Sunday, January 31, 2016


James H. Hoose

William H. Clark, President, Cortland School Board.
Cortland Normal School.
The Cortland Democrat, Friday, August 14, 1891.


Letters That Explain Themselves—Dr. Hoose Hits Back.

   The following correspondence explains itself and will be interesting reading to every reader of the DEMOCRAT:
ALBANY, July 28, 1891.
Dr. JAMES H. HOOSE, Thousand Island Park, N. Y.,
   Sir: At the time of our convention at Toronto, in which you suggested that it would be unpleasant for you to continue in the Cortland school a portion of the year, under all the circumstances, I advised that you should consider the matter further and see me again before leaving, but for some reason we did not again meet. What you then said impressed me as having much force, and subsequent developments made it even more clear that, if there is to be a change in a principal there, it should take place prior to the opening of the school.
   My views of the law touching the relations of the Board and Superintendent, as declared by the Court of Appeals in your case some years ago, and my knowledge of all the facts as they exist, have led me to advise you that a change was inevitable in a little time, at least. I have been anxious to defer it long enough to enable you to secure a suitable position elsewhere, and have intended to hold the resolutions of the Board without acting upon them, for some time, even to the close of the fall term if need be, in the belief that by that time, there would be an opening for you elsewhere, and the difficulties of the situation would be largely removed. But it becomes clear that this is not practicable. You saw it earlier than I. The fact that there is to be a change is gaining publicity through different channels, and will of course make it disagreeable for you to remain there. I had hoped that the unpleasant relations between yourself and the board would become modified, but the hope is not realized. You tell me that the Board treats you unfairly, and the Board claims that you have misrepresented the facts and given out that you had defeated and overthrown their action, and that you treat the Board and its members with contempt. Again, there are to be several new teachers, and some consequent readjustment of work and it is also true that whoever is to be principal of the school hereafter might better be upon the ground while the work upon the new building is in progress.
   It, therefore, seems to me best that the change take effect at once, and I write to advise you to send in your resignation and relieve me from the necessity of approving action which formally removes you from the position. I am sure that this will be wiser for you and it will be more agreeable for me. If you act upon the suggestion, I shall, as I nave said to you, be very glad, so far as I now know, to call upon you for such extra assistance in conducting the institutes as we may need, until you become located to your satisfaction. I am
   Yours very respectfully,
   A. S. DRAPER, Superintendent.

