The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-10-28
SCENE In HACKNEY'S ROOM.
Statement Made by Messrs. Gavin and
Davis.

Mcssrs. Frank T.. Gavin and Theodore p.
Davis, attorneys for the Democratic cam
didates in the Appellate Court case, make
the following statement regarding the story
printed recently in the Journal in refer
ence to scene in Judge Hackney's room:
"On Oct. % the Journal contained an arti-
Gle entitled 'Hackney's Vote, in which it
WAS stated that eX-Judge Reinhard, counsel
Tor the appellees in the Appellate Court
case recently decided by the supreme Court,
late upon the night before the oral argu-
ment found Mr.. Taylor, Charles A. korbly
and Frank E. GAVIN in consultation with
Judge Hackney, with the record and pa
perS in the Appellate Court case spread
their presence was. accounted for by the
statement that we had been discussing the
Marion Soldiers Home case.
we desire to say that the charges made
are absolutely without foundation so far
as relates to their material and essential
features. Mr.. Korbly was not at the State
the evening mentioned with either of us
There was neither conference nor conSulta-
ton between Mr.. Taylor or any of his attor-
neys and Judge Hackney relative to the
case. 1t is true that Mr.. Taylor and two of
his attorneys. Messrs. Gavin and Davis,
were at Judge Hackney's room not late, but
early on the evening before the oral argu-
ment They were there not to consult nor
confer with Judge Hackney, but simply
and solely for the purpose of obtaining the
appellee's brief for inspection and exami-
nation before the oral argument which was
to be made the following morning The
duty of closing the case and answering the
appellee's argument had been assigned to
Mr.. Gavin. The appelee's brief was not
filed until the day before the oral argu-
ment. Mr. Gavin first learned of its filing
late in the afternoon and at once tele-
phOned to the clerk and was informed that
the brief was in the hands of the judges.
No copy had been furnished to the counsel
for appellants.
After supper Judge Hackney was called
upon as chief justice to get the appellees
brief for us in order that we might see
what we would be required to answer upon
the day following. Judge Hackney went
from his room to some other part of the
building to get the brief from whatever
member of the court then had it and
brought 1t in and gave it to Mr.. Gavin We
saw nothing of the record nor any of the
was said either by or to Judge Hackney
relative to the case, excepting merely to
request him to get the brief that we might
what in it.
Judge Reinhard came in just after Judge
Hackney had returned to the room. He
was greeted with the ordinary courtesy of
friends and sat down and talked with all
of us for little while and was during the
conversation informed that we had not had
an opportunity to see his brief until then
and had just got it for examination. No
mention whatever was made of the Sol
diers' Home case. AS a matter of fact we
knew nothing of its existence The whole
thing in nutshell is simply that we went
to Judge Hackney's room solely to obtain
appellees' brief and for no other purpose.
We then spent nearly two hours in the
library in going over the brief and prepar-
ing for the next days argument and saw
nothing further of Judge Hackney We
would ask of you that you give this refuta-
ton of the charges brought against Judge
Hackney the same publicity as was given
to the original misstatemenr.