The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-06-20

the constitution me constitution looking upofff
the Governor as an Official OF integrity, expects
mind whether a case Ii one which should go to the
Senate. Counsel said he had been unable TO hnd a
single case OF this kind In which the Governor IN
his communication to the Senate. had not said he
had heard and examined, and therefore recon-
mended removal and cited the recent cases OF
SMITH, PRINDLE AND CURTIS.
In this case OF Judge McCunn what does the Gov
ernor sayf Not that he had found anything against
him In his official course, but that the Assembly,
having asked him to send these charges to the
Senate, he had done so; in other words, that the
Assembly had sent this batch OF papers TO him. He,
them to the Senate, with the recommendation that
they be examined. This ~ very different from his
ing to You Have examined ese pSners have
heard heard me case, and recommend you to remove
Judge McCunnn Counsel said he could not
see now the Senate could give one moments
attention to this case coming before 1t as 10 did.
As to precedents, he said the Senate could not nd
single case In which the Governor has not said he
has had at least hearing in the case before send
ing II to the Senate. Counsel called attention to
the Importance OF removing Judge from office.
and how necessary II Is that the proceedings
should be regular and constitutional. He could
not think the Senate would do an act which would
be a clear violation of the constitution. He c0ulf
not say what motive governed the Governor In his
action-what induced him TO send such message
to the Senate He might have treated the resOIu-
tions OF
THE SENATE WITH SILENT CONTEMPT,
out ne thought perhaps II was best to comply with
thelr request, so he sends you batch OF papers,
taken by rowing commission to examne-simply
To examine He does not recommend you to re-
move, and, after you have examined these papers.
what theny The Governor not having recon-
mended you to remove, how can you proceed to re-
moveY What authority have you to remove ?
Counsel proceeded In this strain at some length.
referring to the long service on the bench Of the
respondent and to his rights under the cOnstitu-
tiOn
II. w. Peckham, Jr., followed on the same eide,
repeating much the same views.
On the conclusion OF his remarks the Senate went
into private session on the motion.
On reopenlng the doors the President announced
that tue motion OF respondents counsel was
Judge Van Cott OF counsel for prosecution, then
moved that testimony transmitted by the Governor
be received as evidence In the case.
Mr.. Moak, OF counsel for respondent, objected.
He said IL was the first time that he ever heard
that evidence taken for one purpose could he used
for another This testimony was er pdrte, and had
been taken for a Court OF impeachment.
A. G. Davis and r. w. Peckham, Jr, also opposed
the motion.
Senator Johnson offered resolution that a COM
mittee of five be appointed TO take testimony In
New York that each Senator he supplied with a
copy of the same when taken, aud that the Senate
meet at the Capitol to hear arguments In the case
at such time as the Senate may determine
Without taking the question on the resolutions
the Senate adjourned till tomorrow morning.
Counsel on both sides were requested to consult aS
to what testimony they can agree upon as being
proper to accept and dispense with retaking This
has reference to the documentary evidence.