CORTLAND, N. Y., August 3, 1891.
Hon. A. S. Draper, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Albany, N. Y.
   DEAR SIR:—Yours of July 28, calling for my resignation has received attention. The letter very gravely misapprehends the spirit and tenor of the talk which I had with you at noon, Saturday, July 11, in Queen's Hotel, Toronto. My clear understanding with Hon. Charles R. Skinner, Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction, had with him at noon June 30 last, in the Cortland House, Cortland, immediately after the close of our (43rd) commencement exercises, was the same as that which I had with you in your office, A. M., of June 25th last. It was explicit, and to the effect that I should not resign my position under the request of the board made on me June 1 last, as I stated in my answer to the board, made June 8, that if a business proposition came to me, offering a good situation, I was to accept it—provided it was satisfactory to me, and to the entertaining of which I was a voluntary party; and that until such an opening came matters in Cortland were to remain as they were. Mr. R. B. Smith of the board, who was present at the board meeting held in the afternoon of June 30, says that Mr. Skinner placed the above understanding explicitly before the board at that meeting. You conveyed to some friends of mine who were in your office July 3, the idea that you had in mind a very valuable and desirable position for me. I approached you in Toronto in order to learn what business proposition you had in prospect for me, and I suggested that if I were to be offered, soon after the opening of next term, a situation which I might be induced to accept, that it might be as well for our school to open in September without me.
   You responded that you were tired of the trouble at Cortland; that you had left Albany hoping to hear nothing more of the case while away; and you asked me if I was tired of it also, querying if it would not be very unpleasant for me to open the school next term, to which remarks I answered "no" immediately—for I recollected instantly your remarks made to a friend of mine in your office May 20, and repeated to me there June 25, touching the social life of unhappiness which you thought we must have in Cortland, owing to school troubles; it was explained to you that our social life in Cortland was exceedingly pleasant, for our friends were very cordial as well as very numerous. Your conversation at Toronto continued to the effect that members of the board had told you I had boasted of my victory, thus humiliating them before the public, and that you had promised them you would assign me to another position in time; that I should be on the lookout for a position elsewhere; that a teacher in a normal school should have due notice given when demanding his resignation—a time which I had not had; that you had concurred to remove from our school, only a few days before, a teacher who had had ample notice from the board, and should therefore have resigned; that my relations with the Department had been always of such a loyal character that I was entitled to proper consideration therefor; that the majority of the board were your appointees and you had not lost confidence in them; that you had no situation to offer me, except that which was conditional and temporary; and that my ultimate choice rested between accepting from you this temporary work, or eventual removal; that I could think over this matter and see you again on the following Monday, July
13. As I had said to you on Saturday that I had not boasted of a victory or done anything to humiliate the majority of the board; as I was no party to your promise to the board; as you had no business proposition to make to me, other than a temporary one; as I had stated explicitly to you June 25, that I should not entertain a temporary business calculated merely to lure me to resign, and as the only matter to think over was that of the choice of alternates for me, I had therefore nothing further to say on the subject, and did not see you again at Toronto.
   Permit me to say that your conversation at Toronto, July 11, and the contents of your letter of July 28, are in striking contrast to all of your talks with me down to about the time when it began to be apparent that members of the board had received an assurance that you would concur with a majority of the board. The following instances exhibited the unfolding of the case:
   I met you first in your law office in Albany, January 28; you were a candidate for the office of Superintendent of Public Instruction; I said incidentally that we had earned in the school at Cortland the right to live in peace in the future; you answered that you were sure we were entitled to enjoy peace. All the Cortland friends of the members of the "old board" and myself—as well as ourselves—advocated your candidacy, and you gave assurances of active co-operation for preserving and promoting peace and prosperity in our school, should you be elected. You were elected; and no one of the friends who aided you then has been placed by you upon the board—nor have any of their recommendations been honored by you. Instead, your appointees are those who were active to promote the candidacy of others during that canvass, they are those who were pronounced in the opposition to the "old board" and to myself in the controversies of 1880-2; when we resisted and overthrew in the Court of Appeals the illegal power that was assumed by one of your predecessors.
   At commencement at Cortland, June 28, during public remarks you said that our school was "second to none in the State in its management.'' At the meeting of Normal principals held in New York, in the American Museum of Natural History, I expressed to you after dinner, October 19, solicitude for judicious appointments when you should fill the vacancies then existing in our board. You intimated that you should make your appointments upon political advice, but that you should not do anything that should disturb the present order of things in Cortland; you would act for peace and prosperity. The latter part of November, I was told that you had said to a Congressman and an Assemblyman that no appointments to the board should be made that would not be acceptable to me. November 21, Judge Duell and a friend saw you in your office; upon return home, they said that you assured them you "should not do anything to unsettle affairs" at Cortland. Formal notice reached the board December 17, of your first appointments. These two appointments were ominous of subsequent trouble, for the appointees had been in the forefront of opposition to the board and myself in 1880-2.
   This act of yours raised in my mind the thought that you purposed ultimately to remove me, and the idea of my leaving the school arose in my own mind as well as in the minds of friends. But the idea was dismissed after a time, for the first time I saw you thereafter—at an institute at Canajoharie, December 22—when I expressed deep solicitude as to the outcome, saying our people were disappointed and anxious over your action, you asked me to see you in Albany to talk over the situation; and you said that you would see that no harm came to me from your appointments, and that I need not worry for you would take care of me. Articles appeared in the press of last December, entitled "Hoose Must Go," indicating the effect upon the public made by your appointments.
   An Assemblyman told me, January 10, that Superintendent Draper said to him that the conditions of his appointments (of Dec., 1889) were that they should raise no issue on the principal, but should work in harmony with him, for no attacks upon him will be permitted, as "Dr. Hoose is too valuable a man to be disturbed."
