Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-03-05
nous letter was SHOWN to superintendent
Imputation Resented.

nous letter was SHOWN to Superintendent
Imputation Resented.
Admiral Baird intimated that as the let
ter had been In the hands OF the defense
he wanted to know whether the letter
was the same as that on which the charges
had been based.
The alleged insinuation was resented by
Mr.. Richardson.
manded.
Il resent such imputation." Mr.. Cobb
and Mr.. Richardson announced simulta-
neously
sit down, SIR" the president of the
board again commanded, indicating Attor-
ney Richardson.
II protest, and certainly feel that this is
sample of the unjust attitude of the
BOARD howard the defendant" Attorney.
Richardson remarked
Don't shake that pencil at me-" the
admiral said angrily
And don't you shake that gavel at me-"
Mr.. Richardson retorted.
The air grew thick with warm inter-
cnange OF uncomplimentary remarks.
MRS. Terrell resented the charge of injus-
uce TO the defendant by the board.
Mr. Richardson explained that he had
not meant the board as a whole but IN
tended to direct his remarks only to the
president of the board
When matters had Gained down Superin-
tenoent Chancellor was shown clipping
said by counsel to be from the Washington
Times. Witness said he had never read it.
Counsel appealed to the board to read the
article In question.
superintendent Chancellor stated, in reply
10 an inquiry by Mr.. Mcnamara that
one OF the letters received from Car,iozo
old not refer to the matter tf the assistant
superintendency.
Heard From Cardozo.
MI. mcnamara wanted to know If inde-
pehuentiy OF that one letter he had heard
from Cardozo in regard to the assistant
SUPPLEMENTARY.
Yes" the witness replied
he came to see me and presented his
claims" -'
In reply to Mr.. NcNamara. witness said
tnat he had an impression that articles in
the Times had been written by a yo,1thfuI
reporter, whose name he did not remember
.. How 90 you know he was youthful
Ills. ais articles h read as if they had been
written by young man."
The defense called Dr. G. w Childs as q
yitness; He said he is familiar with Car
dozos handwriting
He was shown the letter ard h. sold. .er
do not think that is his .handwritinr II.
cant write that welI'' ~
Ihe last part of the remark was stricken
out. w AeA
Witness said he had freouent convers.-
tions with Cardozo prior to the appoint-
ment of w. 8. Montgomery as assistant
superintendent. Defendant had told him
ing principal.
The witness testified that the defendant
mad favored DR.. Montgomery, to which Mr
Mcnamara objected. The witness recited
an instance of the witness being referred
to the assistant superintendent by Car
dozo He said Cardozo had declared to him
that Dr. Montgomery was in authority and
would have to decide matter in regard
10 the transfer of a certain teacher
Objection to the stating of Impressions nv
the witness was made. and sustained by
the board. ~
Witness testified that the reputation of
Caroozo was tip top-none better
As to Assistant Superintendency.
On cross-examination 1t was brought out
that witness is doctor of medicine and
was not related to Cardozo. Witness said
Cardozo had never expressed to him de-
sire to be appointed assistant superin-
tendent. Witness added that he had never
gone to the Capitol in connection with a
hearing on a school ,,-.i. =
Mr.. Cobo objected to the witness being
oss-examined as an expert, and prepared
to cite authorities. He objected specifically
to the witness being asked to identity a
certain bit OF handwriting.
me witness was allowed to answer and
said the writing looked like Cardozo's. Mr..
Mcnamara said the writing shown was
Cardozo'S signature to the original charges.
Supervising Principal Clark was called to
the stand. He said he had received letter
from Cardozo last summer in which in
quries were made regarding reappoint-
ments of supervisors. and in which there
was no reference to DR.. Montgomery. He
was shown telegram and said he thought
1t was that which he had sent to Cardozo
in reply The telegram stated that he had
left town and did not anticipate any
trouble.
On cross-examination Dr. Clark said he
had no information in regard to the state
of affairs in the school system at that time
other than what he read in the news
papers, and that he wished to convey such
an idea to Cardozo in the telegram.
Witness admitted he had been a candi-
date for the superintendency.
DIR. John r. Francis, physician, was
next called He said he had been acquaint-
ed since childhood with the defendant, and
had been surety on his bond in recent
legal action. He is Cardozo's physician, he
added He testified that Cardozos repu-
tation in the community is the best.
Position in Jeopardy.
Witness said Cardozo had told him last
summer he considered his position in
jeopardy
Franklin R. A. Bennett of the Episcopal
Church was called and stated he had had
a conversation with Cardozo pending the
appointment of the board Of education.
Witness said Cardozo had told him last
June or July that he opposed an outside
colored assistant superintendent and want
ed DIR. Montgomery appointed He also said
Cardozo wanted to hold his own position
He further testified to the excellent repu-
tation of Cardozo.
DR.. Kelly Miller was called by the de-
Tense and stated he is a teacher of mathe-
mates and sociology In Howard University:
Witness said he had known the de1endant
for sixteen years and that during the past
summer defendant had been in favor Of
the retention of DR.. Montgomery as assist
ant superintendent and merely wanted to
he himself retained as a supervising prin-
cpal.
DR.. Miller said the reputation of the de-
PENDANT could not be better. =
Witness said he had Joined the crusade
L. a. 90 nital in the interest of school re-