The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-03-03

| tineFs account of the House proceedings
and is at this time especiall'' interest
ing:
Mr.. Withers moved to reconsider the
vote by which the House adopted the res
clution impeaching Judge Jones He said
| ne did so because he did not want the
session of the Legislature prolonged He
thought this session had cost the people
/ enough and he wished to bring it to a
close. He thought the matter could be
easily dealt with next session
Mr.. Jarvis (Mr. Robinson being In the
chair next occupied the floor in opposi-
| ton to the motion.
MIR. Jarvis detailed to the House a long
| list of outrages that had been committed
| by Judge Jones. He said that the matter
| of cost should not be considered when the
question was whether the people should be
| relieved of a man who was not only
! disgrace to the bench. but TO humanity
J SC.
! Mr.. Jarvis continued for some time in
opposition TO the motion.
| Mr.. WEIGH said the people were demand
! ing an adjournment, and he did not want
any more impeachment until the next
4
of paying 100000 for impeachment of It
| Judge at this time. &C
| Mr.. Warning was in favor of reducing
the per diem of members to 81 or 81 per
day and stay here all summer if necessary
1 that these infamous officials might be
properly and justly dealt with.
| Mr.. Jarvis again took the floor insist
| ing that the House should take immediate
| Nd Mt in &c tfnr la
said that this disgraceful and abomina
| BILE conduct of Judge Jones was a matter
of public notoriety and sworn evidence of
| it was in possession of the Judiciary
Committee. He did not urge prompt ac
tion in this matter on party grounds; but
as representative of the people. As to
| the cost, the gentleman from Haywood
| (Welch) most largely overestimated it.
: Its cost, as compared TO the Holden i'm
parchment trial, could be well illustrated
| by comparison between the cost of
| four-h horse wagon and railroad, &c.
Mr.. Jarvis argued at length in opposi-
tion to the motion to reconsider. and in
! advocacy of speedy trial. &c.
In the history of that time we find
much more to the same effect, but there
! is neither room nor necessity for re-
: producing it here.
! There were. however, many inter-
esting incidents in that famous trial
that are worth their ink at this time, as
/ the trial to be held next week will
| closely track the Holden trial in all
material respects
The managers engaged in the Holden
| impeachment were seven in number.
| all young men, except Mr. Sparrow.
| the chairman, and most OF them law
! yers They were:
Thomas Sparrow, chairman, of Beau
! fort.
James G. Scott. of OnsloW.
". p WEIGH of Haywood.
T. d. Johnson, Of Buncombe.
G. Fl. Gregory, of Martin.
Jno. w Durham, Of Wilson
The counsel for the managers We're:
| Thomas Bragg Ex-Governor of North
! Carolina.
! William a. Graham, Ex-Governor
/ of North Carolina, ex-Secretary of
the Navy. and in 1852 Wing candidate for
| Vice President.
| Judge A. s. Merrimon later United
! States Senator and Chief Justice of the
/ North Carolina Supreme court.
| Governor HoIden's counsel were five in,
number:
| VIM. \. H. Smith, ex-Congressman and
later Chief Justice of the North Carolina
| Supreme court.
Nathaniel Boyden, exCOngressman.
J. Nj McCorke leading lawyer of the
West
Edward Conieland, an influential law
yer from Halifax county.
Richard Badger, then a young but
promising Raleigh lawyer.
The resolution impeaching Coy. Hol-
den was introduced in the House by
| Mr.. Strudwick on December 9th, and
| was referred to the Judiciary commit
| tee. On December 18th, it was reported
| back to the House with the recOmmen-
dation that it pass. Next day C4th) it
was adopted. The day following. the
! Senate was notified of the passage of
the resolution and later Articles of I'M
parchment eight in number) were
drawn and presented.
| On February 9th. during the trial, a
ninth Article was drawn and adopted
| by the House, charging completely on
the part of Holden with Swepson and
others in the fraudulent use Of the State
bonds. Though only ten members, to
use the words of the Daily Sentinel
| ndu lace 10 NOlG dEdIilSL tic new
! count" nothing seems ever to have
come of it; as it was not argued in the
| trial nor submitted TO vote by the SEN
ators when the verdict was taken.
| The defendant was given thirty days
to make answer to the Articles of I'M
| parchment and prepare his case. The
trial began on February End with a
| speech by Chairman Sparrow, of the
| Board of Managers. The newspapers
OF that day say it was "a great speech"
! After Mr.. Sparrow's speech the taking
Of evidence for the prosecution was
! commenced tt
First the evidence of documentary
! character was introduced, then the ex-
amination' OF witnesses began. This
] lasted just twenty days and on the end
| the case for the respondent (Holden)
VAS opened by speech by Mr. CONG
| land who, writes q newspaper CORE
| Spondent, 'spokr for mere than three
/ hours and a half. with great force and
! impassioned oratcry. rejecting much
| credit on his legal and oratorical abil-
tiles, and meriting the eternal gratitude
of his guilty client
In his opening speech Mr.. Conigland
paid the following beautiful tribute IN