The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-10-10
crowd became so great lately tha. the alton

tion of this cierk might either accidentally or
deslgnsdiy be diverted TO & smother Quarter % & the
A. should he TO take charge OF It, aud see that 1t
was not sfixed to the paper, unless by some one
thai this person had been but q few days before
employed, when this duty was assigned to him
IL required no special knowledge or experience
10 perform It. or his sobriety, Intelligence, and
integrity no question has been made. That the
seal should be kept locked, and be unlocked
every time IL Is needed, is an idea no one can
entertain for moment, unless, indeed, the
clerks shou d be allowed TO keep always on
hand o very considerable number of all kinds
OF writs and certificates of record ready sealed,
srenuously as being itself evidence OF negli-
gence: ~, ,o,uo m, ~, ,,,o,, T., ,no oo,s,ao.
ration OF this case, that the room provided for
the Prothonotary of This court Is small aud
narrow, entirely insufficient for the safe and
convenient transaction OF its business and the
security of ITS important records That, now
ever is not the faultof the respondent tnink
this specification is not sustained.
The Ihird allegation Is that he allowed natu-
ralizstion certificates. signed and sealed, in
blank, to be issued by his clerks If this fact
WAS clearly established, l would not consider
IL as evidence OF negligence, provi1ed due pre-
caution were observed in the custody OF the
papers. see nothing In the fact that eacn OF
Inc clerks may have mad at times pile of car-
tihcates directly before him and Immediately
under his eye, ready signed aud sealed, Whlle
engaged in filling them mp, The evidence SHOWS
that since the crowd became so great as To make
such practice dangerous, IL mad been dlscon-
tinued. Certainly, II Mr.. Mccarthy is To be be-
lieved, since the seal has been placed In mis-
charge no cert11cate In DIanK 0aQ passed uuuer
head
The second allegation is that the respondent
authorized his name, during his absence, To De
signed by the CLERK to certain documents to be
used at Washington in obtaining pensions and
bounties from the Treasury of the United
States. IL seems that the rules In that depart
ment Is not to receive documents signed per
1rooty tyationem. Whether this was right
wrong in the respondent 1 do not think 1 am
called on to decide 1t does not relate to the
record or business of this Court 1t Is done. as
unhn ND hl m 10 IN
aldermen 10 private and other documents. Ii
this practice IL wrong he is amenable TO the
never authorized II to he done In certifying the
records OF this Court. but expressly FORBADE II.
dismiss this specification.
The third allegation Is that he allowed natu-
ralzation certificates signed and sealed In
blank to be used by his clerks. II the fact was
clearly established 1 would not consider II as
evidence of negligence, provided due precau'
tions were observed as to the custody of the
papers l see nothing in the fact That each of
these clerks may have had at times pile of
certificates directly before. and immediately
under his eye, ready signed and sealed. while
shows that since the crowd became so great as
to make such practice dangerous, II has been
discontinued. Certainly, If Mr. Mccarthy Is to
be believed, since the seal has been placed In
his charge. no certificate in blank has passed
under It. find no negligence therefore under
The fourth allegation is that the clerks per-
mitted blanks neither signed or sealed, to he
taken out of the office to be filled up by stran.
gers. do not know that his has been shown
soonGent Ieef Il has been tested q 70 be-
common practice in all the offices. 1t very
much expedites business, Without the seal
and attestation the blank ia nothing; and can
not that it would be much security against
frauds to refuse this accom- mediation.
The fifth and last allegation Is that The re-
spondent appointed temporarily as clerk a
man who, in 1858. was convicted and since
served out an Imprisonment of two years for
the offense OF altering forged pension certid-
Gates. II clearly appears that the respondent
RssF eRef Clerk. IN MIR. .: ROSS Without any knowiedse
of the fact of such conviction, or Of any
thing against the character Of the man;
as he has sworn In his supplemental
answer filed. MIR Ross confirms tnis, and
adds that though he had known the individual
in question for many years, and many persons
of his acquaintance, he had never heard of the
conviction. and that when he recommended
is not the slightest evidence that this clerk was
guilty OF any irregularity or impropriety dur
Ing the short period that he was emf ployed 10
the office No negligence has Deen established
After hearing the whole case In conneotion,
with the clear and satisfactory testimony of
MIR. Anthony NORM, expert of long and
large experience as to the entire practicability
of making, by the elecirotyping process false
seal from good paper impression OF the origi-
nal. which would make Impressions on paper
forged blanks, am strongly Inclined to the
opinion that they were not sealed In the office
their Impressions with twelve genuine ones
made at the same time. and which are IN
evidence. Every one OF the seals OF the forged
uppermost, and best of the twelve true ones,
and about equally good. yet none OF these is as
sharp and good as true impression taken
separately. The letters on all the false papsrs
are distinct and legible. while after the first
four or five OF the genuine ones no letters can
bsble, from their uniform appearance. that the
false seals are all single separate impressions
from die, not so sharp as the original. just
such one as according to Mr. NORM could be
electrotyped from paper impression.
searching in vestigRtion into the conduct Of the
respondent no charge has been made nor any
evidence given of any misconduct In that part
diate supervis lon in court. None of the cler KS
or officers engaged to assist him in those duties
iarities in all narts M Of sba nrocess sys S bsen
alluded to, may take this Opportunity to make
few remarks in explanation OF the mode
courts of this city in admitting aliens to the
rights of citizenship. do not mean, OF course,
to express any opinion upon the legality OF that
mode. because the question may in some form
come before the Court In bsnc. and IL would
arise in the case before me. TO prei9dSe "a a
| question OF such Importance
1t is not Inconsistent, however, with my duty
In that respect to say that II this mode SO long
pursued be illegal, and therefore void, and the
naturalizstion certificates issued under IL can
aliens naturslized by our courts during the last
thirty years Will be reduced again To the CON
Any man. whether lawyer or not, who can
draw logical inference, must aek now Hedge
| that this consequence is inevitable. When /
| took my seat upon the bench OF the District
| Court In 1916. found that this sy stem had Deen
| followed by the learned and pure men who
| were members of the Court, which had pre-
ceded that to which had been appointed;
| and by that distinguished jurist judge King.
| then President of The Court OF Common Peas.
That system Is this: In the cases ofappl tonson
| declarations of Intention, the judge examines
| the papers, and II found 10 be regular delivers
se me se or one Of m the TO s
| and bis Voncher In the Court room. In the case