Evening journal., 1922-11-27


Mr.. Southerland contended that
the Frantz's were 10 receive s750t
for their efforts in favor OF the Davis
inclnerator, but that when the incin-
orator was accepted by the city Hook
wanted 10 allow them but $500. The
result OF this was an effort on the
part OF DR.. Frantz to have the bal
ance due by the city on the incirer-
ator held up by Council. only half OF
the purchase price having been paid,
the State maintained
/ The agreement between DR.. Frantz
I his son and Hook was In writing, 81
was contended.
Hook was alleged 10 have been
advised by Howard Frantz that II
he wanted the Davis incinerator ac-
cepted by the CITY that he should see
his father. DR., Frantz. as he was
very. influential"
Homer c. Simm ons. clerk Of Coun-
Gil, was first witness called at I'LL.
He brought with him a mass of rec
ords OF the city.
He first produced letter OF April
T. 1920, signed by former Mayor
Taylor, naming four members OF
Board OF Health. upon request OF
Mr.. Southerland, who conducted the
examination. The letter was ad-
mitted in evidence without objection.
He next produced record book
showing confirmation OF appoint
ments. The oath hook was also pro-
duced.
When an effort was made 10 In
troduce further records. Mr.. Har-
man objected.
Mr.. Sutherland then read into the
record the names of the members Of
tho Board Of Health and City
Council. The exhibits first intro
duced were then withdrawn.
DR. McRirney. secretary OF the
present Board OF Health was next !
called. Mr.. Finger examined DR.. |
McBirney
DR. McRirnsy said ne was custodian
n tho minutes hook NJ the board |
and that the minutes IN the book of 1
November ? and December 90. 1921, !
were Of meetings held on that date.
q Mr.. Finger offered the book Of svi- /
dence to which Mr.. Harman objected,
saying Dr. McBirney was not secre-
tary At the time the minutes we're
entered and theretore could not tes-
tify as 70 their authenticity.
on REORGANIZATION. DIR. No
Blrney said he did not writs the
minutes, but that the minutes were
handed to him by his predecessor.
DR., Mckinney became secretary of
the board in May 1922.
Considerable argument ensued on
the point Of the advisibllity Of this
evidence. The Court admitted the
testimony however 10 which Mr.
Harman voted an exception.
Mr.. Simmons was recalled at 1880,
after DR.. Mckinney completed his
estimony. Mr.. Simmons was re-
allied relative to a communication
rom the Board OF Health 20 Coun-
81. recommending the purchase OF
he Davis plant. A second letter
recommended 75-ton plant. while
he first suggested a 100-ton plant.
dr. Finger examined Mr.. Simmons.
DR.. Charles NJ. Handy, president
II the Board of Health. was next
allied by the state. He stated that
look represented the Davis Com
,any IN trying to sell the Davis in
.inerator 10 the city. He said that
Il a Joint meeting Of Council and
he Health Board II was agreed to
rave installed 76-ton plant instead
" a 100-ton plant ss recomm ended
~ the board, The price was set
he witness said, at $4,000 by Hook.
nut II was reduced to SIS, 900 af-
Ter some discussion.
The court overruled, upon assur-
,nce OF Mr. Switzerland. that the
state will follow up the testim ony,
dr Harmans objection 10 allowing
)r. Handy 10 testify as 10 whether
" not he was approached by Hook
the incinerator. Mr..
iarman contended that before such
estimony could be allowed. the
tate must first prove a prima fscia d,
sse OF conspiracy. After such
roof. the state might bolster up (
ts case with such testim ony as de- ,
irsd from DR.. Handy, the attorney
laimed 8
Or. Hsnby said that Mr.. Hook
anne to him and said that Howard
:. Frantz had made demand on
lin for commission on the pur- s
hsse Of the incinerator and asked s
i'm (Hanby) II DR. Frantz was very :
This was before the ac- I
eptance by the city OF the Davis
DR.. Handy said. DR.. Z
Ianby added that Dr. Frantz was s
OF nreSent af the cOnvareaffon Z
which took place in January 1922.
City Solicitor Reuben Satterth-
-aite. Jr., testified to the happen {
ngs at a conference at which he. e
favor Harvey. Councilman Nc
ianus and Mr.. Hook were present.
Te testified that Hook denied that a
e had at that time an agreement
o pay $500 graft" but finally a
aid he had had an agreement but
OF at that time. The witness said 8
Toward Frantz in a letter invited q
i'm to submit a bid and that when b
e came to Wilmington Howard e
-anted TO know what he would get
ut OF it II he got the city to take Il
Is incinerator" Mr.. Sattert hwaite u
aid that Mr.. Hook related that II
Toward had him sign an agreement n
D pay a sum, which he did not
ecollect IL the incinerator were ac- r
epted