The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-02-15
IN PARCHMENT RE-
SOlu ION DISCUS
Stu IN THE HOUSE
Continued from 1st page.)

take it that every other member here
today foels much the same way We are
not responsible for the conduct of these
judges, nor must we be swayed in a mat
ter Of this kind by sympathy, nor because
one Of the accused is an old man. Hav
ing taken on himself the duties of office
and he cannot shirk responsibility for his
acts therein
THE QUESTION INVOLVED.
In concluding his remarks, Judge Al
len said:
II desire TO present this resolution to
the House. There is no difference of
opinion as to the facts. We all agree
that two provisions of the Constitution
and two acts of the Legislature have been
violated. There is no difference of opin-
ion there. The only question is, What
shall we do about it,"
Referring to Judge Connor's resolution
of Protest, Judge Allen said:
Before I'd vote for that resolution,
I'd vote to do nothing. 1 can't put my
self in the attitude of saving that these
Judges have violated the Constitution yet
Judge Allen referred to the plea that
the Judges had made mistake, not know
ng il, and said:
Ignorance of the law does not excuse
he humbIest citizen in the land and GER
tainly It should not excuse those in high
place. II you are going to excuse those
who do not know the law, then excuse
first those who have little or no opportu-
nd of
the highest court in the land who not
only have the opportunity. but whose
duty it is to know it
SPEECH BY MR.. STUBBS.
Judge Aliens speech consumed forty
five minutes. He was followed by Mr.
Stubbs, OF Martin. who spoke for an hour
81 opposition 10 impeachment.
Il am opposed to any action on this
matter by this body said Mr.. Stubs,
and / think it right and proper that
/ should give my reasons therefor"
He spoke eloquently of the Importance
of the question under consideration, add
ing:
This is great question. 1t is the
greatest question that you or | may ever
be called upon TO consider"
The committee. he thought. had dore
it's full duty in the report il had made
And" he went on to say. they have
presented 10 this Legislature a series of
facts that no man disputes, but they are
facts that l most respectfully demur TO
as justifying the conclusions of neither
fact nor law arrived at in this case"
MIR. Stubs argued that it would be nc
cessary for members of the Honse, in or
der to vote for the resolution, to find two
things: First that the judges had COM
mitted an error of judgment. and sec
end that they had done so wilfully and
cCrruptly. He pointed out that the de-
o;sions in the White case, and other polit-
ical cases. wer~ law and would be until
they were reversed"
The speaker now went into a discus
sion of the legal points involved in the
impeachment. The section of the consti-
tuition in regard to claims against the
State he argued was an enlarging statute
and not a restricting one; that when it
was passed it gave the holder of a claim
a remedy that he did not before have.
us this a claim against the State?"
Mr.. Stubs asked, and added: "A claim
against the State is begun in the Supreme
court Of North Carolina How was this
suit of Whites commenced? 1t was tried
ty before Judge Starbuck. and comes
up ON appeal. It was controversy sub
mitted without action ON facts agreed to-.
What was Judge Starbuck's decision? lie
lot only said the act turning White out
of office was void but he went further
and declared that he was entitled to the
salary in the old act ($75 month";. The
Supreme court did not go so far, it gave
him only $40 a month So you see by
this decision the State actually saves
money. Yet Judge Starbuck is not in
Guided in these proceedings"
HOKE VS.. HENDERSON,
Here Mr.. Stubs discussed the doe
trne of IIoks VS.. Henderson running
through all these cases and added:
when the Supreme court used this
doctrine TO keep Democrats Like DR.. Wood
aud others in office there was no talk
of impeachment. but when the doctrine
Is invoked for Republicans the case is
quite different
THE only difference between the la st
Legislature and the fusion Legislature
is that the Fusionists were open and
bold in trying TO turn us out, while we
were undetermined and a little more
astute when we went about trying to take
from 2 man tie rights conferred on him
for four years.
The decision in the White case he
termed simply decision TO the effect
that a man can't be starved cat cf IL
iicc." and said it followed a long 'lcnd
OF legal thought from the ti:re Of Chef
Justice Daniel
Mr.. Stubs laid down the proposition
hat the court. having declared White
entitled to pay was in duty bound TO
exhaust all it's power TO St cure FOR h':H
iae money. In this connection he argu I'd
that the oyster funl. from which it VAS
ami could only - pail, was . spe'
appropriation set aside for just sUfh
claims. and that in the payment OF the
White claim the constitution had IN 20
way been violated.
.;ust here Mr. Stubs indirectly paid his
respects to the election law. He insisted
that the court had acted with perfect
honesty and frankness in issuing the man
damus. adding:
The court knew what sort of Legis-
laiure we would have here this time,
They knew something of our election law
AMI they knew as well as you and | that
under il this Legislature would be over
wheilningly Democratic
Again coming back TO the office holding