Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-03-23
afternoon Session
ARTICLE Ill.


Immediately upon converting article three
was taken up and voted upon. 1t charges
drunkenness at New Ulm in June, 1879. The
only explanation made was by Senator Pow
ers, who, while reviewing the testimony from
his minutes, stated its substance, and by
which lie held the charge bad not been
proven, and he should vote no. The vote re-
suited the same as upon the second article, eX-
cept that Senator Peterson was absent, max
ing the vote stand 2S to 0 for conviction, and
respondent was SO adjudged.
ARTICLEIv.
Article four charges respondent with in
toxication while in the discharge of his Off
cial duties at st. Peter in May, 1876. Senators
Mealey, Powers and A. NJ. johnson, while
having grave doubts of the offense alleged
being improbable, thought the testimony
sustained the charge and should
Bonniwell, c. F. Buck, Castle, Crooks, Peter
son and Simmons, seven voted not guilty, the
others, 81, in the affirmative, and respondent
was therefore adjudged guilty.
ARTICLEv.
| This article locates the alleged oflense at 81.
Peter, in October, 1879. The vote resulted in
conviction. standing as in the preceding arti-
Gle except that Senator Mealey voted rot
| guilty-3O guilty and not guilty.
Article six was abandoned 10y the prescott
| ton.
| ARTICLE VII.
The alleged ofiense in this article also &C.
Cured at st. Peter, December 10, 1879. Sena-
tor Miller said that the testimony for the de-
tense greatly outweighed that for the prose
cution, but as lie knew some Of The witnesses
| had PICTURED themselves, aud he should vote
guilty.
BULLDozINe.
Senator Powers said that although the man.
ayers had virtually abandoned the article the
majority seemed determined to press it TO q
vote he wished to have his analysis of the
testimony go with his vote. While proceed
ing to do tins he was interrupted by Sen.
ator D. Buck, who submitted
that the senator was proceeding
ont of order. 1t was a waste of time in 8
senrtor to go over testimony which was or
the table of each senator.
Senator Powers--I don't blame the senator
for not wanting to hear the testimony. If
had voted guilty on that article would mo-
want it on record.
Senator d. Burk-I did not vote guilty.
Senator J. B. Gilfillan held that Senator
} Powell was not explaining his vote in tn,
course he was pursuing, and that he wa
clearly out Of order.
Senator Crooks said that it was the right o
each senator, if he so desired, to review tn
testimony that decided his vote.
Senator HIKES took the opposite view.
Senator J. B. Gifillan insisted on his po;D
of order.
Senator Castle argued that the point wa:
. not well taken-that senator had the RICH
to read or review anything which operated t.
, affect his judgment, and that he could only
deprived of that right by resorting to ga
law, which he presumed the majority had th
, power to apply.
! The chair (CamphelD decided the senate
, had abused his privilege and that the por
was well taken.
Senator Crooks appealed from the decisio
of the chair, but the chair was sustained 9
to IL.
With parting shot from Senator Power
J, to the effect that the majority seemed TO /
Il afraid OF the evidence. The vote was the
J. taken upon the article, but four senator's vo