The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1901-03-19

Whatever that could in the SLIGHTEST
degree prejudice their Judgment.
They further solemnly declare that
every official act of theirs since thew
came upon the bench, in this and in
all other cases, has been influenced
by the same integrity of purpose and
unbiased Judgment.
"While fully recognizing the
rights, powers and responsibilities of
the legislative and executive depart
ments of the State government, they
have always felt, and still feel, that
they have no more right to shirk
the just responsibilities of their office
than they have to exceed it's lawful
powers and they deem it their duty
to decide all cases properly before
them in strict accordance with the
legal rights of the respective parties
as determined by the constitution
and the laws of the State, not incon-
sistent Herewith. Section 6 of
Article ". of the Constitution of
this State provides that THE Supreme
Court shall have jurisdiction to re-
view upon appeal, any decision of
the courts below, upon any matter
of law or legal inference. And the
jurisdiction of said court over TISSUES
of fact" and Questions of fact"
shall be the same exercised by it be
fore the adoption of the Constitution
of 1868, and the court shall have the
power to issue any remedial writs
necessary to give it a general super
vision and control over the proceed
ings of the inferior courts
.'As the final determination on ap-
peal of all matters of law or legal
inference is committed to the Su-
preme Court by express provision of
the constitution as members of that
court these respondents could not re-
fuse to perform that duty honestly,
faithfully and impartially' without
violating their oath.
cit may be that they have been
mistaken in some of their views of
the law but this they have sought
to avoid by a careful consideration
of every case and a steadfast adher-
ence to settled principle of law.
They do nos claim personal infalli-
bility of Judgment, but in all cases
and under all circumstances have
done the right as they e given to
see the right. More, they could not
do less they have not done"
But while the Theophilus White
decision and mandamus is pro
nounced the chief cause of the I'M
parchment proceedings, the preju
dices of members of the House e
worked upon by arguments that the
accused judges have rendered parti-
san decisions to keep Fusionists in
office and to keep Democrats out,
notably after the adjournment of
the Legislature of 1899. These
charges are also made at length in
the articles of impeachment but are
completely and exhaustively an
swered by the judges. The latter
show that after the adjournment of
the Legislature of 1897 they used the
same time honored principle of Hoke
VS.. Henderson to keep a larger num-
Der of Populists and Republicans out
of Offices from which the Legislature
had attempted to GUST Democrats
whose terms had not expired than
there were Democrats kept out by
Hoke vs.. Henderson in 1899. The
Judges then enter into a learned re
view of Supreme Court decisions in
offce-holding cases and seem to show
cutie plainly that their course is
supported by a long line of prece-
dents, opinions rendered by the
States ablest jurists. The remainder
of this article is entirely the Ian
guage of the judges:
These respondents further declare
that in delivering or cOncurring IN
the opinions of the Supreme Court
in the so-called "ofice- holding cases,
they we're actuated solely by a
dominating sense of duty and gov
erned by w~ell-settled principles OF
law. The political affiliations of the
parties in no case had the slightest
effect upon these respondents, and
as a matter of fact it appears that