The Washington herald., 1920-03-12
SCHOOL BOARD
| APPOINTMENTS
| UP AT HEARING
Van .Schaick "Squirms' at
Times Under Questioning
By Harrison.
BRUCE CASE RELATED
President Admits Decision
Was Influenced by Pa
dents League.


which the witness was made to
"squirm" on more than one occasion
under Senator Harrison's searching
questions in the Senate's inquiry
into school affairs yesterday. Rev.
John Van Schaick, jr., president OF
the school board, emerged a triffe
more rufrled than on the two pre-
ceding days. He will resume the
stand again today when the COM
mittee will 60 into the Moens case.
While the Bruce case occupied
the attention of the inquiry during
most of. teh day. Senator Harrison
laid great stress upon the failure
of those members of the school
board who had voted against Van
schaick for president, to be reap
pointed.
The Senator endeavored to show
that the head of the school board
had Influenced the justices of the
District Supreme Court in making
their appointments. In this he was
unsuccessful. DR.. Van Schaick main
tanning ignorance as to what had
actuated the justices in making ap-
lpointments to the board.
Rev. Van shsick was forced TO
admit. by adroit questioning. that
the action of the school board in the
Bruce case had been Influenced by
the enthusiasm of the Parents
League. While the board was con-
sidering the charges against Bruce,
he said. the league began a demon
stration. demanding a verdict in ad-
vance Of the evidence. and the board
decided il was not for the common
good to bow to such noise and
clamor."
Attitude In Opposed.
Condemnation of DIR. Van
Schaick's attitude in requesting"
Superintendent Thurston to remain
away from the board hearings dur
Ing the Bruce case. was indicated
by the questions of Senator Harri-
son and other members of the COM
mittee who. while remaining quiet
during most OF the hearing. exhib-
tied interest in this phase of the
testimony and were curious to as
certain the motives which had ac-
tuated the head of the school board.
Rev. Van Schaick's explanation
that he believed the absence of
Thurston would have permitted the
witnesses to be freer in their testi-
mony. did not seem to satisfy the
committee. They wanted to know
whether it was not in violation OF
the law to exclude Thurston from
the hearings,
Van Schaick admitted that 1t
would have been had it been other
than a request" He said he had
never ordered Thurston to do any
thing. when Senator Harrison in
timated that the request" was
really an order.
1t was at this point that both
questioner and witness lapsed into
vernacular. much to the amusement
of the audience.
Did Not "stack The Cards.,
Senator Harrison asked il the
cards had been stacked" against
Thurston prior to the board meet
ing. Then. realizing that the witness
was a former clergyman and, per-
haps, unfamiliar with such terms.
endeavored to explain his meaning.
Van Schaick. joining in the gen.
eral laugh. waved his hand depre-
catingly, and said, 81 get you. No,
we never stacked the cards"
Emphatic denial was made by
Rev. Van Schaick that he had tried
to influence franklin Peyton, MEM
ber of the board, to vote with him
on the Bruce case. He freely ad-
mitted having written a letter to
DIR. II. b. Learned, another member
in which he said, among other
things:
81 am sorry that Peyton kicked
| over the traces. He did a very
1
low. He did exactly what he prom
ised he would not do
He explained. however, that the
only promise he had extracted from
Peyton was a promise to act more
like a judge than a lawyer.
Attitude Is Explained.
The attitude of other members to-
| wards Superintendent Thurstou
when he was up for reelection was
explained by Van Schaick.
Mr.. Hamilton told me that Mr.
Thurston was not fit man for
superintendent" he said "He said
that he was a good man, but weak
and that he had to be bolstered up.
Mr.. Daniel said he did not think Mr.
Thurston was just the man for the
place, but that he was the best man
available at that time and should
be retained.
Mr.. Larner said that Mr.. Thur
! ston was not a strong man, but
was safe; that he had only "a few
| years as superintendent. and that
he should be given an opportunity
to make good. Mr.. GalIiher said
substantially the same as Mr.. Lar
ner.''
Galliher. Daniel and Larner are
the three members of the board
/ who voted against Van Schaick for
president in 1917. Mrs. Cook Is the
only member who opposed him at
that time who still remains on the
board. he said in answer to ques-
tions.
Senator Harrison said he consid-
cred II strange" that all the men,
bers who opposed Van Schaick and
usually supported Thurston are not
now on the board but the ones