New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-04-15
EY.JTSTTCE DALY'S EXPERIENCE.
WHY HE WAS NOT RENoMINATED FOR THE
BENCH.
Joseph F. DAILY was then sworn.

Joseph F DAILY was then
Mr. Moss-You were a Justice Of the Supreme
Court for many years. were you not? A-Wei' l
was q Judge Of the Common Pleas for great
many years and OF the Supreme Court since the
consolidation OF the courts. three years ago, up TO
the first of January this year
O.-And your time how many years 81 poth
courts? A-Altogether. over twenty-eight years
| Q-As judge. and member OF the bar and
of the community. have you been aware. by COM
candidates have been assessed large sums OF
money? A.-That is, think. so reported. :. :,
Q.-That is matter Of general knowledge Is II
Q-Wcll. it has gone back for many years. has
1t not? Al have heard OF 1t for good many
o.-what sums have YOU heard as being the
inc precise amounts | heard Mr.. Peckham say
from ten to twenty-five thousand dollars were re;
ported and / have seen those reports mentioned
Q.-And have not those reports been matters q
ly? A.-Well. would not like to say that, but |
TfS amy 9dges spoRen to you'll am
going to ask for names, because ] recosnize me
who has been on the bench-have any judges spo-
ken you about the matter OF judicial assess
Ct an opinion concerning them? Al think on one
Q-And what has been the amount mentioned by
them If you remember? A.-We. the only one
Q-How long ago was that? A.-Oh. that Is some
Q@And as to the opinion expressed-what oopln-
lon expressed by judges about that? A-None
whatever.
M is W sne matter Of talk at the
time and that Is why the discussion came up.
arc YOU aware Of the fact that has been already
testified 10 by Mr.. Croker that the positons-the
eppoStmeR of referees by judgeaTe and have
been controlled by political consideration has
| that come to your knowledge! A-WeH nave
Q.NAnd You have known of 1t. have YOU not?
ments should be for political considerations.
Q;-Wil you state who made such claim 49,, A.
| Well. il with reference TO my own candidacy
| last year.
CROKER TRIED TO BOSS HIM.
Q.-what was said. and who said 1t? Al was
notified that need not expect denomination on
the ground that had refused 10 make an appoint
! ment had also refused to make a judicial order.
| Q.-Who notified you? A.-The notification came
| from Mr.. Croker whom see here now. and sup
| pose he will not deny il. It is unnecessary to
! state who was the medium Of the communication.
o.-That was last fall? A.-No that was the
! first part OF last year.
Q-The first part OF last year? A-several
QNNow will you please state definitely what
| the appointment was that you did not make. and
taeonistc to Your nomination? A-The appoint
| ment OF Chief Clerk Of the Court OF Common Pleas.
Q;-Whom did he want you to appoint? A.-Mr-
DQc,.yEMchael T. DAILY? A-Michael T. Daily. yes
vol? A'-Wen. it involved the dismissal OF the
present clerk Of the Court. Judge Jones; and that
Was in case there had been a vacancy: that MI.
Day was not an experience lawyer and that was
Q.-How long had Judge Jones held that position?
indgeNthat he had been clerk for two or three
| years He succeeded Mr. Jarvis. who was Clerk OF
the Court and who resigned and Judge Jones. at
| position clerk. He had been Chief Justice OF
snS no only and W Of y
on account Of the oficiai position that he had
Common pleas when Mr.. Jarvis resigned. at the
request Of the Judges
of Mr. Jones to Ill that position was there? A.
Not the slightest It was stated as exceptional, his
o-When you were asked to consent TO an APP
| Mr. DAILY mentioned that would ht him for that
or w9us as s% a % bad Sese
! good Clerk OF the City Court.
o.-That was stated? Al think It was men
| The request was that he should be transferred TO
Common Pleas from the City Court.
THREATENED CROKER's POCKET.
OIL want to ask you now about the judica
order which you refused to make Please to tell
us about that A.-Thcre was an order for the re-
moval of the legal sales from the Real Estate Ex-
| change. in Liberty-st.. TO No III Broadway. The
! legal sales were required to be held at the Real
| Estate Exchange by rule of the Court and II
required the action Of the Judges alter that rule
T nd The Sr Of tho sae wa front o the
counsel Of the parties who opposed II. Mr.. CadwaI-
[ lader He called upon me and stated that he un-
derstood that application OF that kind would be
made and that he desired hearing for his clients
told him he certainly should have a hearing and
having made that promise declined to sign any
order for the removal OF the sales until the hearing
| had been had. had no Information Idea nj that
time that MI Croker was interested in the re-
moval OF the sales so that my refusal TO make the
order not personal matter regarded him
| although may state, II had known It. It would
| have made no difference, for would have made no
| such judicial order without giving the parties in
| terested an ample opportunity to be heard on the
subject II was therefore "A matter of surprise 10
! be notified from Mr.. Croker that that was consid.
cred personal AFFAIR OF his and that should no,
| he renominated because had refused to make the
order ] thought that this notification vas a lest
az first couldn't possibly concede II to be serious
| OF understand you. the order was presented
\ 10 you parte? A.-Oh yes
Q.-There was no notification TO tac great mass