The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-03-23
A GREAT SPEECH
BY Mr.. BUSBEE
The Second Argument For
the Prosecution.
SPOKE FOR THREE HOURS
The Opening Argument For the De-
Tense Made by Capt. Cooke.
PATTERSON AND DAVIDSON TODAY
The Prospects Now Are That the End Of the
Case Win Hardly be Reached Before the
End Of Next Week. The Speeches
Made on Yesterday.

Made on Yesterday.
The Impeachment trial is now draw
ing as rapidly toward close as the
lengthy speeches CT counsel will per-
NIT.
So far three of the Dozen lawyers in
the case have spoken, leaving just three
times as many more to speak.
Maj. Guthrie, who opened the argu-
ment for the prosecution on Thursday
finished his remarks yesterday morning
at 1890, having spoken in all four and
half hours. 1t was a strong speech,
learned, dignifed and to the point
He was followed by Capt. Chas. NJ.
Cooke. who opened the argument for
the defense. He spoke just exactly
three hours, concluding his speech at
1850. His remarks were much enjoyed
by those who heard them. AT times they
sparkled with humnr,e at others they
scftened with pathos or bristled with
strong legal arguments, but always he
spoke entertainingly.
At the afternoon session. from to
6, Mr. Chas. M. Busbee addressed the
court making the second speech for
the prosecution. Tt was, beyond all
question, one of the ablest and most
convincing speeches that has yet been
made on the impeachment question.
On it's conclusion Mr.. Busbee was
warmly congratulated by his associates
in the case, by Senators and by the
people in the Hobbies and galleries All
united in pronouncing it a great speech,
and there can be no doubt that it will
have a powerful effect upon the decis-
ion of the case.
In its delivery Mr.. Bllsbee held him
self we'll in hand. He was cool, DELHI
crate and always logical. He had stud
led closely every phase of the case
and his familiarity with it was Won
derful and the array Of argument pre-
scented by him seemed absolutely unan-
swerable.
Today Mr.. Lindsay Patterson will
speak for the defense and Col. Thee. F.
close the week with seven lawyers still
to be heard from. 1t is safe to say,
therefore, that an end of the argument
cannot be reached before the latter
part of next week.
GUTHRIE FINISHES HIS SPEECH.
When the court met yesterday morning
10 Senator'S, answered to the roll-call.
Maj. Guthrie then resumed and con-
GUIDED his argument.
In beginning his speech, Maj Guthrie
called attention to the irregularities in
the record of White VS.. Auditor. In
this connection he read from Belmont
vs.. Riley, II N c., ESQ, as follows:
THE summons must be made return
able to the regular term of the Superior
court; not having been so made return
able, the Judge at Chambers did not
acquire jurisdiction and the action must
be dismissed.
Maj. Guthrie, commenting on this de-
csion, said:
This case was thoroughly argued. Fol
the plaintiff there appeared Reverdy
Johnson, the great constitutional lawyer
Mr.. Budd. of Philadelphia and Richars
Badger, who was of counsel for Holden IL
his impeachment trial, and Judge Bynun
rendered the decision.
This was as late as 1867 and every
body knows that the law in regard II
mandamus has not been changed since.
The case of Rogers VS.. Treasurer o.
Durham county, 90 N C. 129, was also
cited and read from as follows:
This action is to enforce a money
demand. and should have been brought
to Superior court in term The sum
mons was improperly returnable before
the Judge at Chambers. He had no juris-
diction. The action must be dismissed fol
want of Jurisdiction.
''In this White case the Respondents
were bound to take judicial notice that
il was not heard at term time,
continued Maj Guthrie. 1T was a case
in which Judge Starbuck had no jurisdic-
ton and the court had notice of that fact
They were also put upon notice that
this was an action for money demand
and could not be heard except at term
of the court. If they had been as eager
to find and do the law as they seem te
have been to evade and defeat it, they
would not be here today.
Let me in conclusion say word K
Won about motive. They plead to you that
thew had no wrong Eaotives in this matter
mont misunderstood the cause of the peo-
pie In this case. These judges are ar