The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-03-19
HEWAS ONLY "ADVlSED"
Some Sharp Things That Were Said
by Judge Montgomery.
TOO MANY POLITICAL OPINIONS ALREADY
Judge Furches viii be cross-E Examined This
Morning by Mr.. POu. Then Judges
Douglas and Montgomery
Will go on the Stand.

The defense in the impeachment trial
yesterday "Iaid it's latter" All after this
will be repetition.
Judge Bynum, who is considered the
strongest and most brilliant lawyer ON
that side spoke yesterday, opening the
case for the defense and discussing
every point of law in it.
Chief Justice Furches, who has been
heralded as the star witness against
impeachment, went on the stand and
told the story that his friends had be-
iieved would turn the tide in his favor
and convince all who heard him.
But after all was said and done, both
by counsel and by witness, the skies
were scarcely the brighter for the i'm
peached. Their friends were detected
over the prospect and the Managers
and their attorneys expressed them
selves as highly pleased with the re-
suit Of the days developments.
And Chief Justice Furches is still to
be cross
His testimony on the direct examine
ton was as follows:
l. A review of the decisions in the
"office-holding cases.
2. Confederation Of Col. Kenan's tes-
timony as to the circumstances attend
ing the issuance of the mandamus.
B. Relation of some interesting things
said in confarepca al,o,,+ Tud~o c,,,
and his opinions, which Judge Mont
gomery denominated as political
This morning at e o'clock Judge
Furches will go back en- the stand for
cross-examination by Mr. Pou.
After him Judge Douglas will take
the stand. He will lie followed by Judge
Montgomery
And after hi mthe experts will be
rendered TO the court Many of them
have already arrived and some of them
are at work in the lobby.
JUDGES FURCHES' TESTIMONY.
At the afternoon SESSION of the court
the roll call showed AZ Senators pres
ent.
The defense now began its evidence.
Chief Justice Furches being the first Wit
ness sworn. He was examined by No,
Long.
The witness said, in reply to questions
that he was born in Davie county where
he lived until 1866. Then he moved to
Statesville. He was engaged in the prac
tice of law, from 1858 to 1875. when he
was appointed judge of the Superior court
to succeed Judge Mitchell, resigned He
held that office for three years, then
went back to active practice until his
election as Associate Justice in 1895. In
January, 1901, he was appointed Chief
Justice.
"Since you have been upon the bench
how many cases involving the title or
the emolument to an office has been be-
fore the court?''
"At the February 1896 term-my first
term on the Supreme bench there were
two: Ewart VS.. Jones, involving title
to the iudgeship of the western criminal
district. and Cook VS.. Meares, involving
title to judgeship of the Eastern dis
trict The first was decided in favor of
Ewart. Chief Justice Faircloth writing the
opinion In the second case we decided
in favor of Meares, and l wrote the opin-
ion. These opinions were unanimous. The
next case was Stanford VS.. Ellington, title
to State Librarian. l wrote the opinion
and it was in favor of Ellington. This
opinion also was unanimous. The court
was at this time composed Of the follow
ing judges: Chief Justice Faircloth, Jus
tices Avery, Clark, Furches and Mont.
gcmery.
Tho next case was Wood VS.. Bellamy
in the other cases, except that Judge
Avery had been succeeded by Judge Doug
las, and all succeeding cases were decided
b. the court thus constituted. In WOOD
VS. Bellamy, and its companion. the ques-
ton involved was as to who should con
troll the three insane asylums. The opin-
ion was written by Judge Montgomery and
was put upon the doctrine in Hoke VS..
Henderson. The opinion was unanimous
The result of this decision was the de-
feat of officials elected by the Legislature
and the institutions were kept in the
hands of the former managers. "
The witness here explained at some
length the principle on which these opin-
ions were based He continued:
1.-THE next case that l remember was
Ward VS.. Elizabeth City. This was an
action involving not title to office but
the salary of an office. 1t was decided
for the defendant, Judge Clark writing
the opinion. There was no dissent.
THE next case was Caldwell VS.. Will
son. Governor Russell had suspended
the Wilson's from the office OF Railroad
Commissioners. They declined to surren-
der. and the court was called upon. 1t
decided in favor of Caldwell. Judge Doug
las wrote the principal opinion, Judge
Clark wrote a short opinion and Chief
Justice Faircloth dissented.
THE next case was Cromartie vs. Par
kerr This was an action brought to
have the offices of the defendants de-
clared vacant because they, as commits
siopers of Bladen county had elected
themselves school commissioners. We
decided against the defendants on the
ground that the two Offices were incom-s