Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1910-09-28
a successor to cownie ?"

a successor to Cownie?"
Yes, sir"
any other charges against MN be-
fore that time?"
"who made them ?"
Various persons"
Name them
zone was Warden Jones or the state
penitentiary at Fort Madison.
ANY others"
That is the only specific and defin-
lite one ] received.
The witness then answered that War
den Jones had been removed from the
peDitentiarv and was bitter toward
CoWnie for it.
Following this. the governor stated
that his first information as to the
charge that Cownie made illegal pur-
chases of goods for state institutions
came from G. S. Robinson, member
of the control board and now chair
man of it.
"At this time YOU We're a candidate
for renomination?"
Yes. sir.
Attempts by Attorney Read to Show
at this point that newspaper crltlclsm
had something to do with the COVER
nor's desire 10 have a record OF all his
movements against Cownie, We're
blocked by objections of the defense
The examination then turned to the
state control boards report on Superln-
tendent Fitzgerald of the Mitchelville
school This Investigation was brought
about by letter submitted by the gov
ernor to the board of control thru
Judge Robinson. The report Of the
board was secured by the governor
thru Judge Robinson.
Was Judge Robinson chairman Of
the board?" Read asked.
He was not" answered Carroll.
The purpose of the state in this
question. ii was stated. was to show
that Governor Carroll dealt almost en-
tirely with Member Robinson in mat
tiers pertaining TO the board rather than
with Chairman Cownie.
From this ATTORNEY Read turned MS
attention TO Mi,chellville and secured
from Governor Carroll statement that
up until the time of the outbreak at
Mitchellville the conditions We're good
at the school.
The Question Of Dancing.
The attorney then proceeded TO show
by the witness that when Miss Garrison
took charge she imposed restrictions
upon the girls which had not been i'm
posed by the preceding administration
such as forbidding the girls 10 dance.
II is true, is il not, that the girls
We're restless and dissatisfied because
OF these restrictions?
NO, it was my understanding that
the girls We're restless because Cownie
was urging them 70 dance despite the
fact that the superintendent said they
should not
The girls made no demand upon
Miss Garrison 10 dance?"
Then Cownie first injected this idea
into their heads"
Yes"
whether the state could go into the
matter Of showing the character of the
girls who made the affidavits against
John Cownie. which argument contin-
ued until adjournment tine at 5 o'clock,
when Judge Howe held with the de-
Tense.
RebuttaI is Brief.
The first witness called in the after
noon by the state in rebuttal was John
Cownie. it being the intention of the
state 10 have him deny in toto, the
charges made against him by girls at
Mitchellville Objections by the de-
Tense and ruling by the court de-
prived Cownie of this opportunity, how
ever. at The time, but he had en-
phatically said in his first testimony
that he never had said an improper
word or committed an improper act
in the presence of any inmate of the
Mitchellville reformatory.
When Mr Cownie took the stand At
torney Read called his attention at once
10 the letter Gov. B. F. Carroll says he
received from Mrs. Maggie Korns. Of
Marshalltown, mother Of a girl in the
Mitche!lville institution. which letter
charges that Cownie acted improperly
toward the girl.
On the stand Cownie read the letter
for the first time, the governor never
having shown it to him. Mr.. Cownie
testified. after reading the letter. that
he knew the woman and her daugh-
ter
Attorney Read then read an excerpt
from the letter in substance, as fol-
lows:
That Cownie called the girl into an
office at Mitchellville and there made
overtures to her. promising TO let her
go home if she would not tell on him"
Had Denied Once.
Before Cownie could reply the de-
tense made objection. The court then
made it's ruling as follows:
When Mr.. Cownie was on the stand
before, he was permitted to testify.
over the objection of defendants coun-
sell, that he had not been guilty of any
acts of immortality with the inmates
Of state Institutions AS has been said
so many times before during this trial
the actual fact as to whether or not
he was guilty Of immortality with the
girls al Mitchellville is not in issue
here. and is not a question that the
Jury is called upon to consider or de-
termine in this case: the question be-
ing rather, what information was pos
sessed and acted upon by the defendant
when he published the article exhibit
2. and evidence in relation thereto has
been admitted and received on this
trial, not as showing that Mr.. Cownie
was guilty of immortality with the girls
at Mitchellville. but as bearing upon,
and only as bearing upon. the question
do