Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1886-01-21
JUDGE POWERS CONFIRMATION.
The Fight in Washington to Gust
Him From the Bench.


A Washington dispatch tosthe Detroit
Free Press, which was republished in one
Of our morning contemporaries this morn
ing, contains what purports to be an in
tervicw with Judge J.. G. Sutherland on
the subject OF his visit to the Capital.
The Judge is represented as saying, with
out reserve, that he was there to defeat
the confirmation OF the appointment OF
Orlando w. Powers to the Associate JUS
ticeship OF Utah. The pointed and APP
parently damaging assertions of Judge
Sutherland, as TO the unfitness OF Mr..
Powers for the position, have awakened
in the curiosity of the community the
widest speculations as to what has
prompted the attack referred to, one
theory having been expressed on the
streets this morning that it was Judge
Sutherland's association with the Bullion
Beck Eureka Hill mining suit and the
unfavorable Ito him) decision OF Judge
Powers in the case that has melted the
warfare. 1t has been known for some
time past that Judge Sutherland had
gone to Washington on such mission,
and ii had previously been I'M
terstood that Judge c. w. Ben
nett was at the Capital pulling his
hardest for the confirmation OF the Asso-
ciate Justice. The fact that these two
distinguished members Of the Salt Lake
Bar had been opponents in the big min
| ing suit above mentioned, seemed to give
to this gossip something of tangible
| form, and q DEMOCRAT reporter set out
with determination to ascertain the
bearings in the matter. Several promi-
nent attorneys here were interviewed ON
the subject, and with very few exceptions
they all expressed their opinions and
feelings with the same candor and ear
nestness which seem to have character
lied the movements of Judge Sutherland.
One law firm expressed its unqualified
contempt for Justice Powers, and resented
the inference that their or Judge Suther-
lands attitude had been actuated by the
recent decision in the mining case. They
commended that nothing which may here
after be accomplished can possibly affect
that decision, and that it is out of their
regard for the qualifications of Mr.. Pow
ers that the fight has been taken up.
They thought most members of the Salt
Lake Bar would concur in the opinion ex-
pressed and forwarded here by the Kala-
mazoo Bar, of which Judge Powers had
been member, viz: the the gentleman
had long since manifested his incapacity
for the Bench. All that Judge Suther-
land had said about Powers discourtesy
and ill-treatment of the Bar here, was
true, and more too. When asked if they
considered that the efforts being put forth
against the confirmation in the Senate
would be successful, the gentlemen hand
ed the reporter o copy Of q
n, lat ,.1,s Ill,
the Senate for several days, containing
the u, proofs OF incompetency of Orlando
w. Powers for the Supreme Court Bench
OF Utah. The paper is lengthy one,
and has been compiled by Edwin L. Con-
ely, attorney for DIRECTORS. The princi-
pal evidence is contained in the letters
and afiidavits OF three of the Judges of
the Supreme Court of Michigan, j. w.
Champlin, 7. M. Cooley and 7. X. Sher-
wood. The former denies having ever
having given the endorsement credited
o him and which contained his alleged
signature; while the other Judges, in ac-
knowledging their Endorsements, point
out facts which have since come to their
knowledge, throwing Il new light on
Judge Powers reputation, in the face of
which they beg leave to withnraw their
endorsements. These letters are all very
pronounced in their denunciation OF Mr..
Powers and accompany other evidence
which, altogether, the Collectors"
feel confident will succeed in
ousting the Judge, notwithstanding the
desire OF President Cleveland and Attor-
ney-General Garland. The gentlemen
who are responsible for the foregoing
opinions and who kindlygave the reporter
access to these letters from Washington,
were quite radical in their expressions
OF disapproval OF Judge Powers conduct
on the bench. The fact OF their having
been on the losing side in the recent liti-
cation, they averred, cut no figure in the
affair, for that was a thing OF the past.
In going further into the details of
that notable suit, however, the gentlemen
manifested that there had been certain
facts OF very prejudicial character which
influenced the decision in the case. They
allege that the visit of Chief Justice Fields |
here last summer and his dining with |
Judge Powers, as well as his being a !
stockhoder in the Eureka Hill property, |
had tended to bring about the result; and |
that the presence OF George +. Whitney. |
field's brother-in-law, during the whole |
process OF the trial was influential in
the same direction. The association of |
Don nj: Dickensonand Justice Field with
the kalamazoo Gazette article bearing on
the subject was likewise characterized as
suggestive. Nothing, however, could be
done now, looking to amends for the past
IN that matter; but the insults to mem
bers OF the bar and the reputation which
Judge Powers brings from his own home
were sufficient grounds for his removal,
which they feel confident would be eff |
fected.
Other lawyers We're approached on the |
subject, but those who were not associ-
ated in the mining litigation expressed
more conservative opinions. Several
reputable attorneys gave it as their opn-
ion that this whole warfare on Judge
Powers grew out of his recent decision In
that notable mining suit, and that the
attack had been pressed by the attorneys
Tor the losing side. They thought Judge |
Powers a much ADLER and fairer man
than he had been given credit ior
being, and believed that he would |
come out OF the siege victorious.
10 complete the information on the sub. |
Ject OF the Judges decision as delivered
at Provo last week, the reporter hunted |
up several gentlemen from Tintic and
lvicinity,who We're not only reliable parties |
but well posted also. From those who
were seen the unvarying opinion was
received that the decision was looked |
upon with much disfavor by the MINING |
men generally, and that there were yerv
lev, exceptions. One party character
lzed 1t as IAN outrage" and said |
no one could be found to express |
u different opinion OF cnursa tba H.,