Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 34, Number 82, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 13 June 1902 — CORRUPTION IN TWO CITIES. [ARTICLE]

CORRUPTION IN TWO CITIES.

Investigations in St. Lon is and Philadelphia Show Much Rotteness. Another chapter has been added to the story of civic corruption in St Louis. The methods of the municipal combine and other city officials have been further exposed; and yet the investigation Is not finished. On Saturday four public men were indicted by the grand jury. Monday a new grand jury was impaneled to continue the probing into what the April grand *ry declared to be the worst Instance of official corruption ever known in history of any American city. The present b»tph of indictments reveals conditions that are nothing short of astounding. The report closing the jury’s work- accuses a former Mayor of the dty, who previous to that had been collector, of receiving interest on public funds for his own privato account; it accuses a fltired registrar of securing a rake-off on printing contracts; it declares that a member of the present house of delegates procured contracts with the city, using the names of other Individuals and imaginary corporations, and then, as speaker of the house of delegates, approved the vouchers for supplies furnished by himself under these assumed names.

Under such revelations as these the grand jurors call their discovery an "astounding story of corruption;” and they add: “The villainous venality among tho sworn officers and public servants of our city should awaken every good citizen to the urgent necessity of stamping it out by giving more attention to public affairs.” In Philadelphia the principal of a public school testifies that when he applied for promotion to another school, where he would have received $2,0G5 instead of $1,350, one of the directors asked for sl,000 as a consideration for the election. When he refused the demand was lowered gradually to S3OO. The principal refused to give anything, although he knew he was prejudicing his chances, for two other directors had told him to listen to what this blackmailing director had to say and to “take his advice.” The principal told his Btory to the President of the local School Board, who said the director should not have made the demands ho did, but if the principal was sleeted he ought to “remember” the men who for him. One woman teacher testified that she had paid $l2O for her election In three monthly installments, but one director returned S3O to her., Another woman teacher was asked to pay $175, but just as her uncle was about to pay SSO on account tbe peculiar methods of the directors were made public. Other witnesses told how, in order to get a place In the schools, it was necessary to see the “ward leader” and aecure his support.