National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1879-02-05
SAM STR0NG'S SUIT.
The Hearing Commenced in the Gen.
eral Term.
some Disngroeabio Facts Narrated Before
Judge Humphreys-A Justice said TO be
obviously and Patiently Drunk"
The Real Cause for Asking
n Continuanoe-Sparring
Between Counsel.



District of Columbia involving over $250,oO0,
claimed as due on contract work, came up for
hearing yesterday in the general term before a
full bench. Justice Humphreys was present,
but looked weak and feeble from his late sick
ness. lie took little part in the proceedings,
occasionally interrupting the attorneys to ask
q question. The chamber was crowded during
the session with spectators.
Mr.. Strong was represented by Hon. Ben
iamin f. Butler, Hon. Matt II. Carpenter, Hon.
]. Amber Smith, and Colonel William A. Cook.
The District of Columbia by Hon. A. G. Rid
die and Francis Miller, esq.
After frequent postponements of the case in
the court below IL will be remembered that
trial was actually begun on September 10,
1873. Owing to the course taken by Justice
Humphreys ut that time the counsel prepared,
and, with the parties in interest signed, q slip.
ulaton to SGT aside any order or Judgment
which the court might make in the case If IL
| should disallow the application of tho plaintiff
to continue the case and compel the trial to
proceed For signing this stipulation the
court fined the counsel aud District Commits
soncrs. ThereupOn ono of the plaintiffs coun-
sci and the attorneys for the defendant with
drew from the trial which went on for several
days, and resulted in verdict for tho plaintiff
for S133,0Ol.50.
The only action pending further proceeding
taken by the attorneys for the defendant in
court was TO except to the charge of the court
| TO the jury aud submit motions for new trial
aud in arrest Of judgment, both of which were
subsequently overruled.
SERIOUS CHARGE AGAINST JUDGE HUM.
| PHREYs.
Mr.. Riddle in his statement on the first mo-
ton regarding the proceedings on September
| 10, says:
have no hesitation in saying that the Judge,
| while on the bench that day, was drunk, so drunk
rs to be incapable Of dealing inteligenty with the
questions before him, and incapable Of presiding
in the court with dccency and becoming decorum,
| and that he was also very much intoxicated on the
ensuing days That 1t was TO protect the parties
against tile consequences of this intoXication that
! took the course | subsequently pursued. And
cause apparent on the record This ground of my
acton was also, as understood, the reason for the
action on the other side. Mr.. w. A. Cook at about
this time told me- IN the presence Of Mr. Miller aud
Judge Macarthur, that he had approached the
Judge then holding the court and requested that he
would refrain from the use of Intoxicating drink
during the residue OF the trial. Both he aud his
associate, General Totem, put their action on this
grOund-the continued intONicatOn of the Judge.
II became apparent 10 the counsel on both sides
that i was useless TO proceed or attempt 10 go on
with the trial of the case, and on consultation IL
was grave question of how the matter could be
disposed Of IL was apparent that the court was
determined to compel n trial of the case without
reference 10 the wishes OF the parties the condi
ton of the record. In the meantime II was thought
best 70 secure further adjournment of the case If
wise some decent and dignifed disposition of the
case for the time, short of further attempt to try
the case, which, In the united judgment of all the
counsel would, from the then condition of the
record and the notorious condition of the court be
but disgraceful waste of time.
The affidavit of Francis Miller esq, filed in
tho case, is TO the effect that during the latter
part of the session of September IL the Pre-
siding Justice (Humphreys) was
OBVIOUSLY AND PATIENTLY INTOXICATED
So apparent was this that after n short con-
sulation is was determined by counsel on both
sides that under no circumstances would they
submit the case to trial before him. that he
was absent from the session of the court on the
12th, and, on his return to the city on the 18th,
. Mr.. Riddle informed him that he had agreed
with the counsel for plaintiff to have a confer
I ence with Justices Wylie apd Macarthur, but
t that Judge Wylie was sick.
, AT the appointed time Mr.. Riddle and / met
McSsrs. Totem and Cook in the consultation room
and stated our embanassments to Judge MRcAr.
thur. We all concurred in the intoXication oi
> Judge Humphreys and Mr.. Cook gave an account
of an Interview he had had with him on the 18th
= He said he had met him at Dubants restaurant
where they were taking their lunch; that the sub
ect of the strong case had been introduced BY the
= Judge and he had expressed his firm intention tc
insist on the trial at that time that he lCook) had
then said that If he did try the case, he had one
= suggestion TO make to him Upon the Judge asking
5 him what II was, he replied. That he should alb
c stain entirely from the use Of Intoxicating liquor;
5 during the trial. That the Judge, in reply, said
/ He had no doubt his Cook s. motive was kind in
- saying what he had, but that his rulings had al
> beeu right and could not be disturbed! Mr. Cool
e replied, However that may be- 1t is certain that
i case could not be tried by judge whose mind wal
inliamed and excited by drink with as much dig
nifty or propriety as by one whose mind was in IL
proper and natural condition. After full cOnsulta
: ton II was unanimously determined that on Mon
v day, 10th of September the plaintiff should ask
7 leave TO withdraw juror and continue the case
and that the defendant should join In the request
and nat So SbpE o should be PREPARED anG
should be taken by the court should be, by consent
If set aside at the next term of court This supula
!, ton was prepared by Mr. Tottcn, as was informed
= and signed by the parties and their counsel eXcep
. myself who was absent when it was signed"
GENERAL BUTLER WANTS THE RECORDS
- PURGED.
Shortly after the cause was called Mr.. Butler
~ moved that all motions made prior to the bill
: of exceptions be stricken out, unless the de-
:, PENDANTS waived the bill of exceptions, anC
i that would bring the arguments upon ono oil
q | the other exclusively. He also moved tina
. the statement in regard to the condition ant
q conduct Of the Presiding Judge at the trial bt
h stricken out
!" He said that no spoke in all s0berness and
T. seriousness, and would not stand before tina
n bar or any other unless in fear of contempt
: and argue before bench of Judges the question
as TO the misconduct Of one of their associates
q There was place, and II proper one, for thu
. making of such an inquiryand examination
and to that tribunal 1t should be taken If the
\ circumstances warranted it. There in his place
!. he would deal with 1t rs duty demanded but
;. before that court it did not belong, and h'
a hoped would DO wiped out of the record.
y Chicf-Justice Cartier replied that any ques
ton affecting the rights of parties in pending
|; proceedings properly came before and SHOULD
, BIO heard in a court of justice They woulC
= proceed with the argument of the case in thu
ordinary way, aud these motions would b.
q reached in the course Of the hearing, aud whei
q that was done they could be acted upon regu
: larly.
! Mr.. Riddle then proceeded to read the record
9 consuming some time, and was follow ed b.
/ his assoc late with the opening for the defend
- ants
THE STIPULATION.
Mr.. Miller in the course of his argument
q reached the ironclad stipulation, and anon
.. other things said that there had been no con
tempt of court in signing the agreement.
&c Mr. Carpenter-'lhere was q contempt ant
!. fines imposed for it.
!. Mr. Miler-But the court RENTED tho fine
a because he fOun hmself without authority t
impose them.
Justice Humphreys-There was an apolog
made before the fines were romtted.
u Mr.. Rddle-There was no apology made.
IN did not make one and did not intend to max
one TO that court. Let that be distinctly I'm
~ derstoOd.
b. Mr. (orneutpr--Nnll Won OVe one Ia III