Weekly journal-miner., 1910-01-12
BABCoCK FAILS TO
 MAKE GOOD CHARGES
From Sundays pailvl

, III the halter or the charges prefer red against Prof. A. H. Mcclure, by Dr. Kendric C. Babeoek, in the fol lowing language, says the Phoenix Re publican.
 The Territorial Board of Education
 Coming on to be heard, this 9th day of January, 1910, the charges
 preferred against A. H. Mcclure by
 Dr. Kendrick c. Babeock, member of this board, all the members of the
 board being present, and appearing
 also respondent A. H. Mcclure. with
 his attorney, Thos. D. Molloy, and
 the attorney general likewise appear
 ing in behalf of the board, there upon the charges were read, and evi-
 dence, both oral and documentary,
 adduced in support of the same, and by the respondent in defense thereof,
 and the board having fully consider
 ed the same, finds as follows, to-wit: |. As to the first charge the board
 finds that the evidence adduced at
 the hearing was too conflicting and
 uncertain to enable it to determine
 with certainty whether or not A. | H. Mcclure, in his letter to Dr. Bab-
 cock, solicited the latter's endorse
 ment for appointment to the position
 of principal of the Union Flight
 school at Yuma, wilfully misrepre- sented the attitude of D. L. DeVane,
 probate judge and ex-ofieio county
 school superintendent of Yuma eoun- ty, in the matter of his candidacy,
 and therefore dismiss the charge. ?. As to the second charge the
 board finds that A. H. Mcclure has
 diploma purporting to be that of
 Graham College, of Graham, Vir-
 ginia, conferring upon him the de-
 gree of Doctor of Philosophy. It
 further appears that Graham Col
 lege does not appear in the list of
 colleges of the United States as pub
 lished by the United States Bureau of Education, and that it is unknown in the office of the United States Commissioner of Education. Inas- much, however. as there was intro duced in evidence a certified copy of the articles of incorporation of Ora ham College, from which it appears that it possesses the power under ! the laws of the state of Virginia to | grant decrees. the board, while of | the opinion that the title evidenced | by the diploma is of little value, | cannot say that it is fraudulent, and | its use by MT. Mcclure unprofessiOn- l al conduct under Section 112, Par agraph 2242 of the Revised Statutes of Arizona, 1901.
 8. In the absence of proof being adduced to sustain them, charges numbers and f were dismissed and no findings are needed.
 f. In support of the fifth charge | oil f-l ing to be the work of Yuma school . to be submitted by MT. Mcclure as the territorial fair of 1907, when in fact said oil paintings were not the work of pupils of the Yuma school, the court finds that no representa- tions were made by the said A. H. Mcclure as to the time when said work was done, but the representa- ton was made by him that it was work done by pupils in the Yuma schools.
 The board further finds from the evidence that said paintings so ex hibited were in part the work of a pupil in the Yuma school before she became such pupil, and in part by another person, but whether such lat ter person was ever enrolled as a pupil in said schools the board is un- able to find from the evidence. The board, however, does find that if the latter person was ever enrolled as a pupil in the Yuma schools this was for the purpose of having said oil paintings, which had previously been painted, put into the Yuma school exhibit. The board finds, assuming that said person was so enrolled, that this was reprehensible conduct, but is of the opinion that is not such as to authorize the revo- cation of MT. McClure's diploma un- der the statute.
 Prof. Mcclure, when seen after having read the findings of the board, was much gratifed at his complete legal exoneration, though he indi- rated some disappointment as to the verbiage in which the findings were couched as rather belittling the dig I nifty he believed was due to his , school and his credentials. In view of the charges not being proved he was asked as to what he attributed the attitude of pr. Babcock in op- , posing his interests, or rather, what was the cause of the differences be- tween them.
 He replied that they had been on ( very friendly terms until the meeting i of the Territorial Teachers associa- ion in Tucson in November. 1908. and that speaking for himself he had been friendly to .Dr. Babcock ever ' since until the fling of these charges. { On the occasion of the convention re- ferred to he said that pr. Babeock :, lad supported resolutions before the I association that he, Mcclure, regard I d as of a personal nature between C Dr. Babcock and another person. and | hat he, Mcclure, had opposed the vigorously, believing it vas not the proper place for their l 'entilatiOn. and they were defeated t He also said that le supposed Dr. Babcock had been further irritated hy the prominence [ hat had been given 10 him. Mcclure, f " the National Educational asso- q