Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1868-07-31
For the Journal.
Judge (.) Jones-Governor ~ Holden.

MEssRs. EDITORS :-There are two things
which, it seems to me, have not received
the attention that was due to them at the
hands of the press:
refer first, to the assertion of Mr.. Sey
mour, member Of the House of Represen
tatives from Craven, that the charges pre-
ferred against that poor, miserable wretch,
Judge E. W. Jones, did not present cast
IN which impeachment was remedy. A.
Mr.. Seymour is a lawyer, a member of the
Judiciary Committee, and, if 1 mistake
not, ITS Chairman, an erroneous impression
may be produced by the fact that no one
has thought proper to deny the correctness
of his assertion. Mr. Seymour is reported
to have said, in substance, that it was the
duty of the Courts of Law to investigate
such acts constituting crimes at law as their
jurisdiction covered, and, by necessary in
ference, that the jurisdiction of the Court
of Law excluded the Jurisdiction of the
Court of Impeachment. I respectfully
submit, there is no foundati On for such an
opinion, either upon general principles or
specially under the law of North Carolina.
L shall, however, make no argument upon
general principles, and shall content my
self by quoting Sec. 5, Art. ", of the
State Constitution recently adopted, which
renders Mr.. Seymour's position more alb
surd than any words of mine can:
''SEC. 5. The Court for the trial of impeach-
ments shall be the Senate; ajOrity of the
members shall be necessary to quorum, and the
and disqualification to hold, office in this State
but the party shall be liable TO indictment and
punishment according to law
1t seems from this, therefore. that be-
cause his Honor, Judge Edward Wilkins
Jones, was "liable to Indictment and pun
ishment according to law" for the crime of
an indecent and public exposure of his
person upon the streets of Raleigh, he was
none the less amenable to the Jurisdiction of
the Senate as a court for the trial of an i'm
parchment. I presume, of course, that
Mr.. Seymour did not wish to intimate that
the Indecent exposure ofhis person upon the
public streets OF city by Judge, wasin the
line OF his duty, or indeed compatible with
the dignity of his high Office, or in conso-
nance with the vestaI purity, if L may so
cali it, of the judicial ermine, for if such
conduct was not reprehensible on the pub
lie streets at the seat of government, it
would necessarily, almost, be not reprehen-
sible on the bench. have too high a re-
gard for any one who obtained a license to
practice law from the old Court, to think
for a moment he would pretend to justify
a Judge upon the bench for making a
public exposure Of his person for either
sober or drunken amusement. I do not
care to press the point about drunkenness,
however, as even in old times [ have heard
that drunken Judge could be seen in
North Carolina Ali that [ wish to do
now is to enter my protest against Mr.
SeymOurs notions about impeachment and
to express my surprise that with SO much
legal learning he should not have been
placed upon the bench. / do not intend
to say a word as to the conduct of poor
Jones in remaining in Raleigh SO long
after such disgraceful behavior. Ii he had
been responsible for his actions, and mad
possessed a particle of shame or sense Of
} decency, he would at once have left the
scene of his disgrace.
Inc other mater to which [ refer 8 the
fondness of Gov Holden for that charity
which be ills at home, and that phllan-
throphy which provides first for those of
) ones own household. Policy would have
dictated to the Governor the proprlety OF
SLOWING cOntentment With his own high
position. This, however, he did not do
His son, youth addicted to poetry, So
: called, was made Speaker of the House
OF Representatives,. This, however, was
through the form of all election by the
} House ITSELF and [ shall therefore say no
more about it. Inc glarin5 case is the ar-
pointment OF Que W. 81. Harrison (s'Col "
so-called) by His EXcellency, W. W. Hol-
den, as Mayor Of Raleigh.
Now, this E'Col." Harrison is the Gov
ernor's brother ln-law, aud to advance him
the Governor unblushingly violated plain
: provision of the Constitution he had lst
sworn to support. If the power to appoint
municipal officers had been doubtful one
even, it would seem to have been rather
, impolitic to exercise it in behalf of a near
relative-especially at time when every
act of the Governor must undergo the
closest scrutiny. How bent on his purpose,
then, must the Governor have been, when,
to push his family interest, he openly vio-
lated the most saced provisions of the Con-
< stitution
The act just passed by the Legislature
: to confer on the Governor the power to
make municipal appointments in future, is
plain and palpable admission that His
EXcellency had no authority to appoint
his brother-in-law, and the doubts express
ed by legislators as to the right of the Lee
gislature to confer this power, doubtless
made him sigh earnestly for his militia
and six thousand State police, who will
not probably trouble themselves much with
constitutional scruples. 1t is said, too,
that all, or nearly all, of the employees of
the Standard Office have been provided for
by His Excellency at the expense of the
State.
? This nepotism of the Governor and the
, impeachment notions of the Chairman OF
7 the judiciary Committee, have not receiv-
ed their due share of attention, and have,
therefore, penned this hurried note asking
you to notice editorially the matters here
l in referred to.
, DoN'T ACCEPT.-I see my name amour
ced in list of Justices of the Peace for