   At the meeting of School Commissioners, Binghamton, I saw you the first time since our meeting at Canajoharie. You called me into your room in Hotel Bennett, in the evening of January 19, and stated to me that your appointments had been made at the instance of a State Senator; that there was a distinct understanding between the Senator and the appointees that in no way were they to enter the board for the purpose of reviving old issues or to make trouble for the administration, and that you had refused to make the appointments until these conditions were agreed to by the appointees; that, hence, I need have no fear of trouble from them. This assurance you repeated to me January 20, adding the remark that I should rest entirely free from anxiety because of our board. Alluding to a prediction of trouble made in a recent issue of an educational journal, you remarked that you saw no reason why the paper should state that, as the appointees would cause no trouble. At the meeting of the State Teachers' Association, Watkins, at your hotel, in the evening of July 5, you said "I will not leave you in a hole," when I explained how the majority had passed, May, 26, a resolution calculated to embarrass the administration of school work—as is fully explained in my answer to the board, made June 8, 1891.
   At the meeting of Normal principals, Buffalo, October 16, in the Genesee House, you asked me if there was any "blood in the cloud" at Cortland, referring to the acts of the majority towards the administration— you had non-concurred October 2, in the rules passed May 26. In the evening of October 16, during a stroll about Buffalo, you said to me in effect that you would stand by me in every way; that I had an established reputation in my profession; and that I should be defended by you as long as you should remain in office. October 26, an alumnus of our school told me that a member of the majority of the board said to him their policy was to curtail my power —a policy fully exhibited in my answer of June 8. At Syracuse, at the meeting of academic principals, I explained to you, December 27, that members of the board were interfering with my prerogatives as principal by giving over my head authority direct to the students—a practice which must stop. You said that you did not "want any fuss at Cortland," and that you would go to Cortland to meet the board and myself, or you would meet us at Albany, to adjust the provinces of authority between the board and the principal. These provinces had already been outlined in your letter of October 2—see my answer of June 8.
   At the meeting of School Commissioners held in the American Museum of Natural History, New York, I said to you January 8, that I should ask you to come to Cortland to meet the board and myself to stop the encroachments upon my authority as principal, unless they ceased, for our students were becoming demoralized by the interference; you said that you would meet us, if wanted. In my office, in the forenoon of February 15, one of the majority raised some point of administration that interfered with my official duties; I suggested that you be invited to visit Cortland to settle the provinces of authority; he said "It would not sound well to have that done — we could agree;" he called again in the afternoon of that day and said that hereafter they would deal with the students only through the principal. Another member of the majority said to me March 19, that he wished only one head to the school; that I should administer discipline myself. On April 23, one of the majority said to me that he should write to you to visit Cortland to consult about employing teachers before any nominations were made; he informed me April 25 you could not come until May 14. This same member informed me by letter May 2, that "The Superintendent has endorsed the Prang System (of Drawing) for the State" — a matter that touched materially our work in school, and a notice I had not known before. This showed an understanding on professional subjects between the board and you that I had been ignorant of. Suddenly, the board nominated two teachers May 4 —ten days before you could be present for consultation.
   You were at the meeting of Normal principals in Cortland, May 14. One of the nominees, being in town, did not call on you, nor had I been called upon by said nominee. On the evening train from Cortland to Binghamton that day, I suggested that perhaps I had better leave the school, as the aggressive course of the majority touching my authority and advisory province as principal might work ultimate injury to the school; you answered that you did not want me to leave, but to stay, as I was doing good work here; I said that if there was a Normal principal in the State more devoted to his work than I was, I should like to know him; you said there was none. During this ride you suggested that you would summon to Albany the nominee who did not call on you while in Cortland; I approved. May 17, in the afternoon, the said nominee called upon me at my office, by "request of the Superintendent." I wrote you May 17, that the conference was satisfactory. You wrote May 18, the candidate "quite agreed that it was a mistake that he had not called upon you previously, and gave me every assurance that, if confirmed, he should cooperate with you in all ways for the advantage of the school. In view of that fact, and of the contents of your letter, confirmation will follow at once."
   In January and February nominations of teachers were made by the board. Your official course in those cases was in direct variance to that taken in the case of May, 1889, although at the meeting of the Department of Superintendence, New York, while we were walking from the hotel to the evening session, February 18, you said to me, alluding to appointment of teachers, that I might rest assured you would not see me "imposed upon." May 18, you made two more appointments to the board. On December 2, I met at the school one of the architects and assisted him in planning for a new building, and for improving the present building—two other members of the faculty aided. This aid was continued December 16-18, and on December 29. Our suggestions were substantially embodied in the plans which were later adopted by the board.
                              INSTANCES DURING 1891.
   Your fifth appointment to the board became public about July 1. You wrote April 7, in answer to my letter of April 4, that you were not responsible for the reports about you on the streets; that "whenever the affairs of the Cortland school reached me officially, I shall undertake to do what may seem to be best for the institution." May 16, the majority began their attack on me, doing it in an unofficial manner. This was the first notice received from any source that I was not acting in harmony with the board. My official account of this was laid before you May 20. You said to a friend May 20, that you had said you would concur with a majority of the board; that you should think work elsewhere would be agreeable to me, "say in some other Normal school of the State;" that whatever your decision in the case might be, "no harm should come to Dr. Hoose." Acting under your above suggestion about taking work elsewhere, I wrote to you May 21, that "if you appoint me to a place where I can pursue my professional labors, the case here can be adjusted amicably and speedily, so far as I am concerned." You answered May 26: "I know of no position at present to which I could appoint you, provided your relations to the Cortland school were severed, but so far as anything has transpired, I should have no hesitancy in doing so or in approving a nomination made by the local board of any State Normal school, if a suitable opportunity should present itself." June 1, came the request of the board that I resign, and my refusal, June 8.
