The advocate., 1891-06-03
ADDRESS OF THE BOARD OF MANAGERS
IN THE BOTKlE IMPEACHMENT CASE.


port t. Third. tho proceeding FBs, PFRcl,
Cally Che appointment Of receiver for
pauSroHrAK CORPORATION, o thing which can
mot be lawfully done anywhere. The stOrS
Of this infamous proceeding on the part 81
Ihdge Botkin was told by Mr.. JohH Il,
,Pitzer, one Of the respondents attorneys,
who was called and testified in behalf of Che
respondents on May IA. Mr.. Pitzer, whom
examined by Judge Boskin's attorney, testi-
i faed thus; I'M Ns8 00fFGfTWi9TI
n OK. Didyeu hear the reInsTks Of Judge Rotkln
ss the tinnc, In appointing the receiver Y "ta
.fa At4TAgdii iitf as,ia'daH hro otn ~ p7"'oeh =" p
e. What did he Gag? ,,,., H." %a,,', se"s,.~f :,
A,r&lh A The court then ,prcOeededed 70
uaytlst he bad, been annoyed . gEeatdeaa shout
that case and the condition Of affairs connected
with it; that = 2 in view Of, the threats
chat had been made-apd, considerable excite
Ment existed ut that time over tiIeTclty treasurer
refusing 70 pay warrants BtElce the injnnctOil was
granted he would appoint 81 receiver. He be-
Ilbsea ~ was simply one band of rObberSagainss
smother attempting to get hOld of the ciCyiufdg,
..alsd that he would appoint J@ "a. Adams 70
celver, and would give him fOEty-eight hours to
Ie his bond in the SUM Of &1O 900, to be approved
by the court land. H. not Dled IN shat slime. tho
money should be turned over TO the clerk OF the
court. ~o
O. Did he give any reason why he wanted to
appoint rccstver In that case?
"A, Well, he said In order TO bring the money
nearer TO the court. He made q remark like
this Here Ia q small town that has SOmethtng
more than s5O,O Indebtedness omit, and tlera
"a nothing 10 show for 1t. and the only thing W
stOht for the boys Is 1Chdt Httle NSOev tere Is IN
tho tyeGsury; and II the injunction suit has been
properly brought, am going to bring this
money, by placing It In the hands OF receiver,
nearer TO the court, IN order that 70 may be-
looked after, and throw protection around the
city treasurer or receiver. Ergyl 1o iNui
In the manner and upon the grounds
stated, Judge Botkin, in open, hagrant and
positive violation of the law, brought
the City's money "nearer the court, F" and
then, having first advised one OR more OF
the counCilmen to employ Mr.. W. p. Hack
ney 10 defend thern in both the civil and
criminal actions brought against them, de-
layed the examination or trial of the crimi-
nal case until, Mr.. Hackney could reach
Springfield. On Mr.. HaCkney's arrival at
Springfield he met the mayor and cOuncil-
men and made q contract by which they
were TO pay, him $4,000 TO defend them. He
then arranged with the county attorney $50
hetestifed himaelf) to have both actions
dismissed; after which the mayor and coln-
oil issued to him city warrant for the
9A,O0O attorney's fee, which warrant Judge
Botkin approved and ordered paid By the
receiver, and the same was paid that same
night. Thus "a 900 Of the City's money was
broughb much ''nearsr tho court" by finding
its way from the courts receiver 10 the
pocket Of the courts friend, HaOkney. The
court also allowed Mr.. John Fl. PitEer $3.50
out Of the city money for assisting the
county attorney in PRHyHNTINa che two
suits AGAINST tho mayor and CounCllmen
(not for defending them); and che court al
lowed two other attorneys 500 !. for
assisting the county attorney in rsRos.
ncUr1Eo (nOs defendlng) tho mayor. and
conncilmen. in those two suits--bOth Of
Which were settled BY Mr., Hackney and the
county attorney as soon as 10 was known
that the money was ''near enough TO The
court" TO be disbursed by its ''receivsr" ON
th6 order Of Judge Rotkih, and tho court
also allowed Receiver Adams $500 Ouh Of
she city money in his hands, soE. doing
nothing rObbing the treasury -sOl
Springfield Of four sums Of money aegre-
eating $3.50, without ono single legal OF
moral xc,,sa. The agreement made by