The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-10-25
The Chief Justice, Democratic Law
yers and Candidate i'm a Late
Night Conference.
JUDGE REINHARD'S SURPRISE
SAW THE APPELLATE CASE PAPERS
SPREAD BEFORE THE QUARTET.
Informed His Associate Counsel of
What He Had witnessed i'm
Hackney's study.

| Little by little the true history of events
| leading up to the decision of the Supreme
| Court on the Appellate judgeship case is
| becoming known.
At the time the decision was rendered
many people were at loss to understand
the reasons which prompted Judge Hack
ney to concur in the opinion handed down,
presumably by Judge Howard. Only a
short time before that, i'm an interview, he
had expressed himself in no unmistakable
terms as having the same opinion as the
members Of the State Election Board, that
there were no vacancies on the Appellate
Bench. Taking this as the basis for their
belief. almost every one familiar with the
case thought Judge Hackney would not
sit in Judgment on the case, or that if he
did he would vote to affirm the decision of
the election board.
There is, however. little room for doubt
that Judge Hackney wrote the opinion,
which was handed down as having been
written by Judge Howard. Attorney Gen.
eral Ketcham, who is familiar with the
style, phraseology and methods of Judge
Hackney, openly asserted at the time that
he was positive that it was the work of
Judge Hackney.
Late developments in the case have
shown beyond doubt that the justice who
was the uncertain quantity was Judge
Howard. Among those who were close to
the court it was also known that it re-
quired a full days persuasion at the hands
of Judge Hackney, who is said to have
used the political whip to accomplish his
ends, to turn the friend of Judge Monks
over to the Democratic side. In any event,
there is no room for doubt but that had
Tn Hoo
case or refuse to take any part in IL be-
cause of his former utterances, the deci-
sion of the election board would have been
affirmed, as the Constitution provides that
where the court is evenly divided on any
decision the judgment of the lower court
is affirmed
CALLED IN DEMOCRATS.
Another and more important point in the
case which has never been made public is
that the deliberations of the chief justice
were not of an exclusive nature. Ex-Judge
Reinhard, who was associated with Attor-
ney General Ketcham in the case, was, the
night before the oral argument was heard,
the guest of Judge Henley, of the Appellate
Court. AT a late hour, when he was about
to retire, he remarked that he would go
across the hall and see Judge Black for
few minutes. In doing so he looked over
the railing to the floor below on the oppo-
site side of the building and saw a light
burning in Judge Hackney's room. He
then remarked to Judge Henley, 81 believe
/ will pay my respects to the chief justice
and bid him good night at the same time
walking down stairs. The door was slight
ly ajar and he pushed it open and stood
for moment speechless with surprise.
Judge Hackney was seated at his desk,
with the briefs in the appellate judgeship
case spread before him. Seated around him
were Frank e. Gavin and Charles A. Kor-
bly,, with Taylor, one of the Democratic
nominees for the appellate judgeship. Real
izng that he was witnessing something
that was altogether out of order and not
intended for him to see, he gracefully paid
his respects and retired. At the time the
statement was made by those present, in
apologizing for their presence in Judge
Hackney's study, that they were talking
over the Marion Soldiers Home case, but
the absurdity of this statement was appar-
ent at a glance, as that case would have
furnished no pretense for the presence of
Taylor. Moreover. in the time Judge
Reinhard was there he was able to see
beyond any doubt that the papers spread
before Judge Hackney were those of the
Appellate Court case. Judge Reinhard, al
though Democrat, deemed it his duty to
advise his associates of the circumstance.
That it has been kept secret so long by
those interested in the case was due alto
gether to a desire to shield the chief JUS
tice of the Supreme Court from any in
yidious remarks.