The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1898-08-11
here by the same selfish interests.

But it il not true that Judge
Conyngham "drew the bill to make
the Judiciary elective which was
passed in 1851" The Judiciary
were made elective by a constitu.
tional amendment which was adopt
ed by a vote of the people in 1850,
and carried by a large majority.
The change was made by the peo-
pie of the whole state, and there
fore could not have been made for
the benefit of Judge Conyngham
alone, as the Sentinel would have il
understood.
In Is4e the Luzerne Represent
tatives in the House at Harrisburg
were Henry M. Fuller and Thomas
Gillespy /; in 1850, John N. Cony-
ngham and Andrew Beaumont, and
in 1s5 II James w. Rhoads and S.
S. Benedict.
Judge Conyngham, therefore, was
not a member of the Legislature
when the Joint Resolution of 1S4o,
proposing an amendment to make
Judges elective by the people in
stead Of appointable by the Cover
nor, (by and with Senatorial appro-
val), was introduced and passed,
nor was he member when this
Act of 18th April 1851, (P. Laws
65I), for dividing this state into
Judicial districts was enacted into
law.
A second passage of the Constitu-
tional Amendment Resolution at
the session Of 1850, was matter of
course, being supported by public
opinion and not strongly opposed,
while submission of the amend
ment to a vote of the people, the
fall following, as provided for at
that session, was required by the
constitution and the sworn duty of
all the members.
1t will be seen from this state
ment how false are the imputations
upon Judge Conyngham. as made
by the Sentinel writer, "that the
judge drew this bill to make the
judiciary elective,' in order to
defeat Judge Jessup that such bill
was passed in 1851, "and that this
Judge Conyngham succeeded in hav-
ing himself nominated and forced
Judge Jessup off the bench even
though it was necessary to wipe out
by Legislative enactment our then
system Of choosing judges"
To all which we answer Judge
Conyngham drew no sue h bill and
no such bill ever existed he was
not in the Legislature in 1851 to
draw or pass any bill whatever
the bill or act of 1851, referred to,
was not an act to change the man
ner of appointing judges but fo1
reforming judicial districts and did
not change injuriously to him the
home district of Judge Jessup and
lastly, the vacation of Judg {
Jessup's commission was not by
virtue of any statute, but of the con.
stitutional change decreed by the
people the year before. The act o.
1851 made Susquehanna, Bradford
and Sullivan the 18th Judicial Dis
trict but in the fall of that year
Judge Jessup did not choose to be a
candidate for election therein. He
became one of the candidates of his
party for judgeship in the Su-
preme Court, but failed of an cleo
ton.
1t seems like. useless expen di.
ture oftime to say anything in con.
tradiction Of the allegation that
"Conyngham, Woodward and FL
we'll were all Office seekers" That
it is utterly false is known by every.
body who is old enough to remem.
Der the men, and honest enough tc
admit an established fact. Judge
Conyngham was first appointed in
1889, at the request of his friends
irrespective of party, and was elect,
ed and reelected.
| Judge Woodward was appointed
by Governor Pollock in 1856. nbot
tie recommendation Of tie members o.
lie bar 0fMe SeUerai counties in tile
district, and in the fall of the same
year was elected without opposition
| Freezes History says: Judge
Woodward was never a candidate
for political Office, in the ordinary
sense of that term, but by devotion
to his profession of the law, he
qualified himself for high judicia
positions, and obtained them with
out personal solicitation or effort
When, in 1861, Judge Woodward
was offered the nomination fol
Judge of Berks county, without so