   On June 20, a committee of prominent citizens of Cortland and the president of the Alumni Association of the school appeared before you in your office, representing through numerously signed petitions the citizens of Cortland and vicinity. The alumni and students of the school all protested against the violent action of the board, and asked you to non-concur in these attacks on members of the faculty. An extensive correspondence to the same effect enforced this request of the committee and petitions. You wrote me June 23, if I did not wish to see or write you on the action of the board, saying, "I feel inclined to act without much more delay." With friends, I called on you at your office June 25; you assured us that there was nothing laid against me. In a subsequent interview with me that day, you said that you had exacted assurances from your appointees of May, 1890, that they would enter the board to act in harmony with me; you spoke of several plans you had considered that would place me in more agreeable work elsewhere in the State; that you had been asked a year ago to remove me that you had declined to have anything to do with the case, but that you had agreed to act with a majority of the board. I said that I should not resign under the attacks of the board—I would be removed first; that I would entertain a business proposition, if a satisfactory one were offered to me.
   In conclusion: Referring to your letter of July 28:
   (1) You alluded to your "views of the law touching the relations of the board and the superintendent." Reviewing incidents and past acts, it appears that you stated May 20 and June 25, that you had promised to concur with the majority in their acts; that the majority refused, May 16, to meet you to investigate the nature of the differences and to adjust them; that you positively refused, May 20, to meet the board and myself to investigate the case, after you had as positively promise to hold such a meeting; and that you removed early in July one of our faculty, because the board asked you to do so. The legitimate inference from the above, is that your views of the law are direct and simple, to wit—that the business of the Superintendent is to concur with the majority, because they wish you to do so; and that this view of the law lies under cover of the words, "immediate supervision," as they exist in the decision of the Court of Appeals.
   The case is reported in 89 New York Reports, "The People, ex rel., Neil Gilmour, Superintendent, etc., respondent, vs. Frederick Hyde et al., appellants." The "holdings" refer explicitly to the employment and discharging of teachers, and that this can be done only by concurrent action. Relating to the Superintendents act of attaching a condition to the contract of hiring, e.g. "to continue during the pleasure of the local board and the Superintendent," the Court says: "We think it clear he had no right to attach such a qualification. The exercise of such power by him would substitute the caprice of either of the branches of the appointing power for the joint act of both, as the instrument of removal, and deprive the teacher of that certain tenure of employment which the law has provided in his behalf." * * * "The Legislature intended that his employment and its continuance should rest on the conjoint action of an immediate and a remote authority, and not on the pleasure of either acting by itself." On the matter of dissensions, the Court says: "If the local board, upon whom the responsibility of immediate supervision is devolved, shall mismanage the school, the entire board or any member of it may be removed by the Superintendent, with the concurrence of the Chancellor of the University." * * * "Such a construction of the statute preserves to the school the benefits of an independent local supervision, while it enables the Superintendent to arrest a perverse or pernicious course of management before it has impaired the usefulness of the school."
   This decision was supposed to be in the interest of permanency of tenure of office; but your construction of it practically converts it into an article that destroys permanency, thus virtually nullifying the decision of the court. It surpasses my powers as a layman to understand how these explicit provisions of the decision contain explicit or implicit, mandatory or permissive provisions, under which a superintendent may promise to concur with a majority of his own creating, to remove a teacher without cause and without an investigation, or to understand how the majority of a board can, under the newly promulgated "due notice" theory, and at its sole pleasure, implicitly attached to its every act of hiring teachers, a virtual condition of removal and that, too, without cause and without an investigation. An investigation in tribunals seeking justice brings the disagreeing parties face to face—a privilege denied by you.
   (2) I am in no way responsible for the publicity of the reports that there is to be a change of principals at Cortland—hence it is not disagreeable for me to remain there.
   (3) I disclaimed at Toronto any acts of boasting to humiliate the board.
   (4) I have done nothing to increase this unpleasant feeling which the board entertains toward me—unless it be my refusal to resign as requested, June 1.
   (5) Your own official decision in my favor cited in my answer of June 8, answers satisfactorily your words, "you tell me that the board treats you unfairly."
   (6) I am entirely unconscious of any act of mine calculated to treat the board and its members with contempt. My rule of life is to treat all associates and officials with becoming inspect. But mark the contrast: Since the close of last term numerous changes have been made in the faculty; no word touching these has reached me from the majority, or from you—notwithstanding you said to me June 25 last, no associate teacher ought to be employed without the approval of the principal—a course universal with us until the advent of the majority into the board. This treatment towards me can have only one construction—that the majority have been acting against me with your knowledge and consent.
   (7) To adjust teachers to their work is neither a new nor a difficult task to me.
   (8) It would be no difficult work for me "to be upon the ground while the work upon the new building is in progress"—especially as I assisted to elaborate the plans.
   (9) You ask me to resign. I opened the Cortland Normal school March 3, 1869, twenty-two and a half years ago—sixteen years before you came to your present position. The prosperity and efficiency of the school are history. As recited before, twice during your administration of five years I stood ready to leave the school, because of your appointments of men upon the local board that you knew were inimical to my administration; but your course persuaded me to remain.
   It is too late now to ask me to resign. I cannot do so with honor to myself, to my friends and to my cause. Without a single exception, my friends in state and nation, who have communicated with me on the subject approve my fixed purpose to decline to comply with requests for my resignation. You offer "to call upon" me for temporary work if I will resign. I am not seeking this or that place; I am a candidate for justice; I am an advocate for the inalienable right of the teacher to enjoy his reputation and position, except for just cause duly established. Except under the conditions made with Hon. C. R. Skinner, June 30, I respectfully and firmly refuse to resign my position as principal of the Cortland Normal School.
   I have written at this length, because in case of injustice to a public man, his ultimate court of appeal is the public.
   Respectfully submitted,
   J. H. HOOSE, Principal.

