The Saline County journal. [volume] (Salina, Kan.) 1871-1893, 1883-03-08

SINCE our last issue the committee
appointed 70. iuyesiigzts chas0ss
against Judge Prescott reported to the
House. The majority Of the com.
mittee submitted q report whleh
stated generally In effect that there
were not sufficient grounds " De re-
nssal ofths Judee Or hss imoeach.
ment, while the minority (eoas1sslns
oftwo Demoerats) msde bong report.
recommending impeachsneat and
specifying the charges upon which the
Impeachment should be based. The ma
jority Of the committee had no inti.
nation that the report q the minority
would contain specific charges, and
hence they made the general report
mentioned. Wherefore on Monday last
they filed a supplemental report,
which follows this article. We have
not room to publish this week both
the reports of the majority and mi.
norlty. and hence give only the sup
elemental report. which contains
practically the charges against Judge
Prescott and the findings Of the ma
jorIty Of the committee on the same.
The House on last evening took up
the matter and adopted the supplement
ri report. At tile Close Of this long
drawn out contest twas fully proven
that Il had been made political
fight The opposition did all In their
power TO give Gov Click chance TO
appoin. n new Judge OF the l4th Ju.
diciai District. and IL also leaks out
that the willy Governor himself had
his hand secretly in the fight. Judge
Prescott has no cause to be otherwise
than gratified by his handsome &C
quittal by so large vake Of the House.
He returns to his tome enjoying. the
same degree Of popularity NJ ever in
the District which has four times
elected him to the position he now
holds.
sUrrLENESTAL REPORT N rHE nArTER OF JupaE
Mr. SPEAKER: The majority Of your committee
10 inyesiIsaie the chars preferred against Judge
John II Prescott beg leave TO make the following
Supplemental r-p,rt. In view Of the character OF
the report presented By the minsrity Of the COM
mttee, and which Se had mo reason to aptteipa;e
from our view OF the evidence.
Fir.,. The Grst charge in the complaint relates
TO the conduct OF said John II. Prescott In . eer-
tain criminal prcceeiiI,g Instituted by him sgainss
one ". :. Warner. The only pficial act he IL
shown % have done was h,ire the amount Of BAH
contradiction, shows vas done upon the joint APP
picstiOn Of the county attorney and the attorney
81 Warner wi,hosst objection TO the right of the
Judge 10 sct, aud the amount established was not
excessive There we're reasonable grounds for the
Institution OF such proceedings. the said Warner
harin. en,bczzefed large amount OF wheat Of
sail Prescott and after tri,i of said cause be fore
Judge James Humphrey and q jury. and the jury
having disagreed, the said cause. with the consent
aud approval OF said Judge Humphrey, vas by the
eonni. attorney dismissed. without the isterven-
tion ia any way whatsoever Of said Prescott.
The evidence shows that said Prescott received
from ssii Warner In full settlement Tor the wheat
| enbezsici converted iess than the value there
Of AMI nnthing whatsoever Tor any other purPose
and that this was received indie DC ndeni oi and
without reiereare o. the Grimm al cause.
SossI: In the trial Of the case Of Foster vs.
Turner, Ne lind that said John w. Prescott ron
! Quoted Limseif s. judge fairly and impartiaIly.
The complainant Is the only witness who t-st fed
10 any exhhiion az feeling against him. or tn any
nni.ifns-s of the Judge In that case On the other
hand the two opposing counsel in the ease. the
sheriff u Nct'herSon county. The FOREMAN Of the
jury before sii.,n the cause was tried and three
disinie rested attorneys. members 81 tho Mefher-
son bar all testified that they prssent 81 the
triai complained nf AMI that the conduit and De-
mtanor 81 the Judge fair and impartial. In
that Gaze the said PrescSi submitted TO the jury all
proper special findings asked, without mater
change, on the pant ofhoth plaintiff AMI defendant.
