Omaha daily bee., 1899-04-01
REPORT on SUPREME COURT
Legislative Committee Finds No Irregu-
larities Worthy Of 0ensure.
VALUE RECEIVED FOR ALL MONEY PAID
' only Two Items which Appear Ir-
reRuiar aud These Are Explained
These Have Reference to
NorNnI and sullivan.

LINCOLN, March 3i.-t Special telegram
The majority report, signed by Lane and
Detweiler, OF the committee appointed under
the resolution of March Is. to investigate
the alleged Irregularities in the Offices OF
judges OF the supreme court and supreme
court commissioners, was filed today 1t Is
as follows:
We have examined under oath each Of the
members OF the supreme court now serving,
and Of the late supreme court commissioners,
besides numerous other witnesses. including
several who have served or serving as
clerks or assistants to said judges. All Of
said Witnesses appeared voluntarily before
the committee at our request and answered
fully and freely all questions put to them
touching the matter under Investigation,
which evidence is hereto attached and sub
mitted herewith. We have also during the
limited time at our command examined the
record Of claims and vouchers in the offices
OF the state treasurer and auditor, so far
same relate to the subject of this inquiry.
From the evidence before us we find the
following facts:
J. That since the enactment OF sections
22a, 22b, pc and 22d chapter 10, Compiled
Statutes Of 1887 tchapter 81, session laws
1850, each judge of the supreme court, ana,
during the existence Of the supreme court
commission, each member OF said commits
sion has employed constantly one clerk or
assistant which clerk or assistant has been
paid from the state treasury upon vouchers
uuly signed by them as required by law, by
warrants payable to their individual order.
Precedent Set by MAXWELL.
.. That the employment of said
clerks or assistants and is authorized
by law, and the services rendered are of sub
stantial benefit to the court, enabling the
judges thereof to accomplish about one third
more work than would otherwise be possible
The evidence disclOses that with few ex-
ceDtions said clerks have not been stanog
raphers. 1t also appears that none of the
judges of said court or commission have
been accustomed to make use Of dictation in
the preparation of their opinions and that
the value OF the services rendered by their
said clerks would have not been increased
from the fact of their being stenograp piers.
). That beginning in 1887 with Judge
Samuel Maxwell, who employed as his clerk
successfully his two sons and daughter 1t
has been the common practice of the judges
of the court, and of the supreme court COM
mission to employ as clerks members of
the respective families or relatives of the
said judges
Fourth. The committee finds from the evil
dence that said practice was adopted and
has been continued by said judges largely
as matter OF convenience. the greater part
of the work Of said judges in the preparation
of their opinions being done at their homes.
So far as your committee has been able to
inquire, the clerks employed have been
in every case fit and capable persons and
the services for which they were employed
have been faithfully and conscientiously per-
formed.
Legislature Changes Compensation.
,. The committee finds that prior to 1896
the appropriation for the payment OF clerical
assistance to the judges of the supreme court
and commission was in gross sum- and
that same was drawn from the treasury upon