Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1912-01-18
HOW CATAWBA
WAS INVESTIGATED
Star Chamber Proceedings 10 Cover Up the
Charges Made BY Mr.. EIllott-The
Letters in the Case.

ROdnOhe, va, NOV. 10, 1911.
Tazewell Republican.
Yours of the 18th received today and
am glad to know you will publish my
statement, for which feel am under
many obligations to you, as have been
trying to get this published since Oct.
eth. Both of the Roanoke papers hav-
ing turned it down and also used their
influence in preventing it being pub
hshed.
sent it to the Roanoke Times Oct.
9th with instructions il he could not
publish it to return it to me, but he sent
it to DR.. Ennion G.. Williams (see edi-
tors letter Oct. 6tb) and could not
hear any more from it. sent down to
the Times Oct. 10th and the office girl
said Mr.. A. Il. Williams was in Rich
mond and would return the 18th. 1
sent down the 18th to know what had
become of my statement. (See editors
letter Of Oct. 1Sth.) So on the oath 1
had not heard anything, so 1 wrote
little piece in the Evening World to
smoke them out. In the meantime
wrote DR.. E. G. Williams on Oct. 18th
and received no answer. (See clippings
from Evening Worldly
On Friday, Oct. 9th, 1 received a
letter from DR.. Williams. (See DR..
Williams letter Oct. 26) Now you see
DR.. Williams did not tell me in his let
ter that the committee would call on
me next day, the 18th, and for me to
have charges ready for them, but he
said if had any charges to send them
to Mr.. ]. T. Mastin, Sec, knowing Mr..
Mastin would be here next morning.
Well sent to Mr.. A. B. Williams
Oct. 9th ard told him had a letter
from DIR. Williams stating he had uot
received the statement and suppose
they were still in his office and if SO re-
turn them to me. He wrote me that he
had just heard from DR.. Williams stat
ing he had not received his letter or any
communication either and knew nothing
OF the charges and he wrote DR.. Will
liams on the 18th and it seems it got
mixed up some way and DR.. Williams
never got it and he enclosed part of a
letter from Senator Swanson to show
that DR.. Williams got Swanson's letter
but no one got DR.. Williams letter.
Now DR.. Williams and A. B. Will
liams' letter don't tally this letter Of A.
b. Williams of Oct. 9th was confiscated
later by j. T. Mastin.
So on the evening of Oct. 9th sent
all papers to Attorney General S. w.
Williams including A. B. Williams let
ter of Oct. 9th and Saturday morning,
Oct. 28th, DIR. Ennion G. Williams and
j. 7. Mastin came to my room, where 1
was sick in bed, and DR.. Williams said
II l had any charges to make to tell
Mr.. Mastin as Mr.. Mastin was the COM
mittee Of the State Board of Charities
and Corrections and was going to inves-
tigate Catawba Sanatorium that day.
l was taken by surprise and had no
charges prepared and told them 1 had
sent the charges and all papers to S.
w. Williams the day before. Mr.. Mas
tin said well just tell him what charges
] wished to prefer and the committee
would investigate it. found out after
they left the committee was left down
stairs. never saw the committee 80
told Mr.. Mastin about patients not be-
ing furnished with water and started to
give the particulars. He said they were
IN hurry to get to Catawba and for
me not to go into any details, just tell
him what charges / wished to prefer
that the committee would get the par
ticulars. thought that was strange
as l thought they would want all the
information they could get so then
told him abont the poor food and lack of
attention and bad management and the
resident physicians time being taken
up at the Mountain View Sanatorium
and the assistant resident physician do
ing the country practice and started to
give him some instances and particulars
and he said they did not want any par
ticulars, just specify what charges 1
wanted to prefer they would get the
balance, so ! saw he was not after any
information, 30 told him that was all,
and when they left ! wrote these
charges (enclosed) and sent them to
him at Richmond on Nov. lst to be read
before the board, which has never been
done (see ]. T. M. letter Nov. 1st)
stating he received my charges os the
lst and had put them before the board
in substance and you will also see he
succeeded in getting another delay of
80 days.
l wrote and told him I was very much
disappointed and also discouraged as
fully expected those charges to be read
before the board at its next meeting.
then got letter from him dated Nov.
9th but he never said he would read
them before the board yet. (See J. T:
n. letter Nov. sth.)
Now sent the names Of about 40 ex-
naffanfo fo ho inf A.,A