Kentucky Irish American. (Louisville, Ky.) 1898-1968, 1919-11-01

coal and slate to the Houses of Re-
form at Greendale. is absolutely I'M
true and without foundation, as
Hatcher at no time furnished or was
paid for any coal by this Board of
Prison Commissioners. (See affida-
Wit of Hatchery
On October 9Th, 1915, the Board
of Control installed at the State
Reformatory at Frankfort, KY. the
Nicholson Underdraft Fuel-Saving
System. and at the State Peniten-
tiary at Eddyville, Ky, the Palmer
Forced Draft Burner System. These
systems permitted all grades of coal
to be used and are in service in
many large factories and power
plants. and reduce the cost and con-
serve coal.
In test by the engineers of the
State Penitentiary and State Re-
formatory. approved by the en-
cheering department. of the Ken
lucky University, showing that
saving from fifteen to twenty-five
grade of coal by using these systems,
the board on December 8, 1916, after
comparative tests and consideration
of the bids, decided to install the
Nicholson system at the Houses of
Reform. The proposition of the
Nicholson Underdraft Fuel-Saving
System was presented to the board
by l.. v. Frank C Company of
Louisville, agent. In his address at
Frankfort, Mr.. Franks states that
this was sold by York &c Company,
and alleged that Mr.. Eli H. Brown
was a member of this firm. This is
untrue. Mr. Brown was not mem
Der of the firm of York G Company,
or L. v. Frank e Co., and had no
interest therein as shown by his
affidavit, made part hereof.
On June IS, 1918, the Board of
Control organized as follows: H.
B. Hines, F. T. Hatcher, j. A. Bur-
ton Herbert Carr and J. F. Butts,
and ordered a request for bids for
six months supplies to be bought
by competitive bids sent to the trade
at large. On this requisition there
were many items, one of which was
for prison cloth and another for
denim. When the bids were opened
and samples examined 1t was found
there were no bids on denim, but
brown khaki as a substitute was
offered and Tabb G. Austin were the
lowest bidders on this material. This
firm was awarded the contract at
forty-nine cents per yard, which they
filled to the satisfaction of the State
Houses of Reform, as per sample
submitted to the board. The affida-
Wit of this firm covering the
purchase is attached hereto.
IN racnicitfnn for uniform
cloth there were no bids received.
We instructed the secretary to send
our further requests for bids.
Abraham Baldwin Co., of Chicago
ILL.,, a firm that has supplied these
institutions and many other states
for years with a special cloth. at a
cost of seventy-eight cents per yard,
advised that their lowest bid was
two dollars and thirty cents per
yard, but that the United States Gov
eminent had taken over their mills
and that they could not take orders
for this cloth. (They have just re-
turned to the market this summer
and are offering this cloth at two
dollars and twenty-five cents per
yard)
d. A. Loud & Co. of Lexington,
KY, advised that they were not in
the market and could not offer any.
yardage at that time.
The entire board being present,
after considering and comparing the
samples of substitutes offered from
sixty-five cents per yard to one
dollar and fifty cents per yard gave
an order for one dollar per yard
for covert cloth to Armstrong Com
pany, and same was furnished &C
cording to sample, and though no
thing like as good as the old Bald
win cloth has given satisfactory
service as a substitute, especially
when the difference in price between
one dollar per yard and two dollars
and thirty cents per yard is con-
sidered. Contrary to the f. t.
Franks statement purporting to
quote ex-Superintendent Howell of
the Houses of Reform, there was no
bid offered by Corley. Austin &
Tabb, or Tabb & Austin, on this
material. CSee affidavit by Corley
and Austin e. Tabb herewith)
There are always many firms bid
ding who are not personally known
to the board, and the board con-
siders samples and prices filed and
are only concerned in seeing that
supplies are delivered, according to
contract. AS to who is Armstrong
the affidavit of Mr.. Armstrong is
hereto attached.
Attached to and made part of
this statement is the resignation of
Mr.. Ernest j. Howell as superinten-
dent for the State Houses of Reform.
In said resignation Mr.. Howell in
dicates that the newspaper criticism
of his former business connections
has weighed very heavily upon his
mind and has been the chief detri-
ment to him in making a success of
the institution and in controlling the
employees and the inmates thereof. 1
About this time last year it seems
that the climax of his disturbed con-
dition brought about his tentative
offer of resignation, and that later
the condition was so much advanced
that he did on March 18 1919,
tender his resignation to become
effective ON April l., 1919, at which
time he was succeeded by Mr..
Charles P. Weaver.
The attached affidavit of Mr..
Clarence Westerfield shows that the
period of unrest from persecution
in Mr.. Howell's mind has again
arisen. and this affidavit is filed as
a part of this statement.
Mr.. Franks also in his speech at
quoted Mr.. Howell in
his statement as saying that re-
port on the House of Reform by
the state inspector and examiner was
This statement Is alb