Dr. Hoose and Supt. Gilmour:


Saturday, January 30, 2016


The Cortland Democrat, Friday, August 9, 1891.

Citizens Who Want Honors and Emoluments—Full List of Candidates for the Republican Convention.
   The delegates to the Republican County Convention to be held in this place Aug. 25th will have a large list of candidates to select their county nominees from. It looks a little as if quality had been overlooked that quantity might prevail, but that is nothing unusual with Republican conventions. As a rule, every member of the party expects some day to be a candidate for office and if there are some who haven't yet announced themselves as candidates, it is probably owing to the fact that they haven't sold their butter or else they haven't had time to "dig their 'taters" yet. It costs a good bit of money to obtain a nomination in a Republican convention, and the candidate whose butter is in the cellar or whose 'taters are still in the ground, is but poorly fortified for the strain of a long campaign. The boys in each town have to be seen as well as heeled and a good bank account is of much more consequence than talent or fitness for the office desired.
   There will be considerable strife for the nomination for Member of Assembly. Charles O. Newton of Homer seems to be entitled to be first noticed for the reason that Uncle Rufus Peck is said to have promised him the nomination this time, if he would act as chairman of the county committee last year and do his level best for the latter's re-election. It is pretty generally understood that Newton fulfilled his part of the contract to the letter, but it is said that Uncle Rufus, true to his record, is "agin him" now for the reason that he fears Newton's nomination might complicate matters in some way, that would injure his prospects for the Senatorial nomination. Newton is a good man, but he don't weigh two hundred and fifty pounds, still he may get there in spite of Peck, provided he will open one of his barr'ls, of which he is supposed to have several; otherwise he won't be "in it" as the boys say.
   William H. Crane of the same place is also a candidate for the nomination. He is cashier of the First National Bank in that place and has represented that town in the Board of Supervisors several terms with credit. His opponents claim he is always wanting the nomination for some office and if he don't get it is sure to be disgruntled. They think he has been pretty well taken care of for a man who ran with the Democratic machine up to within a few years. Crane certainly seems to have an itching for office but he is a pretty competent man.
   James H. Tripp, better known to politicians as "Jim" Tripp, of Marathon, has again been forced into the field by his friends. If a man's friends would only let him alone, and wait until he became ready to want the office himself, what a lot of trouble and expense it would save. But they won't do it. Many a good man has been ruined by his friends because they hadn't patience to wait until the man himself wanted to run. Tripp is a man of much more ability than the average Republican candidate for member, and this fact has been an injury to him. His integrity so far as we know, has never been questioned, but this is a qualification that has not benefited him in previous canvasses for the nomination, in fact it has seemed to work against him. If Tripp was possessed of a little low cunning, was utterly devoid of conscience, and would go around and see the boys, open his barr'l and promise every one of them an office besides, he might stand a good chance for the nomination.
   Peck promised him the nomination last fall if he would take hold and work for him the fall before, but when the time came he took the plum himself. Tripp may get the nomination but as there will undoubtedly be a large number of commercial delegates in the convention, and he isn't inclined to purchase the prize, it is by no means a sure thing. The average delegate to Republican conventions has business ideas of politics and he is there for all there is in it. He has very little respect for talent or fitness for office and friendship doesn't count with him at all.
   There is at least a ten acre lot full of candidates for Sheriff, and they are of all grades, fair, tolerable and intolerable.
   Henry Howes of Cuyler has served one term as supervisor and is the present supervisor for that town. When a man gets a bee in his bonnet, he manages to get the nomination for supervisor of his town, gets elected if possible, and then considers that he is in the swim for a fat county berth. The office of supervisor is considered the stepping stone to a higher position and if the candidate has been active in cutting down printers and constables bills while on the board, he feels that he is entitled to anything he may ask for. This applies to other candidates as well as Howes. Howes is a pretty fair man and is making a lively canvass for the nomination. He won't be the last in the race, but there are a good many candidates and no one can tell now, what the result will be.
   John Miller of Cortland is making a strong fight for the place, and the fact that he is said to have been counted out of the nomination three years ago, is a card in his favor. He has served both as constable and deputy sheriff and has generally done his duty pretty thoroughly. This, however, won't help him much except with the better element of the party, who do not attend the caucuses. The political heelers and workers prefer a man who can't see their misdeeds, but is quick to discover any little irregularity indulged in by those who don't belong to their set. They want a Judge who will favor them and their friends, a District Attorney who will do the same and their motto is "no honest man need apply." Miller would make a pretty good official but he has lots of opposition to overcome.
   John O. Reid of this village was a candidate three years ago and went into the convention with considerable strength. Reid is a good citizen and would undoubtedly discharge his duty faithfully. He is making an active canvass and will undoubtedly have considerable strength in the convention.
   A. D. Wallace, one of the proprietors of the Brunswick in this place, is also said to be making a canvass. He has considerable strength among the boys and is one of the originators and proprietors of the "Silk Stocking Club" of this village. He is said to be Dick Duell's candidate and you can bet your last dollar he will have votes in the convention.
   Wallace W. Parker of Harford, who was a Democrat until recently, is also a candidate. We believe this is the only qualification he possesses for the office and as it has been a good one for many others, it may pull him through.
   Eli J. Colegrove of this place, formerly of Cuyler, is also in the field with both feet. What Eli don't know about politics in general and the effects of the McKinley bill in particular, isn't worth knowing. If he ever gets started on a speech in the convention he will either get the nomination or stampede the house. Eli is a hustler and may win.
   Adam Hillsinger of Marathon is a candidate and has seen service as constable in his town. If Tripp is nominated for member of Assembly, Hillsinger will have to wait at least three years before he can be nominated.
   Charley Burlingame of Willett is one of the present deputies and if he isn't a first-class man for the place he is mistaken. If he can make a majority of the delegates believe as he does he stands a right smart chance for the nomination.
   Rufus L. Cass of Taylor has been a delegate from his town for other candidates for a good many years and has finally decided that he will ask for something himself. If he can throw his delegates right in the convention he may get a deputyship. This will be a hard matter to accomplish as the delegates from his town are generally out for all there is in it.
   Aaron Overton of Virgil would like to be nominated for Sheriff but if Steve Jones handles the delegates from that town Aaron won't be nominated.
   Dan E. Morris of Solon, and Wm. A. Shirley of Homer, are said to be candidates, but we can't learn that they are doing much except in their own towns.
   Hubert T. Bushnell, the present incumbent, is a candidate for renomination for the office of County Clerk. Mr. Bushnell isn't a very noisy man but he makes a very good official and is always obliging and accommodating. He ought to stand a good chance for the nomination.
   Frank J. Collier of Preble is a candidate. He always votes the Republican ticket and has wanted the nomination for a long time but never had votes enough in the convention. He is a farmer and expects the support of the agricultural element besides a sprinkling of the politicians. He will have to do some hard work and we understand he is hustling about pretty lively.
   Stephen K. Jones of Virgil tried hard last fall to obtain the nomination for County Treasurer, but when the votes were counted he discovered much to his dismay that he wasn't in it. Nothing daunted he comes up this year and asks the party for the nomination for County Clerk. He is quite a hustler, but not a very sharp politician. If he knew how to arrange a combination he might win, but unless he has learned considerable the past year, he won't know how to do it.
   Jerome Squires of this place is a candidate for District Attorney and is said to have only one opponent for the nomination. Squires has held the office of Justice of the Peace in this town for one term and the boys say he run it for all it was worth. He would be a decided improvement on the present incumbent.
   Miles E. Burlingame of Willett is a pretty good lawyer and we believe would make an honest official. If he was more of a politician he might make it lively for Squires and may do so as it is.
   Horace L. Bronson, when interviewed by the Standard last week said that he was not a candidate, and the people of Cortland county are to be congratulated. He is also reported by the Standard to have said that "while in office I have endeavored to give to my official duties all the time they required, no matter what else had to suffer, and I think the records will show that I have met with fair success." Undoubtedly he had in mind the occasion when he went to Canada to attend to private business the morning that the County Court and Court of Sessions opened in this village, making no arrangements for the transaction of the criminal business before the court in his absence. The result was no business could be transacted and court had to be adjourned simply because the District Attorney was attending to private affairs. It is enough, however, to know that he is not now a candidate.
                      SUPERINTENDENT OF THE POOR.
   Dwight K. Cutler of Scott is a candidate for re-election to the office of Superintendent of the Poor. It is pretty safe to say that Cutler hasn't lost any money during the past three years and that he has made a very good official. He is something of a politician and stands a pretty good show to succeed himself, if the nomination is all that is needed.
   Almon W. Angel of Cortland, formerly of Taylor, is anxious to serve the people in this important capacity. He was a soldier in the 157th regiment, and has been Justice of Sessions. He is about the only candidate in the entire list that represents the soldier element to any extent. He was dangerously wounded while in the service but this don't count for much in Republican conventions.
   If there are other candidates whose names have not been mentioned and they will send in their names, the DEMOCRAT will be pleased to publish them with such comments as their individual merits or demerits may deserve.

