The advocate., 1891-03-11
KANSAS LEGrsLATURE.

Ihirty-secOnd judicial district:
10 mo House Of Representatives.
The special committee appointed under
and by virtue OF House resolution, adopted
February Z, 1891, 70 investigate Tho charges
preferred by J. r, Van Voorhis, II. r..
Thompson, O, L, Calyers, s. A. Kl0in, and
w. A. Ralstin, against rheodosius Botkin,
Judge Of tho Thirty-sooond judicial district,
respectfully herewith submit their report
Your committee notified Judge BOtlEin Of
tho time and place Of said investigation, and
appointed r. n. Henderson their stenog-
rapher, and on Tuesday, February 17th,
proceeded 10 examine the Witnesses and r0-
duoo 10 writing the testimony taken, which
accompanies this report.
twenty-five Witnesses we're examined on
behalf Of the 0omplainants. The commit
too also attach TO tho testimony an affidavit
by s. N. Wheeler, Of Grand Junction, Colo
RADIO, formerly a resident OF Johnson City,
In the Thirty-second judicial district; also
the ahldavits Of Frank Hall, A. r. Knapp
and Fred Friar, Of Leoti, Wichita county.
Respondent furnished the committee with
a list Of 3Oi witnesses, which no asked TO
have subpnnaod, az the expense Of the state,
at a cost Of twenty-five TO thirty thousand
dollars. No statement was made TO tho
committee az TO what the respondent do
sired 10 establish by these witnesses. Inas-
much as only twenty-five witnesses had
been examined on behalf Of the complain
ants, tho committee determined 10 permit
the respondent TO have subpmnaed, at the
expense OF the state, thirty witnesses, (bO-
ing greater number than chat allowed the
complainants,) and Judge Botrip and his
attorneys we're 90 informed by the commit
teej but they refused 10 have any OF the wit
nesses subpmnaed unless they could got all
they asked for. No evidence was introduced
on behalf OF Judge Botkin. The witnesses
examined on behalf Of COmplainants we're
lawyers, merchants and professional per-
sons and city and county officials, from the
Thirty-second judicial district, and Inn
pressed the committee with the truthful
ness Of their testimony.
From the evidence taken, the committee
unanimously find that the charges made by
the OOmplainAnts against Judge BOtkin are
true. Judge Botkin was appointed Judge of
the ThiEty-second judicial district in the
spring Of 1889, and az tho general election
in the fall of chat year was elected for the
term Of four years, commencing on the
second Monday In January, 1890. The owl
dence shows clearly and beyond a doubt,
that Judge BOtkin is an habitual user OF In
toxioating liquors 10 an excess; chat ever
since his election, up TO and including last
month, he was repeatedly intoxicated
throughout his district during the terms OF
court, and In several instances was 80 Far
overcome by this vile habit az 70 have been
intoxicated while on the bench; that he has
been guilty Of oppressive and malicious
abuse OF his judicial authority, arbitrarily
imprisoning persons thrOughOutthe district
without any shadow Of law or authority;
chat ho has been guilty Of willful and mali
cious partiality, corruption, misconduct and
abuse of authority, in his official capacity.
and under color OF his Office.
Your committee deem IL but due 10 tho
people Of tho Thirty-sOCOnd judicial dis
triCt, and the good name Of tho state Of
Kansas, that this House should take Che
necessary and proper steps 10 remove him
from office, that tho judicial ermine be
maintained unsullied In its pristine purity.
So believing, your committee have, after
calm, careful and COnsiderate review of
the testimony, unanimously agreed 70
recommend TO this House Che adoption OF
tho following resolution,