlantic
City, remaining away until after the 7th.
Mr.. Cobb dwelt at length on the alleged
absence of sufficient testimony on the other
side to establish motive and called atten-
ton to the abundance of testimony submit
ted by the defense to destroy what evil
dence the prosecution had offered on that
point.
Question Of Handwriting.
AS to the question Of handwriting, Mr..
Cobb held that witnesses on the other side
had not been positive obout the handwriting
and declared that without any motive es-
tablished the board was forced to acauit.
As to the testimony of Superintendent
~