The Tin Plate Club.
   Last Tuesday evening without previous announcement, several prominent Republicans of this village met and organized a new club which is to be called by the above singular name. About thirty signed the roll and the following delegates were elected to represent the club at the State League meeting held in Syracuse the following day: Webster Young, Ernest M. Hulbert, and H. L. Gleason. Alternates,
A. S. Brown, H. M. Kellogg and S. J. Sornberger. The following are the regular officers elected by the club:
   President—Edward Keator.
   Vice-President—H. L. Gleason.
   Secretary—Herbert L. Smith.
   Treasurer—H. M. Kellogg.
   The club is made up of some of the wealthiest and best citizens of the town and it is understood that they are all heartily opposed to the nomination of Hon. R. T. Peck for Senator. It is well known that the "Silk Stocking" Club of this place was organized in the interest of Mr. Peck and a few others who have designs upon the offices to be filled at the ensuing election, and that the organization is virtually controlled by Peck. Some of the members of this club belong to the new club and the "Silk Stockings" will undoubtedly give the renegades, as they call them, the grand bounce at the next meeting.
   Those who left the "Silk Stockings" for the Tin Plate Club, claim that they could not remain in an organization that was being run almost entirely in the interest of the candidacy of a man who is so obnoxious to the better element of the party as Mr. Peck. It is understood that the members of the Tin Plate Club will oppose the nomination of Peck, and if they do, Mr. Peck will have an uphill time in securing the honor.
   There is in fact more opposition to Peck's nomination than appears on the surface and it is believed that the road he has to travel will prove to be a very rocky one. A very large element of the party feel that they have already had all "the Peck in theirs" as they express it, that they want.

   An interesting feature of "The Witch," the famous colonial play, which Marie Hubert Frohman will produce in this city October 30th, is the introduction of the pillory, the ducking stool, and other methods of punishment in the old Puritan days. "The Witch" depicts in a graphic manner the witchcraft persecutions in Salem, Massachusetts, and incidentally tells a touching story of love, desertion, and ultimate reconciliation and happiness

Friday, January 29, 2016


The Cortland Democrat, Friday, July 31, 1891.

