Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-02-23
TIE IMPEACHMENT CONTEST.
A Dozen Testimonials of Sobriety Before
the Senate Loses Its Quorum.


the Senate Loses Its Quorum.
The impeachment court met promptly at 10
O'Clock yesterday morning, with Virgil Sew
ard on the stand upon article fifteen, and the
question undecided at the adjournment Of
court Tuesday evening, as to whether or not
witness should answer the question upon cross
examination, that he had said at certain
time certain person ought to be indicted for
selling liquor to an habitual drunkard viz:
Judge E. st. Julien Cox. This was argued
by Counselor Arctander and Manager Dim.
The argument concluded, the question was
submitted to the court and the objection was
overruled.
Senator Castle, addressing the chair, said he
did not see how senator's could vote, as they
had violated every principle of law and rule Of
practice.
The cross-examination OF Mr. Seward, the
first question being had ne not said a certain
time that if the grand jury had done their
duty they would have indicted certain man
st. julien Cox, to which he answered: II did
| not" Being allowed to explain his testimony
Mr.. Seward said that it had been
| reported that Judge Cox had been on
| big drunk, and Rev. Samuel j. Rogers COM
| menced to work up a boom against Judge
Cox, and get him indicted, in talking about
| which, as general principle, he had said that
| ia such cases he thought the saloon keeper
ought to be indicted as well as the inebriate,
| without making any reference to Judge Cox
whatever. The conversation was general in
| its character, and was merely my opinion as q
| lawyer.
Continuing his answers to the cross-exami-
nation, Mr.. Seward said he saw Judge Cox in
saloon in that term Of court, but could not
! say whether he drank or not, but thought he
| did.
Re-direct-There was nothing in the resolu-
| tons of the grand jury having any reference
| to that term of court. The judge, when he
handed the resolution to the bar that
/ he desired the bar to investigate the
| matter and report their conclusions, and
promising that if they found the charges sus-
tanned he would telegraph his resignation to
| the governor.
| questions,S answers, etc., upon this point be
ruled out. The were not germane to any
charge or specification made against respond.
/ emit.
Senator J. B. Gilfillan seconded the motion.
| Senator Hines argued the materiality of the
| evidence.
| Upon vote of the ayes and noes, the mo-
| ton was lost. Ayes 4, nays 10.
| The resolution of the bar association was
/ UuCu ouUlultuCu III CtluCICCs
| CHARLES W. MAIN.
| Reside at Tracy. A lawyer. Was in at
tendance at the term of court at Marshall in
1881. Saw the judge at the opening of the
court and heard his charge to the grand jury.
| Thought the judge was perfectly sober during
the entire term. His appearance and conduct
was the same during the whole term. His
| rulings were clear aud distinct.
| The cross-eXamination did not result in
/ bringing out any new facts.
| FRED. GLEY.
Sworn. Reside at Marshall. Formerly re-
sided at New UIm. Have known Judge Cox
twelve years. Saw him at the June term of
court at Marshall in 1881. Met him the first
day and talked with him. He was perfectly
sober. Talked with him ten or fifteen min
utes, the next morning. He was perfectly
| sober. The bridge over the river was not fin
/ ished, and foot men had to cross on tempo.
rary foot bridge, two planks side by side.
| This positively contradicts witness for the
prosecution. who testified the new bridge was
| finished, and that be saw Judge Cox stagger-
| ing drunk when he crossed it from the rail-
| road train going to the hotel the first day OF
court
W. s. EASTMAN
| sworn upon the same article: Reside near
| Marshal. Farmer. Not acquainted with Judge
Cox, but know him by sight. Saw him at the
term of court in Marshall, June, 1881. Saw
him in court the first day of court. Had seen
| him in court before. Had no doubts as to the
sobriety of the judge. Do not drink anything
myself. The appearance of the judge was as
| on other occasions when had seen him.
| CAPT. s. WEBSTER.
| Upon the same article testified reside at
| Marshall. Farmer Have been sheriff for two
terms. Have known Judge Cox for ten or
| twelve years. Was present at the term of
court in 1881. Met Judge Cox in the after
noon of the first day and talked with him.
Later Mr.. Williams said the Judge was re-
ported drunk, and replied he must have got
sober very quick for have just left him, and
he certainly was sober. | had no doubts then
and have none now of his being perfectly
sober. The bridge across the river had not
been rebuilt, and passengers at the time Of
| court had to cross on two plank footwalk.
j. j. HARTIGAN.
| Upon the same article sworn. Reside at
Tracy. Keep saloon. Saw Judge Cox at
| in 1881. The Judge was in my place twenty
| he was perfectly sober. He took two glasses
of beer while he remained.
| Cross examined-Did not see a bottle of
| whisky among the party. Did not furnish
| them any whisky.
H. c. GROSS
sworn upon the same article. Reside at Cur
| ry, Murray county. Attorney. Know Judge
Cox. Was present at the Lyon county term
of court, 1881. Got there the second day of
the term. Remained until Friday or Saturday.
Saw no difference in the appearance or action
of the judge from what I had seen before. Had
no doubts of his sobriety.
NJ. E.. MATHEWS.
Same charge. Reside at Marshall. Lawyer.
Have known Judge Cox since 1872. Was his
| law pardner for about three years. Was in at
| tendance upon the Lyon county term of court
| in 1881. Was engaged in most of the cases.
| I was in attendance upon the court nineteen
twentieths of the time.
Recess until $50.
afternoon Session.
H. G. MATHEWS.
Twas present every day of this term of
| court, and heard Judge Cox's charge to the
jury and his rulings and decisions, and saw no
difference in his conduct from that of other