The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1895-01-18
EXONERATES R|CKS.
Congressman BrOderick Files a
Minority Report
In the Judge Kicks Impeach-
ment Case.
HE Is NOT GUILTY
Of Any Offense or Intentional
Wrong.
No Moral Turpitude Attaches
Says the Report.

WASHINGTON, Jan 1S.-Mr Broderick,
of Kansas, today submitted to the house
judiciary committee the following re-
port, being the minority's views on the
Judge Kicks case. The report says:
"rhe committee on judiciary to which
was referred the charges IN the above
entitled case has reported a resolution
in favor of impeachment, to which the
minority states the following objections:
"The memorial conta ine three charges
against Judge Ricks viz l. He is
charged with having corruptly cheated
and defrauded the government of the
United States out of $I,158S5, received
1881, and Decemb Der 27, 1891. 1t is al
legged that this fraud consisted in the
misappropriation of certain fees which
were paid to the clerk of his court
''2. That he, as judge, on or about the
10th day of January, 1890, corruptly ad-
vised and persuaded Martin w. Sanders,
then clerk of his court, to omit his (Sand-
ers') emolument report, the fees and
emoluments of said clerk from July /,
1889, to December 81, 1889. aggregating
the aforesaid sum.
So That the said judge, willfully and
corruptly. certified to the correctness of
the said clerks alleged fraudulent re-
port knowing that the report was untrue.
The answer of Judge Kicks, submit
ted to the subcommittee, denies all the
charges Of fraud and wrong doing, and
admits that he received the fees men
toned in the first charge of the memo
rial, and alleges that he was entitled to
said fees, except certain sums which
were rightfully paid out to individuals
for the completion of the record of the
cases, out of which the fees arose and
the amount paid over to the government.
''The memorialists and Judge Kicks
were respectively represented by counsel
before the subcommittee while taking
the testimony and until its sessions were
closed. There was no evidence in sup
port'of the second and third charges. SO
| that the case rests and must be deter
mined upon the first charge, namely
that the judge defrauded the government
out of said money.
Judge Kicks was clerk of the United
States district court for the northern dis
trict of Ohio for number of years, and
during the latter part of his term was
also clerk of the circuit court During
his clerkship there were a number of
cases brought up for infringement upon
a certain patent These were known as
the Birdsell cases.
After one of these cases had been tried
and decided, the others were referred to
the clerk, as master, to hear an account
ing as to damages and report to the court.
This he did, but some of the reports
were not approved until after Judge
Kicks became judge. The remaining
reports were approved by Judge Ham
mOnd from the United States district
court of Tennessee, and the orders of
! approval were entered upon the records
! of the court in 1888 and at the close of
the first half of 1889. The last year and
/ half of Judge Kicks clerkship, in
! rendering his emolument reports to the
attorney general he charged himself up
with the fees in the Birdsell cases, in
Guiding tho costs for making the final
record, which could not, as a matter of
fact be written up until after the masters
reports were approved.
He had estimated the cost of this final
record in advance of making it, and
| therefore became responsible for the
government of the same. Before this
final report could be made Judge Kicks
was appointed to the bench and became
judge July 81, 1889, and Martin W. San
ders, a former deputy, succeeded him as
clerk.
After Judge Hammond had approved
the masters reports, some question arose
between Mr.. Sanders and Judge Kicks
| regarding the title to the fees for the
record in the Birdsell cases. but it was
| finally understood between them as
Judge Ricks had charged himself with
these fees that an employe, Miss Liliss,
should complete the record of these cases
and that Judge Kicks should pay her
charges. This was done and Judge Kicks
reported all the facts to the department
of justice and this report was examined
and approved.
1T is not shown bv the evidence, nor is
there any pretense that Judge Ricks,
while clerk, ever retained or attempted
to retain more than his maximum com
pensation. that is $500 per annum.
The law requires u clerk Of the United
States court to render semi-annual emolu-
ment reports to the attorney general OF
the United States and to charge himself
with fees received and also with fees
earned and not received. He is allowed
reasonable office expenses and at the enc
of the year he may retain s., 800 as com
! pensatiOn and must remit the balance tC
the department
There are various views regarding
this statute, but we agree that in esti
mating and charging up fees in advance
in these particular cases where the con
tested questions we're settled and litiga
ton as a matter of fact and law ended
was at most only mere irregularlty, a
it is the universal custom in all courts o
the country to estimate the fees for fina
records in such cases.
'In view of all the facts in this case
it is our conclusion that Judge Kicks i
not guilty of any offense; that there wa
no intention of wrong doing, and NJ
moral turpitude attaches. We therefor'
| recommend that the resolution reported