The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-03-20
Judge Maynard's Statement.

Judge ISAAC II. MAYNARD OF the Court OF
Appeals, whose conduct as counsel in the
Outchess county election cases has been so
much criticised, was under no legal oblisa-
ton to take any notice OF the recent act
of the Bar Association OF this city in ap-
pointing committee to look into the matter.
That act. however. doubtless prompted his
written statement which We published yes
terday In the form of letter addressed to
Chief Judge EARL Of the First Division of
tho Court Of Appeals. and to Chief Judge
FoLLETT Of the Second Division. who, no
says, represent the only body which could
with any propriety expect statement from
me upon this subject"
Judge MAYNARD does not deny that he
went to the State Comptroller's Office in
Albany and obtained from the clerk vino
was engaged In opening the Comptroller's
mail. the envelope containing the second
election returns from Duchess county. He
took It to the County Clerk Of Duchess
county. who was waiting at the Capitol.
and delivered it to him. Mr.. WEMPLE. who
was then the State Comptroller. testified on
his examination before Mr.. Justice CULLEN
In Brooklyn in the contempt proceedings
against the County Clerk that he was not
present at the Office when the returns were
thus taken away. and that he gave no
authority to his clerk to give the
package to any one; but he now de-
clares In O letter which Judge MAYNARD
appends 10 his statement that he
always considered that Judge MAYNARD
had full authority to do whatever he
thought proper in the matter. The posi-
don Of Judge MAYNARD is that all that he
did was iustitable and perfectly right. in
asmuch rs ut the time the returns reached
Albany, two orders were IN existence which
prohibited their transmission to tio State
Board OF Canvnssers one granted by Mr..
Justice FUKsMAN Of Troy and tho other
granted by Mr.. Justice INGEAHAM OF this
city. 1t is only under II most technical
view OF tine law, however. that Judge FURs-
MANS W,ler can be regarded rs then in
force: while. On the other hand, Is Judge
lN0RAHAM'S order is deemed to have been
controlling upon the County Clerk. The
samo sort Of tcchIicality in practice must
be wholly ignored.
simultaneously with tho publication OF
Judge MAYNAnD'S statement appears the
announcement from several sources that he
was appointed by tho Governor to his pres
ent position on tho bench ut the unanimous
request OF the Judges of the Court Of APP
p.,nis. Hc was promptly confirmed by the
State Senate. His letter adds little or noth-
Ing TO the material facts OF the case as they
were disclosed upon the hearing before
Justice CULLEN. but it presents the facts in Il
light moro favorable 70 the writer than
they have hitherto been set forth; and it
confirms the opinion which We expressed
when the investigation by the Bar Associa.
ton was ordered. TO tho effect that
no proceedings could he or would be
successfully instituted for the re-
moval of Judge MAYNARD. While he
will doubtless DO denounced as much as
ever by the Republicans. II large proportion
OF the members OF tho Democratic party
will assume that whatever he did was done
frpm motives which were not discreditable
to counsel. and In the jealous discharge OF
what he conceived to be his duty as law
yer: and that 1t in no event constitutes any
adequate cause for attempting to remove
him from the bench. Under our Constitu-
tiop. the Judges Of the Court OF Appeals
Aao tho members OF the State Senate make
ca Che court for tho trial OF impcachments;
and 1t would be idle indeed to bring person
TO trial before that tribunal for conduct
which had already been pronounced blame
less by his associates In the Court of APP
peals and by the State Senate.
In some respects. however. the tone of
Judge MAYaARD's letter could have been
improved. He refers to the contempt pro-
ceeding before Justice CULLEN as having
been instituted ostensibly' for the pur-
poss Of furnishing Mr.. EMANs. but as hay
Ing bssa ussd and doubtless intended for
eaothsr and entirely different purpose.