New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-09-26
nrr,I1s OF TIE HEARING.

- ..i,,,g Justice Edward Patterson 10 the stano
~ o~., witness. Frank Moss made a oriet IN
,rodrctorv address explaining the reasons WHY "0
had subpouacd 30 many Judges 20 appear jew
the committed. He said that, acung upon ''o
rro,ontinas ~ the city Club. the Chamber OF CON"
MERGE and other bodies. he Wished 10 o''"'" Wv
,,,,ona o. the judges Of TIE city as to the aoVlsa
sue - advocating stringent law prohibiting the
contribution of money by candidates for the )uol-
,,arv for election and campaign expenses
,etos first as IN the amount he had contributed
-.nen he was nominated for n justlceship OF tle
Supreme Court. Justice Patterson sdiu Ho V'', ~
-, remember. He thought. however that II
oroor,ted n several thousand dollars. lie was
,,o,O,ra,ed by the County Democracy, and MADE
contribution 20 that party, but although huolseu
hy Tammany Hall. he had made no contribution
20 that organization. nor had he been asked ior
any. , ..... oo,-
tributions by judicial cahuluh'cs o-e"' - ~
hihred by law" -,
80 long as there are political parties they VIII
,eoa money FOR legitimate expenses" the witness
answered "As things are arranged now laH 10
see how the campaign funds are to be raised IN any
o,ber way than BY the candidates judicial ana
otherwise But It would be a very great relief l
think. n tho system were discontinued. 90 not
think II Is the best system could have, but the
fact that such contribution IS made by the can
didate for the bench has not, Of course the sgh'-
est influence upon his judicial conduct Thereafter
stin think # would be a wholesome thing II me
system was stopped altogether"
But does not the selection OF only sucn mon
as can put UP big contributions for election ex-
penses narrow the circle Of candidates, and does
not the fact OF a man making contributions 10 an
organization place him under an obligation TO II!
mot that l know o. On the contrary. should
think that II he once made his contribution It
would relieve him OF obligation for tho future
SHOULD NOT BE ASSESSED
Asked y he had heard any complaint among his
fellow Judges the witness said he had not. and
repeated that on the whole he thought the judicial
candidates ought not be required 10 pay money.
especially az the State assumed much Of the
EXPENSE formerly borne by the candidate
In reply 10 a question put by Mr.. Hoffman the
witness said that while he was OF the opinion that
Il would he better II one had TO pay the cleo
ton funds, stll he did not see how the necessity
could be obvlated under the present political party
system.
Justice Gildersleeve who followed, brought with
MIN a copy OF his sworn statement OF expenses
when he was elected Justice Of the superior
Court in 1891 The total OF these expenses amount
"a 70 between $4,000 and 5000. Most Of this, he
said had been paid ty friends. Owing TO sickness
in his family his campaign had been conducted by
these friends and he had no knowledge OF where
the money went But money which he had him
self paid went mainly 10 the newspapers for pay
nent Tor eCNcrUseHeils-
What would you think Of law relieving JUDGES
OF these contributions
Il have always thought that the system was
fsd one but ! have always thought II fair, a.
expenses have 10 be met. that the candidate
should contribute 10 certain extent see h
reason why they should be completely exempted
Justice Giegerich said that his expense declara
zion fled in 1892 showed that he had paid 5000 Z
Tammany Hall. He had not been asked 70 CIV
CIV certain sum but in the course OF CONVEX
est,on with the chairman OF the Finance Com
mittee Of Tammany Hall. he volunteered to oea
his share Of the cost OF the campaign and aske
81 5000 would be enough. He was told IL woulf
The witness did not see any particular reason VII
judicial candidates should be exempt from assess
Inen,s so long as political parties needed money 70
campaigning purposes.
Mr. Mazet asked what the witness thought {
n legislative measure requiring the city to pay u
expenses Of judicial candidates. Justice Gegeric
replied that such a provision would alter the cas-
altogether. but he added that he did not see VIII