The Ballot Law Changes.
   The general election to be held on November 3d of the present year is regarded as the most important election of recent years, not only from the fact of the large number of offices to be filled in the state, county and city, with all the vast patronage appertaining thereto, but because of its probable effect upon the election of presidential electors next year.
   Both Democratic and Republican leaders are uneasy as to the workings of the amended ballot reform law. Last year, prior to election day, the Republicans were very cheerful over the benefit they anticipated from the new law. After the votes had been counted, however, it is a matter of history that they were not cheerful. Clearly the advantage was with the Democracy, a fact largely due to the educational campaign conducted by its leaders.
   The Republicans hope to profit this year by the experience the voters gained at the last election, but as a great majority of those who exercised their right of suffrage last year were unquestionably Democrats, who can be relied upon to vote straight this year, it would appear that in order to reap an additional harvest of votes at the next election the Republicans will have to do the same work this year with the Republican voters as the Democracy did last year with theirs. If this view is correct and it is generally admitted that it is, the advantage under the ballot reform law is clearly with the Democracy, and its leaders can be relied on not to lose any part of such advantage, if persistent work can retain it. Although election day is still three and a half months away the local politicians, warned by last year's experience, are utilizing their spare moments in mastering the intricacies of the amended ballot reform law and find therein much to engage their attention.
   The last Legislature amended the ballot law in twenty-two of its forty-six sections. Many of the changes are radical in their nature, and all election officials, candidates and others who take an active interest in political matters, will do well to carefully study the changes in the law.
   Contrary to the general belief, no change was made by the last Legislature in the time set for filing nomination certificates, although it was not for lack of effort on the part of the officials charged with the execution of the law that the time was not shortened, as the present law does not give them the time necessary to prepare election matter dependent upon the nominations.
   The Democratic, Republican, prohibition and socialist labor organizations, having polled in the state 1 per cent of the total vote cast as required by the act, are entitled to nominate state officers by convention. But as in many assembly districts the prohibitionists and socialist labor people failed to poll the requisite number of votes they will be compelled in those districts to nominate candidates as independents are nominated, by securing the necessary 250 signatures.
   Under the provisions of the law certificates of nomination made by conventions for a state office or an office to be filled by the voters of more than one county, such as a justice of the supreme court, can be filed with the secretary of state as early as September 24th, and must be filed with that official not later than October 9th.
   An important amendment was made to section 16 by abolishing the blank ballot which the original law compelled the officers charged with providing the ballots to furnish to voters.
   Another important amendment reduces the space between the title of the office and the name of the candidate from one-third to one-fourth of an inch. The width of the ballot remains at six inches. Under this provision the ballot to be used at the coming election will be six inches wide and about fifteen inches in length. This amendment corrects the ambiguous wording of the original act regarding the folding of the ballot which gave rise to so much discussion and argument last year. It declares that the ballot shall be "folded crosswise by bringing the bottom of the ballot up to the perforated line and then in the middle lengthwise."

An Opinion About Cider Making.
   An Ohio correspondent, writing in The World, expresses the following opinions about cider making:
   "The sooner you get the cider out of the cheese [mash] the better. The oldtime idea among farmers was that the cheese should stand over night before pressing, but they have learned better. "To the idea conveyed above I desire to express my dissent. As boy and man I have helped to make a great deal of cider in my time, and have had the acquaintance of many farmers in a district producing a great deal of cider, with opportunities for knowing their opinions and practices as to the immediate pressing of the pomace or otherwise. It certainly was the "oldtime idea" to let the newly ground pomace remain in the receiving box for from ten to fifteen hours before pressing out the juice, unless there were special reasons for hurrying, and I have yet to learn that farmers who make cider in this section have changed their opinions on the subject.
   The liquid when first squeezed out of the fruit is simply apple juice, not cider, to which it is shortly afterward changed by exposure to the atmosphere. This change is, in my opinion, best begun by keeping the juice and the pomace together, as before said, for some hours before separating them, and for the reason that while in that condition the juice acquires from the crushed pulp of the fruit a body and flavor superior to that of freshly pressed juice. It is quite generally admitted that cider made from apples ground in small hand mills is inferior to that made in the larger rural horse power mills, and I believe the reason is that in the case of the former the juice is generally pressed out immediately, as fast as the apples are ground. As in the making of many varieties of wine by fermenting the juice and the pomace together for a few days an infusion is derived which serves to give it a desirable special character, so I believe apple juice by a few hours' contact with the pulp of the fruit, while exposed to the atmosphere, will make better cider as a result of the process."

