Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-06-21
THE IMPEACHMENT
Commencement of tho Closing Arguments
Manager Gilman Makes His Speech for


Manager Gilman Makes His Speech for
the Prosecution.
The impeachment court met at $50 yester-
day morning, as per adjournment, and imme-
diately upon coming to order, Hon. G. A. Gill
man, of managers, commenced upon the clos
ing argument for the prosecution. He began
by saying that he would never have presumed
to have appeared in a case of such magnitude
were it purely legal matter. It was, however,
a case of the people, partly judicial and partly
political. The matter is one of great notoriety,
SO much so that it will be difficult to draw
distinct line between the general talk
and the evidence actually submitted. The
duty of the managers was to maintain
the rights of a coordinate branch, without
malice or vindictiveness. The House of Re-
representatives. after thorough consideration,
brought articles of impeachment by more than
a two-thirds vote, and it is not its fault that
these proceedings have been had. The posi-
ton Of a judges symbolized by a woman blind
favor, malice or bias of any kind, Has Judge
Page done this? The chickering's and the strife
in his community in which he. has borne so
prominent part, answers the inquiry in the
negative The speaker then called attention to
the force Of testimony, and went on to say that
the prosecution nau introduced d
large array Of unimpeachable wit
nesses whose testimony had sworn direct
and positively, to the events, while the de-
Tense covered a great amount of ground, swear
ing wildly, and conveniently forgetting very
important events necessary for correct under
standing of the case.
Mr.. Gilman then took up the question of
what constituted an impeachment offense, re-
futing the argument advanced by MIR. Losey
in opening the case for defense, that no offense
not indictable impeachable, and to argue
that Impeachment trials being extended to Of
lenses Of which ordinary judicial bodies took
no cognizance. the mode of trial as to evidence,
ETC., was therefore not confined by the rigid
rules of judicial practice, but took much
wider scope, going to an official character and
his fitness for the office. The constitution of
this State provides that an official be i'm
peached for corrupt conduct or misdemeanor
in office. Certain actions constitute corrupt
conduct, but it is an imposssibility to give
exact definition of the act necessary to make it
corrupt. that being matter left to a decision
of Senators, guided by common sense, rather
than by strict constructions of law definitions.
Mr.. Gilman then took up charge first, relat-
ing to the libel proceedings against D. s. 3.
Mollison, and argued that Judge Page after
causing tho prosecution of Mollison for an al
legged libel, then using his power to prevent
any trial. keeping the charges hanging over
him for years for malicious purpose. The
obligations for such trial rested upon the court
accused waived his right to demand and re-
demand trial, did not relieve the court Of its
obligations and duty to give him that speedy,
impartial trial contemplated by the law. In
stead of doing this, for period
of time covering, nearly, four years;
to trial, but rather by his peculiar tactics of
delay at one time having one excuse, at an
other time something else, actually prevented
such trial being had.
Speaking of the weight of evidence, Mr.. Gill
man argued that, wrong in one respect, it shonid
be received with distrust in all. In this mat
ter respondent had placed himself in the un-
enviable position of swearing directly opposite
to many of the most respectable citizens of
Mower, whose word no one would attempt to
impeach. All these men are fatty contradicted
by respondent-ths respondent who has been
the file leader of the defense, and by his power
full will directing the evidence Of the few wit
nesses called in his behalf, as he would have
it. On this point Mr.. Gilman
criticised in very happy and sar-
castle manner, the eulogium pro-
nounced by Mr.. Losey upon respondent, deduc-
ing from bis comparisons, that the language
used by him to Mollison, to the grand jury
whom he sought to make his tool were not in
accord with the divine attributes ascribed to
him by Mr.. Losey, but disgraced himself and
his official position by tyranizing and lording
it over those so unfortunate as to be brought
in contact with him. Whether in his misconduct
in this case respondent far overstepped the
bounds laid down for the government Of judi
cial officers is for the Senate to decide.
Mr.. Gilman next considered the Riley article,
arguing that the subpnnas were regularly issued
to Riley, that he served them in the ordinary
manner as he was sworn to do, and that the
s s re was in h re h% f1r ee sa
ance with law. The testimony was conflicting
as to the circumstances attending the presenta-
ton of his bill by Mr.. Riley, but the facts, SUBJ
stantiated by overwhelming testimony, were
that the bill, so far as Riley was concerned,
was honestly and legally contracted and that
Judge Page, for the purpose of Furnishing
Sheriff Hail. who had refused his advice as to
the appointment of deputies, used his official
position to prevent him from getting his fees
for the services he performed. The course of
respondent in this matter characteristic,
sly, cunning and vindictive-the latter being
especially observable in his treatment of Lafay-
cite French, then county attorney, and up to
that time his protege. From that day to this
responent had warred upon the pro-
fessional character of French, his capital car
rying the persecution to the extent of endeav-
oring to have him debarred. The conduct of
respondent was q disgrace to the nineteenth
century, and it is doubtful if it would have
been allowed two hundred years ago, when the
notorious Jeffries polluted the bench on which
he sat. JefEies was punished for his arbitra-
ry, malicious and unlawful acts and now this
Minnesota Jeffries is called upon to answer to
his misdeeds and you, Senators, are to pass
Judgment upon his acts. His arbitrary and
unlawful deeds have been placed before YOU
in evidence and upon it you will pass judg-
ment.
At this point, Mr.. Gilman having spoke
three hours, and completed his review of the
second article, the court took recess to P. NJ