The New York herald., 1872-12-07
THE CASE "REsTED."
Closing Remarks Ct RefutatiOa in Be-
half Of the Respondent.
The Final Arguments To BE Be.
60 fore the Whole Senate.
ADJOURNMENT UNTIL JANUARY 6


announced the close Of their case, with the under
standing that thoy should have the privilege Of
putting in rebuttng evidence.
oIENINa fnB CASE FOR rnn REsPospENr. &.
Fl. y. Dcnnison, on the part ~ the respondent,
proceeded to open his case. He commenced by
calling attention TO the importance OF these pro-
ccedings, saying that the respondent here was
about to go forth from this senate q man or to be
deprived OF the association OF all honorable men,
For the past two years, nc said, we have been nv
ing In stirring times. Persons high In 0fflce have
been displaced and stripped OF the power and
position they possessed. This body has been
engaged IN very important work, and has per-
formed taa3 w2gs e the ssi,sIect!cn 3! the people
anu we present tnis respondent here fOf The
closest scrutiny ana investigation, satisfied that
notning can 6e ound against him. Nevertheless
nyou Can nnd anything We will be content. He
cal.cd attention TO the frst the initiate step In
this proceeding, which enanated from the very
man now before the Senate charged with crime.
a letter appeared in New York journal making
charges against the Judges OF the Marine Court.
That letter was written, signed and published by
the respondent, who had been a JUS tice in that
Court since the year 1861. 1t was bold, public,
direct, and left no doubt in the public mind to
what was charges. IL left the impression that
there was some thing In that Court to investigate.
What was the next step The respondent made
no appeal TO the Bar Association. He made his up
peal to the people at large. Counsel said he re-
mempered welithe time the lnitiatory step was
taken for the formation 0, tins Bar Association.
Three or four OF %. he said, met 10 small room
anu there laid the foundation for this organ,za-
tion. wen- remember the solemn words
S One q MS tSIe snd an
nence in the Bar. lie said to us.
lyon arc engaging IN no boys play ana we
understood him. We Knew the risb ana danger OF
the step VIC were about to take-the risk and dan
ger OF setting ourselves up against certain Judges
pno n M ae coar ye
theiess wc went on and formed our Bar Associa-
tiopr But what was the result Of tris letter
appearance An the other judges OF the Marine
Court, except Judge Tracy, perhaps ediately
.hese Judges went before the Bar Association and
made application Tor an investigation. THIS
investiga,ion was made and hnally sent here.
Now for eight months this respondent has been ly
ing under the hDputation Of crime; hut he 10
tnankinl ios fe1S9eSsc unity % have his conduit
snaliness or The result OF tnc investigation here,
which is only equalled by the magni6cence OF the
promise made at the outset by The counsel tor the
prosecuron. Those gentlemen came here charp-
ing the respondent with conspiracy and violating
eight statutes. The main charge was that Of
fH RECEIVING REFERENCE FEES; rf
but there is not one particle OF proo Iustying the
charge 1t was charged that he was in partner
from the 1st OF January til the 9th OF May ls7e is
not denied. We admit that. But at that time
ees eh os % yns May Ia
he said the Legislature having passed an act pro-
hibiting Judges from practising IN their own
Courts, he could not remain longer partner in
the firm. THIS partnership had been formed for
the purpose Of aiding three or four young men.
On the hrst day Judge Curtis attention
informed his partners OF MS determination.
But counsel say that was mere trap 10 get rld OF
Cusbi N al a
showing that he participated in the earnings OF the
firm after the 6th day OF May 1870, the date OF his
Withdrawal. As to reference lees, there was no:
On the face of the record any evidence OF the re-
spondcnts receiving any such fees. We will show,
SAID the counsel, that there are express sipula-
tons In the articles OF the copartnership tha Judge
Curtis was nOt to receive anything from this bnSi-
ness; that all the earnings rom this business were
TO 20 TO Thomas H. Pttplan. He ha1 heard since
he came to this city that adstingulshed Judge here
was in the habit OF sending causes before him
in his Court to himself as referee: but he desired
call the particular attention OF the Senate 10 the
TACT that there was not single case OF reference
sent to Pittman in whlch Cushing, Gardiner or
Goodhart. counsel on either side, and he would
show that In all sucn cases not one cent went into
Judge Curtis pocket; that there was an express
| stipulation in the partnership TO that erect.
Counsel then briefly reviewed the charges and the
| testimony taken thereon, showing that nothing
4 had been proved but the Innocence OF the respond
ent, and said II tie nsa1es OF this court would
allow it he would move Tor nonsnit
A. l.. CusnlkG's TESTIMONY.
A. LoriIg Cushing was called by the defence and
sworn. lie testified that IN the latter part OF the
year 1869 he was applied to by Messrs. Gardiner,
Goodhart and littman 10 form q copartnership
with Judge CURTIS he inquired into the standing
&e., OF the parties; the copartnersbip was formed
but he finally came to the conclusion that there
we're too many members and he withdrew; he
notified the other partners OF his withdrawal by
written letter, which was written some time after
he had come To the conclusion; he had his name
taken from the sign and took no interest IN the
firm afterwards; Judge curtis had withdrawn be-
fore the letter was written, but Eot before ] had
determined TO withdraw; there never was
any understanding in the partnership with
Ju9se CURTIS hdseot thar rom we him were de
there never could have been, because that woiM
not have been honest; nor was there any sucn
agreement with Judge Curtis concerning reter-
ences; nor that Judge Curtis was TO derive any
snch benefit; nor that he was TO MAKE any refer
ences 10 our firm nor derive any benefit from his
oaicial relation with the Marine Court in any man.
ner or form; took no interest in the account
books OF the firm; ] soon saw there was not bust
ness enough to make il interesting
Crcss-examined by Mr.. Townsend-The part
Judge Curtis was TO perform in the partnership was
to send us all the business he could as a citizen,
but not Us q Judge.
TO Senator J. wood-The fact that Curtis was
Judge did not induce me TO enter the partnership.
THOMAS ". riTTMAN's EVIDENCE.
Thomas W. Pittman, one o! the firm, was called
ana sworn. He said:-Colonel Gardiner proposed
the copartnership 70 me; J. being an old acqnant-
cllned | was urged by Gardiner to 60 to him again;
Ibid so ;he then with myurging, consented; but he
said II lie entered TIC hfm he dad not want to have
to do with anything brought into the Marine Court;
we never had case there but once that was an
Ofu case ~ avdinsb SIKH avenue
Company; gave It To Gardiner and told him that
IL should be his individual case also told him that
whatever he got out OF II he could keep Tor hmself
after we had been going a lcw weeks Mir. Cushing
retired from the firm we all regarded that as
DISSOLUTION OF TIE FIRM;
no new articles or corartnership were drawn M;
we took a lease Of the office, signed by Goodnart,
Gardiner and myself; Judge Curtis had nothing TO
do with II he had, about the time Cushing retired,
informed me he desired TO withdraw, and asked
me to have bis name taken out OF the sign: there
was 20 agreement Or understanding trai the firm
Was TO be benefited by Curtis being a Judge OF the
Marine Court; the reference fees were mine ind-
vidually; that was understood; the firm was moi 10
have anything 10 do with reference cases; never
main IN the firm after the withdrawal OF Gushing;
never told any one that the withdrawal oi Curtis
was to get rid OF Gushing.
Tie crosscX animation OF the witness elected
nothing new OF material.
Mr.. Douglass Campbell, cognsel for CLARK IN the
case OF Bcanc yg, CLARK explained the IrOcy,tr.