Evening star., 1926-04-25
REP AIRED REPLY TO CHARGES ANSWERS EACH in DETAIL

of any law whatsoever. Miss Cunning
ham did collect the monthly retired
pay Of her brother and did deposit the
same in the National Savings and
Trust Co. to her credit as committee
and she Is to be congratulated upon
having made the deposit In so substan'
tial q fiscal institution located IN the
District OF Columbia and she being a
resident Of another jurisdiction.
Cites Jury Verdicts as PROOF.
..Charse 25--Cor pora ton counsel
Lunacy proceedings In INDECENT cases
| are under the law fled by the cor
| poration counsel in the name OF the
Commissioners Of the District or 60.
lumbia, and as TO whether IN any OF
the cases referred 10 in charge 70
the said persons are sane ana sho'!.1
not be deprived Of their liberty inc
| records of the Supreme Court. -. u,
| will speak IN the form OF verdict o1
juries. .-.,-.
Charge 26r~Corbett case: was
committee of Mrs. Caroline +. Corbett
many years ago. and under an Crder
| of court first had and obtained j sold
certain housenold goods which Mrs.
Corbett and her daughter. Miss
Cornelia J.. Corbett, told me belonged
TO the said Mrs. Caroline f. Corbett,
AS committee Of the mother, render
time 10 time. and after the discharge
of the said person from st. elizabeth 8
Miss Cornelia i. Cofbet. did bring n
action against me for several thousand
dollars which she alleged tc be the
value OF some Of the property which
had been sold and accounted for by
me as the propart" cf heT mother, on
which suit she obi;,insd judgment OF
few hundred dollars. The court, In
1rEf mo
meet The amount Of this judgment in
so far as was possible 10 do so from
the remaining funds belonging to the
mother which | did. No part Of The
property of Miss Corbett was ever
squandered, and every cent received
for property which had every reason
to believe belonged 10 her mother, Tut
which she claimed belonged 10 her,
was accounted for in the lunacy cause
of Mrs. Caroline F. Corbett.
Fakes Up Aliens Case.
Charge 27-Lieut. Aliens estate:
In charge 27 it is alleged that | am
squandering the property OF my
ward. Lieut. F. ID. Allen. All of my
activities as committee in this case
| are being performed under nav re-
sponsibility as committee and under
the direction of the Supreme Court,
District of Columbia. and there is
| no lust flea tion for an allegation that
there has been any improper conduct
in this case and ! challenge any
one to point to any action ! have
taken in this case which is not In
the best interest of my ward and In
= pursuance of the law and in con-
/ formity with orders of the Supreme
| Court, District Of Columbia.
Il Charge 2s-Notary fees; A no
=. tarial fee is proper charge under
S the law and is so recognized by the
court and ii has been held in the
= case of Ohio National Bank Vs. Hop
e kins appeals, d. c.. 14e' that an
5 agreement by a notary agreement TO
divide his fees Is void as against
n public policy A notary public is
J. entitled to his fee as fixed by law
D and it has been my policy to pay
l. such fees to notaries in my onice
+ and to notaries outside my ONCE and
= I have never obtained from any OF
t such notaries | cent of the fees so
l. paid.
. Explains Headley DemOtion.
! charge 2s-Headley and Gore
. cases. Inspector Albert J. Headley
n was denoted by the Board OF Com :
e missioners of the District of Colum-
= bia on the recommendation or the
E acting major and superintendent,
METROPOLITAN Police Department. and
have never taken any steps TO
4 punish Officer Gore as alleged In
charge 2s.
Mel. Allen was appointed oy tne com
u missioners on my recommendation ds
: a member of the board OF police ano
n fire surgeons and the said appoint
l ment. In the opinion of the FIVE other
O members Of that board raised the pro-
fessional standard of the said boaro:
l The appointment was made because oil
l. what ! considered to be necessity
\ Of having an experienced nose and
i throat specialist on the said board; II
y was made after consulting with other
n members of the board and after talk.
ing with a number Of DISTINGUISHED
physicians in the city of Washington,
all of whom commended DIR. Allen
g professional and personal qualnca'
B lions. II was made on the recommen-
A dation of Senator Reed. and Represen-
= tatives Kelly and Phillips. all OF
2 Pennsylvania. who wrote In COM
j mendation Of DIR. Allen as a physician
). and his character as q man. DR..
4 Allen is not my prospective son-in-
e law as alleged in charge 30.
+ The Famous Lee Case.
D Charge 3l-Sergt. Lee: "Sergt. Rob
+ ert f. Lee. Metropolitan Police De-
= partment was retired on the recon-
i mendation of the retiring and relief
,, board composed of the corporation
i counsel, one officer of the Police De-
partment and one officer of the Fire
! Department The recommendation
! was unanimous. l approved the said
recomme ndation and the Board OF
; Commissioners retired Sergt. Lee Feb
. ruary "a 1925. The next day re
ceived letter, dated February 20,
! 1926, from Mr.. Blanton asking thai
[ the case be reopened and that he be
given q chance to be heard. to which
replied that the action of the Board
:, of Commissioners was final and that
a promotion had been made to ill the
: vacancy, and TO which Mr.. Blanton re-
! piled, under date of March 6, 1925,
! threa tening me with Impeachment. IT
, is said in charge 81 that I arbitrarily
refused to grant a proper hearing on
the matter requested by Member OF
/. Congress- When the request come
J from the member aforesaid it was after
the retiring and relief board and the
Commissioners had disposed of the
. case and Allied the vacancy by pro-
motion. Charge 81 also alleges that
this action was taken in order to pro-
: mote one of my friends. This is abso-
! Ilutely untrue as can be learned from
' the ma jor and superintendent of po
. lice, who recommended SerSt. Gould
y man, and his recommendation in ihis
, respect was adopted, and | never saw
lOficer Gouldman nor did I know him
nv name until the recommendation for