Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-01-25
IMPEACHMENT WORK.

Satisfactory Showing Made Yesterdsy-A
Number of Important Witnesses for the
Charges Judge Cox With Being Drunk
While Delivering Temperance Address
Most of the Witnesses More or Less
Ratified on the Cross-Examlnation.
The impeachment court met at 10 o'clock
yesterday morning with Senator Wilson in
the.chair, with fair number of senator's in at
tendence, and proceeded at once with the ex-
animation of witnesses in behalf of the prose-
cutiOn, and
MR.. W. II. MORRRLL.
was called upon specifications 3 and ID of ar
ticle II, to which he had before testified and
upon which he desired to make
q correction. He had testified he
and Mr.. Wallin had stipulated
in certain case. He had COMPOUNDED this
with another case which was to be brought up
at the time stated, and learning the condition
of the judge on the street, we decided not to
call the case up.
Cross-examined-Wa an attorney in the
case. Appeared before the judge August Z,
1880. The judge did not refuse to have any
thing to do with the case. The application
was simply to correct the title in the order
he had made discharging the garnishee.
c. G.. GooDNow.
was next called upon article 8, charging
drunkenness at New Ulm.
Reside in Pipestone county. Formerly lived
at New Ulm. Know Judge Cox. Was called
to act as clerk in the case of Wells VS.. Sesike.
T. IN, IND bad 70
do the work. The Judge was intoxicated and
took no part in taking down the testimony.
acknowledgement before the house
committee when Judge Cox was being inves-
tigated in 1878. with reference to charges
against his conduct in Martin county, and sug-
gested some questions; Isat with my backto the
judge when taking the testimony Think the
judge was exceedingly drunk. Don't remem-
Der the judge leaving the court while the
witnesses were being examined.
C.. PATTERSON
was sworn upon article Is, charging the
Judge with being drunk during term at
Lyon county. Am clerk of that court.
Known Judge Cox since 1879. Was
present at the term of court in Lyon in June,
1881. Don't remember to have seen the
judge before he entered the court room. in
my Judgment he was intoxicated then and all
during that day. The second day he
was about the same. The third day
he began to improve and kept nearly sober the
remainder of the term. Don't know of any
action by the grand jury upon his drunken
ness.
Manager Dunn asked witness if any paper
found by the grand jury failed TO reach him as
clerk.
Mr.. Aarctander of counsel objected, and
said a similar question put to another witness
had been refused.
Finally Manager Dunn withdrew the ques-
ton.
Cross. examined-It was not far from noon
when the jury opened court Immediately af-
ter coming in on the train. He did not look
like Judge Cox sober. His staggering way,
reeling around, not sitting erect as usual.
In the afternoon there was an apparent con-
fusion of ideas recognizable, shown especially
in making out some naturalization papers.
The business was hurried l never swore
witnesses in such cases, where Judge Cox pre-
sided I signed the jurat attached to the
papers. Never swore a witness, though l SO
subscribed. Thought he made several remarks
unbecoming as judge. Don't recollect any
thing particular, except these remarks, to
make me think he was intoxicated. Should
presume there were thirty-eight or forty per-
sons naturalized that afternoon. The grand
jury was charged that afternoon. Did not
notice anything very particular in the charge.
A jury case was also tried that afternoon,
and number of cases were otherwise
disposed of. In the case Bradbury VS..
Bedford, the judge non-suited the plaintiff. l
do not remember of saying to M. E. Mathews
that I thought at the time Judge Cox was
intoxicated, but / am now convinced no man
could try case as he did that when drunk. I
might have said something of the kind to my
wife. Have thought good deal of this case
1~4a IL oHn1 NJ v,ot
recollect any particular thing occurring during
the time to make me think he was intoxicated
except his general appearance. This might
have been the result of WEAKNESS to a certain
extent. noticed, when coming in from recess,
his face would be flushed It was very warm
at that time, and the room was
very uncomfortable. The glare from the
large windows was almost binding. 1t is not
a fact that the Judge expedited business in the
usual manner. The recesses were too fire.
quent. l should think there were from SIX to
twelve recesses the first two days. My min
utes do not show the number. / omitted
them to shield Judge Cox. / do not know
that the recesses were taken at the request of
the jurors, to give them an opportunity to get
a little fresh air. The first recess was to allow
Judge Cox to get his dinner. Think the court
met about 7:35 the next morning. Cannot
tell the occasions Of the recesses nor what they
were for. There were no other delays in the
proceedings. Think the short hand reporter
arrived the second day. The judge did not
appear different the third day than on the pre-
ceding days. The same staggering was OBJ
servable during a greater portion of the term.
The Judge seemed little more constrained,
perhaps, after the second day. l remember
the scene when it was learned some indct-
ments found by the grand jury, in my posses
sion had disappeared. He was qnite severe in
his comments upon the transaction. l think
he was sober at the time.
Redirect cannot recollect anything in the
charge of the Judge to make me think he was
intoxicated. After the charge he asked me
aside, can't that daisy charge "
Don't think he would have made the remark
if he had been sober. Never addressed such
remark to me before. During some of the
recesses Judge Cox left the court room. l
think there was saloon in the same block
with the court room. Did not see the judge
in a saloon, or going into one
At this point the records of the court were
produced and the cross-examination was re-
sumed. Did not recollect the "daisy of the
barge" before the house committee. There
as large calendar at that term Of court,
probably sixty or seventy, all disposed OF by
trial or continuance. Think there were four
teen days of actual session, two Sundays and
4th of July intervening. The witness was
examined as to the proceedings had in
court as shown by the record,
which had not proceeded far before manager
1@ol{ I, 49,