A Valuable Invention.
   Mr. Marvin Main of this town has recently invented and placed upon the market a milk cooler which will prove of great value to dairymen and farmers. It is well known that much cream is lost in warm weather through the fact that the animal heat is retained in the milk so long that the flavor is ruined. How to dispose of the animal heat has long been an unsolved question with dairymen and although many expensive devices have been manufactured for the purpose, very few have proved satisfactory.
   Mr. Main seems to have solved the problem satisfactorily to all who have tested his device, because it does the work perfectly and is not an expensive machine. Indeed, it is so simple that it is a wonder that some one had not thought of it before. A description of this valuable invention is hardly necessary here, but we advise every farmer who keeps any cows at all to call upon the proprietors, Messrs. Main & Glen of this village, and examine the same.
   Good butter cannot be made from milk that retains the animal heat and it is only good butter that brings a good price. Some of the best and most painstaking dairymen in this vicinity are already using the device with the most satisfactory results.

The 45th Rifle Score.
   Wednesday and Thursday of the present week the annual rifle practice of the 45th Separate Co., N. G. S. N. Y. [National Guard State of New York], took place at the military range north of this village. The rain interrupted the test on Thursday so much that an effort for a day's grace will be asked to finish the list.
   The summary of the shoot for the first day is:
                                            200  300
                                            yds.  yds.
Captain Dunsmore,             17    18
Lieut. McDowell,                 20   19
Sergt. Corwin,                      18    15
"         Gray,                           22    19
"         Harkness,                  15    18
"        Hodges,                      18      5
Corp. Brening,                    20    10
"         York,                          20    21
Private Brownell,               19    16
McMahon,                          17    18
Franklin,                             19    13
Snyder,                               16    16
Benedict,                            12    12
Reed,                                   15     9
Gosper,                               15    18
Gregg,                                 14    12
Hyde,                                  14     8
Clotten,                              19    13
Munson,                            16    17
Miller, E. J.,                      15     9
Santee,                              20    14
Barnard, R. E.,                 17    14
Barnard, L.,                      14    18
Callahan,                          17     9
Darby,                               19    15
Van Marter,                      14     5
Garden,                             15    17
Winters,                            19    14
Elster,                               20    20
Fish,                                  18    12
McEvoy,                           19    13
Miller, W. F.,                   14     3
Munson,                           17    13
Mills,                                 15     5
Peters,                               18    19
Randall,                            17    20
Risley,                               18    13
Schouton,                         18     5
Q. M., Cleveland,            20     20
   The second day resulted as follows, each man being allowed twenty-five rounds of cartridges at each range throughout:
First Lieut. Dickinson,   20    16
Asst. Surg. Higgins,        15     *
Lieut. Howard,                15     8
Corp. Harmon,                18     9
Private Willson,              16    17
Hyde,                                15     5
Danforth,                         19    12
Head,W. L.,                      15     5
Reed,                                16    15
Shares,                             14    4
Bates,                               18    16
Gregg,                              20    13
Monroe, G. F.,                15    14
Hodges,                           15    17

Our National Flag.
   It is a fact which is possibly not familiar to the public at large that the Congress of the thirteen American Colonies struggling for independence adopted June 14,1777, a military and naval standard which was the first general American banner and the forerunner of the national flag of to-day. That standard differed from the present flag only in the number and the arrangement of the stars in the "union," or square, in the upper left corner. It consisted of thirteen stripes alternately red and white, beginning with red, and a union of dark blue with a circular group of thirteen white stars. The union was a square with a side equal in length to the breadth of the first seven stripes.
   Red and white having been chosen for the colors of the stripes, it was imperative to use blue as the background of the union or corner field. White was then selected in preference to red as the proper color for thirteen stars shining from a blue sky. The stars were arranged in a circle to evidence the strength of the union of the thirteen colonies.
   The flag as constructed in 1787 floated over the Continental armies at Yorktown and was the standard of St. Clair's and Wayne's forces in their conflicts with the red men. Remaining unvaried until 1795, it was then enlarged by the addition of two stripes to commemorate the entry of Vermont and Kentucky as States into the Union, and two new stars were also placed with those in the union. The stars were then arranged in three parallel rows.
   No further variation was made until 1818, when the stripes were again made fifteen in number and five additional stars were distributed in the union to represent five new States. At the same time when these alterations were made by Congress, it was made obligatory by that body that another star should be added on the Fourth of July first ensuing after the admission of a new State.
   The number of States is now forty-four, but until July 4 the flag of the United States of America will contain only forty-three stars. The explanation of the shortage is the fact that the last State, Wyoming, was admitted since the last Fourth of July, the date of its entry being July 11, 1890.
   The disposition of the stars at present is in six parallel horizontal lines. Eight are placed in the highest and seven in each of the five other lines. Wyoming's star will be put in either the second or the sixth line.

   Ithaca uses 5,000 barrels of beer annually, at a cost of over $150,000 to the consumers. At $14 per barrel, a profit of $70,000 is divided among the beer sellers.
   Uncle Sam possesses 1,000,000 French Canadians.
   Mexico is on the verge of another revolution.
   A Weedsport five-year-old in playing circus last week, fell from his trapeze suspended from a tree and was caught around the neck by the rope in some way. When rescued he was black in the face, but revived after a time.
   There is no denying that hard luck follows some men, no matter how hard they try to escape it. D. Yarrington, a carpenter, lost all of his property and one child by the Johnstown flood. Friends made up a purse for him and he went to Arizona. Here another flood washed away all of his earthly possessions and drowned a second child. He then went to Oklahoma, and there the other day a third flood beggared him and drowned his remaining child.