The complaint that the judge DESTROYED ahy spec
ial Findings presented by the plaintiff is expressly
disproys.l by the evideure, all such finds, except
an inn1feTia one being among The records Of the
case prcsenieifo Several special Bdings
orally requested for the defendant therein, aud
were fairy written oat 10y the judge and submit
led according 10 hi, usual practice In such cases
The additional instructions given tn the jury
after argument were cccasioucd by reason OF the
psin,r Poster in his argument To ih. jury taking
issue with the court upon the law 81 the a,
laid down In the original instructions. aud were
also given for the purpose Of explaining the spsc
i'll findings al 'nitt.i 10 the jury. and which had
not been prepared when the first instructions
were given and no objection WAS msde at the
time to the giving Of such additional Instructions
In settling the case made prepared by said Fos-
ter in said action said John II. Prescott followed
the prsciire adopted IN such In his district
anil exercised his usual in correcting he
TOT the purpose Of making = true case-unAde. The
cass-nate n presented TO the judge, though pre-
pared by the Jerk Of said Foster from s.-nogrsph-
&c notes made by hum Of the trial. imperfect,
incomplete. and in many respects erroneous as T.
shown by the record Itself, AMI by numerous wit
nes-~s. The st.nosrapher in taking notes Of said
trial was acting under no appointment or nIthori-
iy being simply In the enpioy Of said Foster and
his private clerk, and had bu, little expericRee
q stenoyrapher.
Many 9th" changes made by said Prescott in
said case-rnaic APPEAR iroin the record itself to
have been nece ,sary and proper: and all changes
a,s.esr to hsv. h,-ei, made Tor NO other purpose
than 10 cans, the record to slssak the truth. This
cas--m,>ie ronfsnsd about s-yee hundred pages
iar sn rgesti,n Of sr,endm-nts ,bly delivered lie
same to the Judge, say ing that there were many
errors in u they eculi not suggest them all 10
defenSant a. well a. sad Foster. to meet him Tor
,be pIr,s.,. of examining and .rttliu, the ca,e-
m,Ie which they failed To- Ia And he then nro
coded 10 do II himself heinz guided by potes
i,per Thr rn,nnl.i,.nt Eoster when NM, m.
sand as a witness heinr. us va. a.keS ~ 10,
different tins 10 ,oini out In ina rac,ri any ma
teriaI change nia.lc nv sail Prescott which was
mot corset and he xns unable 10 refer yo,y eon.
milt.e 4, nny ,u IA chang, ar a, uoint o,t any nj.
ter,,ion or i,s~rtioa mae ty tba Judge s Which
uau,d tend 10 prev. M a reversal Of the c,.e nv
the sunrr,. Caur, Tbi. c,s. a rov ,e,d,pv a.
The ,u,ren,e CaaT, and The r,sori 6,,i ths,cin
fily snj fsirIv ,yesrn,s 10 s,J r,nri for M Jeci
sion All m - 20 W.. ruins of ssId Pr.cctt
TO- ~ In M. eau '" Of Tu , =. Yau,y =.
snJ The somplsint az 10 The insertion by ,aid
Prescott Of matter As Testimony. cl,,,ped NOT 10
hayeIeen ,n,rcaueca. 10 l.. entirely nm 5ov ri,sI
The .xii.nc. 90. n. Lrin, M. r-.,Y, ;sssjf n,
sail e,.a a. male Lr iii fo,i,, a. veiI ~ the
,e.,tm.p~ ~ .nm,r,,s ~j,nrs... eoneirsiveiy
nsoyes ina, ,urt ,estimonv v,s iutnriueed upon
,Lc ,,;,i .,i.,.n,,.,i. 80 in.a,,.I A. Al 60
a aas, fa ..;5 ;ns ns ~ ~ .n1.;sn.ii~
fee,;,. ~ Ian s,,,s;,r hriwerr yuA,r prrsr,ti
ara II, Fc,asr ,nd m. chsr,s thss j.ds. P,,s.
colt exhibited malice tovarI Foster in the trial Of
M Two fHrssninr cases md in ,he trial ~ other
,-e.s ~. S,S No e,;s.ree ,sHS,.,e, s,ncr,sjrr
m,h ,s,y,r. iJ,o, the eor,r.ry re srI sh.i
Jujy. presca,t rhils on The Lanrb .lv.v. f,estcl
NJ Ea.,. r -, ,,.o,,s,r anil f,i,Ir
Fssy,s. In rr-sri 10 the cha rsc that judge Pre-,
,.tt Il he /. s,,,;t ~ enn,s.sian ,~fs.a,