The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1901-04-04

CAPT. G. n. COOKIES AISLE spEEcn
Delivers Before the senate In Behalf Of
the Judges.
Continued from last week
the precedent of enlightened coun-
tries, adopted that rule. But the
State can be sued for q claim.
think / have maintained that
Hoke vs.. Henderson was sustained
by the Supreme Court after 1868,
when the constitution was amended,
which fact 30 much stress was laid
upon by the prosecution. think
have satisfied you all that Hoke W..
Henderson Was the law before that.
l have never seen . judge or jury
to whom | would not have been
willing to submit this case.
You lawyers in this House know
/ am speaking the truth as to these
office-hOlding cases. To hold these
responsible after this long line of
decisions have cited Is wrong. The
list Of cases, which are precedents
for their action is unprecedented and
unparalleled. If you are going to
impeach these judges fer UNFOLDING
this well-established principle why
do you lay your hands on two of
these judges. Why not all Of them?
In Wood va. Bellamy, when DEM
ocrst was in, all the judges sustained
HOke vs.. Henderson This may
have been a coincidence. Every one
Of the four living judges and the
dead judge sustained Hoke VIZ. Hen
dersOn.
1t was all right when you were
keeping DR.. Murphy in the Western
asylum. 1t was all right to keep
DIR. Miller in the Eastern asylum.
Praise went up over the State for
these non-partisan judges when they
upheld Hoke vs. Henderson then.
But what since HOke vs. Henderson
kept Democrats out. Then it began
to be partisan. Then the assaults
were made on this doctrine-made
by the same people who praised it
before.
If you are fair and honest in this
proceeding, why did you publish
and scatter these charges to the
world and only prefer charges against
two of these judges? Why did you
not include Judge Montgomery?
The attempt to break the force of
Judge Montgomery's testimony by
the cross-examination that resulted
yesterday meets with my disappro-
baton. My manhood rebels against
it. He is man of character and If
he has no political party back of
him. 1 am behind him, because he
has been the friend of my youth.
My friend, Gen. Osborne, said
yesterday he would not hang a dog
upon such evidence. The chairman
Of the Board of Managers complain
ed Of this language. 1t might be
conceded that the language was not
classical, but we stand by the pro-
position.
They say the judges ought to be
impeached. They say that Judge
Clark had been denied the privilege
even Of expressing his views in q
protest or something of the kind.
The Chief Justice said the writ
was not an order Of the court, but
he said he did not disavow any res
possibility. Now don't say any
more that these judges were twist.
ing and shifting. 1t is too big a
case to bring in such contention as
that.
Maj. Guthrie grew very eloquent
over the information that the high
est court was in wrangle. am
not saying anything about the judges
individually. But these two respon
dents conducted themselves with
credit on the bench and on the wit
ness stand as the evidence here
shows.
Then comes page 1 regret to re
fer to in this trial.
1t is judge of the Supreme
Court advising the Treasurer not te
obey the mandate Of the court. He
says l told him if he did that there
would be three empty seats Ovel
Iyonder. Listen Senators, lister
Senators, as North Carolinians.
am talking to you. Has there eve
been a time in your life that tina,
communication or threat to 20,
would not have reused your blood
The leading associate justice in time
of service, the only justice Their
with q dominant party behind him
threatening three judges Of the Su
preme Court.
There was nothing that touched
= me more than one thing yesterday
The press played upon it. The,
9 came here expecting to hear sensa
tional things when Judge Clark wa
On the stand. Oh, they said the d.
Tense showed its weakness when |
= failed to cross examine Judge Clarf
3 We counsel reached over to the re-
pondents yesterday and asked th
chief justice if we should cross ex'
!, mine Judge Clark. He said: an,
have no fight to make on Jude
81 Clark. He is member of the 81
preme Court as we'll as myself"
II We have met your charges an
we defy them. We have tried
answer them respectfully.
We believe these judges are goin
+ lack in association with Judg,
It Clark and Montgomery. It is rigl
K that they should. They have lie
than two years to serve on the benc
d We want them to 60 back in ha
J. mony. Had we listened to SON
d advice we could hove amused an