Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1858-12-16
THE IMPEACHMENT OF JUDGE wATROUs.

The proposition for the impeachment of
Judge Watrous is consuming the time Of Con
gress, apparently TO no good purpose. Tie
history of the case in brief, is, that upon the
organization of the Judiciary for Texas, the
new State was erected into a single District,
and John c. Warous appointed its Judge
Great confusion existed in the land laws Of
the State, which were COMPOUNDED with the
Spanish laws, the Louisiana civil code, and the
decision Of the U. S. Land Office The set
tiers were squatter broken down bankrupts,
desperadoes who had many instances taken
law into their own hands. There was con-
tinual conflict. The Court Dockets We're
crowded with cases of land litigation. Among
others was that Of a Mr.. Stafford, Louisiana
planter, whose property, slaves and all, was
mortgaged in that State. Mr.. S., initiating the
example Of many others, crossed the line with
his slaves and became a Texan. This was be-
fore annexation. OF course his Louisiana
creditors could obtain no judgment Upon
annexation his creditors followed him, and aid
was sought through the District Court, when
Judge Watrous occupied the Bench. He set
aside the plea of the statute of limitations and
ordered the negroes into the custody Of a Re
ceiver.
This, it will be perceived, was a blow, not
only at Mr. Stafford, but at nearly all the Tex
great majority of them had, prior to annexa-
tion, found it convenient to leave the United
States. Nothing could have made a Judge
more unpopular. Judge Watrous soon had
hornets nest about his ears The Legislature
took up the matter, and on the 10Th of March,
1913, joint resolution was passed almost
unanimously, charging him with aiding indi-
vlduals in an attempt to tasten upon the State
the most stupenduous frauds ever practiced
upon people, the fruit Of which would have
been the loss of millions of acres Of lands
pledged for the payment of the public debt
Other charges were made-that he had minis
tered laws njustly, and had been influenced
by unworthy motives. The resolution was
presented by brother-in-law of Stafford
But the legislature had no power to remove
him, as that is the province Of Congress,
through impeachment. The parties opposed
to him have followed the matter up, and now
tits before Congress. The grounds of impeach-
ment, however, are circumstances which have
happened since the passage Of the resolution,
in 1913. 1t is a land transaction known as the
La Vega grant. While a land case was pend
ing in the Court, the decision of which it was
supposed would settle all the difficulties in the
State, Judge w. joined a company and pur-
chased land. The case was decided, but it
did not settle the difficulties. Judge w. en-
deaVored to Keep the question in the State
Courts, but his associates overruled him and
carried it into the Circuit Court, held at New
Orleans. During those four years, according
to the accusers, Judge Warous concealed his
interest in the case, ruled, decided, and adjudi-
Gated, invariably in favor of his friends, and
finally granted the rule removing the case to
New Orleans, whether he secretly followed, to
effect by private interest the final decision.
These are the charges; Judge Watrous
shows by the record of his court, that when
the case first came up, he stated his incapacity
to try it, and that it was by agreement Of par
ties that it was referred to an arbiter, who,
with jury, were to decide it; and he denies
that he ever interferred with that tribunal.
Such in substance are the facts, and the
question now is shall he be impeached The
impression is that he will not be- that the evil
dence is not sufficiently conclusive to warrant
it. The matter has been before Congress at
nearly every session, and it is quite time to
have it out Of the way. We hope that Con-
gress will dispose of it at once.