Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-03-14
THE IMPEACHMENT.
Some of the Senators Agitased Over the
Exposure OF Absenteeism.

Some OF the Senators Agtta9eo over inc
Exposure Of Absenteeism.
Tie impeachment court reassembled again
yesterday afternoon at $50, and the following
answered to their names:
Adams, Campbell, Castle, Clement, Crooks,
Gilfllan, g. D., Gilflllan, j. B., Kinds, John
son, F. D., johnson, X. B., Mccormick, Mea-
ley, Morrison, Perkins, Pilisbury, Rice, Shall,
Ter, Shallean, tiffany, Wheat and Wilson-2l.
Senator Campbell arose to question Of
privilege, end desired to correct statement in
the GLOBE to the effect that Of the twenty-five
days devoted to taking testimony, twelve were
occupied by the prosecution end thirteen by
were occupied by the prosecution, ten by re-
spondent and one in common.
Senator Adams moved that when the final
arguments are all in that the further proceed
ings IN the case, and the arguments made. be
In open sessions, and that the speeches OF
counsel as well as members be made matter
of record. Notice of debate was given.
The article in Saturdays GLOBE showing
the absenteeism then engrossed the attention
Of the court.
Senator Mealey said the published state
ments were not correct with reference to his
attendance at roll call.
Senator Gillfllan OF Hennepin, ap0logized
for his lack OF attendance, and INDUCED in a
TRADE of abuse, both as to newspaper report
ers, counsel and the managers. He said some
body had been nOsing about after other peO-
Piles business. He said that as a lawyer he
would depend upon the court records, as in
cases of Courts of Chancery. That counsel
could object to irregularity in case anything
Illegal was done, and appearances indicat.
ed that somebody wassconnivisg in the interest
of respondent. He was notably absent the
last half hour of the argument.
Senator Pillsbury of H-nepln, took umbrage
at what the public press had published. He
said this trial has proved to be s'a scandal to
the state of Minnesota" particularly as to the
manner it had been carried on, in being per-
mitted to drag out. Members could not hear
the witnesses, they spoke SO low and there was
SO much confusion in the hall, and members,
of necessity, must rely ON the journals.
Senator Adams SAID in his opinion it would
have been better for the state and respondent
if the case had fallen through long ago.
Counsel Arctander promised his remarks by
an apology to the court for his short comings,
/. c. sins OF omission and commission, and
frankly stated that he had his time SO en-
crossed in the conduct Of the case, he had
probably failed to meet all the requirements
of the case. Senator Gilfillan Interrupted,
saying he had no reference to the speaker.)
ARTICLE Ia, LINCOLN COUNTY TERM.
Counselor Arctander then took up the term
of court held at Marshfeld in 1881, comparing
and contrasting the evidence given, asserting
that the preponderance of testimony was
to the effect that Judge Cox was perfectly
sober--that witnesses for the prosecution were
prejudiced, many of them On account Of the
adjournment of court from Tyler to Marsh
field. Coleman's evidence was not worthy OF
notice, having been impeached. Another
witness had been reprimanded i'll open court
by the judge.
At sis p. m. call of the senate showed
seventeen members actually present, Senator
Campbell acting pro tenn. as clerk.
Senator johnson F. /. moved a call of the
senate.
Senator Buck came in later, and at 5:35 in
sisted that the court adjourn, being satisfied
it would be impossible to secure a quorum,
but after delay until $40 bare quorum was
secured, when Senator Buck moved that
when the court adjourn it will adjourn to p.
IN. Carried.
| Counselor Arctander then resumed.
In few moments the quorum had vanished,
aud by common consent the speaker continued
the last half hour without quorum, closing
| at $3.50 o'clock with fourteen members present.
Adjourned to S p. m.
EVENING SESSION.
A quorum assembled in Judge Burr's court
room and Counsel Arctander proceeded to ex-
anime evidence under article 15-the term of
court held in June, 1881, at Marshall. He
pointed out the absurdity of the statement
that Cox Travelled with heavy overcOat, from
the pocket of which was exposed a whisky
bottle that was broken on board the cars. He
called the attention of the court, that on that
day it Is admitted in evidence that Cox drank
one glass ofNbeer and two IF whisky; also,
that there was four in the party, including
Col. McPhail, not an usual allowance, and
further evidence that they used it spariDgly is
from the fact that there was liquor left when
| the bottle was broken.
After reviewing the evidence Of the eleven
witnesses for the respondent, be claimed that
il certainly oyercame the statement of the five
or SIX witnesses on the part of the state, two
OF whom he impu gned their motives and the
remaining gave their evidence rather hest
tatingly
A further evidence of Cox's sobriety is that
while John Lind had several cases that term
of court, although decided against him, in no
case did he appeal them to higher court.
Further, in general, 1t is q remarkable coinci-
| dence that in every case Lind was beaten, he
| has come forward and testified that Cox Was
drunk. The speaker said it was characteristic
of cripples, and particularly in Lind's case, he
becomes sour and peevish, petulant and fault
| finding. In some instances where-a jury de.
cided against him he was ready and threatened
to whip them, calling them fools.
Mr.. Patterson's evidence as to the naturali-
zation papers is not worthy of credence, as we
| have shown conclusively, that he is lone OF
| the most unmitigated liars that ever lived"
| His evidence that Cox's eyes were pulled up,
while other witnesses state positively, that his
| eyes never have that appearance; on the con.
trarv, they are sunken; that Judge Cox re-
marked on seeing list of some forty Swede
names for naturalization, jaw breaking, poly
syllables why, ''the devil couldn't read them"
is no evidence of his inebriety. When he said
| there were large number of recesses and. as
clerk of the court he made no note of them
ito screen Judge Cox he perjured himself,
| it being denied by nearly all the witnesses,
some ten or a dozen. Counsel explained the
omission of the preliminary call of the cal
endar by the fact that he took up the first case
tcalled to his notice of being ready for trial
which if he hsd not done, would have occu-
pied the entire day. Having disposed of these
the judge immediately proceeded to the call
of tie calendsr-a further evidence of the
Judges sobriety. Drew's evidence that Judge
Cox staggered on the streets of Marshall, is
contradicted by the fact that Cox crossed a
foot bridge carrying heavy hand satchel,
which is corroborated by six witnesses, that
| this was the only means of foot passengers
getting across. Counsel claimed that the
court did respondent an injnstlce in not allow