The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1901-02-19

w. IA-1
Mecklenburg, said he had oS
his mind and would have f.
merely for the resolution Of
believing the judges we re- n. lug
of corruption and that thew q 20~T
not be impeached for a mi.Q
law.
MI. Whitaker, of FORSYTH
the discussion Saturday. s,o PTp'
for impeachment.
Mr.. Marlborough, of Frgo,,
made a strong argument aeain~t~Y
parchment. The constitution is%
supreme law of the State
Legislature has a right to vio,.4
In 1892 a Legislature Of North ~
lima appointed TheophiIus Whit,
an office for a term of f0ur
In 1899 another Legislature was -,
ted and passed an act, d~e,ionoa
take away from Theophilus WIZ,
his Office, which was his nron..
under the constitution ana Igr.,
North Carolina. When d Lnci.,
ture has entered into contract 49,
a man tofulfl the duties of anv o4n
no Legislature has a cOn~titn+o,
right to GUST him from of9oo
starve him out. What is the oo.J
of the proposed extreme acto,
Has any public scandal been not.3g
Has life and liberty been endanoo,,
by the Supreme Court? Never
history has there been an imnasdl
ment in which there was not q hid
crime Or misdemeanOr, which bs
attracted public attention and rona
the wrath of the people. Can i'll
possible that here in the dawn
the twentieth century Of Christie
civilization, judges Of the SuDren
Court are to be impeacLeI Tor a
error of law, or for a case a5n
which lawyers differ? Wlats N
result of the ''high crime or mis3s
meanOr?' Simply a nan who'll s
been appointed to an office kept ID
office and drew the pay.
Mr. Blalock, of StanIy, thoughtt
constitution about all we had leA
He favored impeachment.
Mr.. Patterson, Of Robson, spo5
next. He said he could not agrs
with the report Of the sub comm
tee on judiciary, either in its repu
Of facts or law. This proposition I
fraught with more danger to I'd
people of North Carolina than a1
other that has come before Us. lad
surprised. We are not stopping
think. They say we are sitting as
grand jury let us remember ii
charge: "YOu shall present no OBJ
for envy, hatred or malice LetI
consider. I was a member of ii
Legislature Of 1899 and [ fear that
have resentment against the judy.
of the Supreme Court. Have I'd
hatred against them? [ fear tbl
you have because of some of tbG
acts. Are we doing this for hatrel
or for malice? Let us consider. v.
have made pledges to the people /
North Carolina, we have promised
work to stop political strife a1E
hatred. Shall we keep them; 70.
decided that because the 5upren
Court decided political question
different from what you believed
they should be impeached. That
the way the people of North CarollI
are going to look at it.
Mr., Stewart, of Harnett, made a
imprisoned speech in favor Of in.
parchment. He thought that t5i
peoples rights we're always t~rlttere
away gradually, and that the sligbI
est error should be severely RI
buked.
Mr.. Sheets, Rep of Davie, paid
high tribute to Chief Justice Furch7l
ability, integrity and high charactaI
He was the first Republican to maS
himself heard upon the matter, u
the members heretofore mentioneI
in this article being Democrats.
Representative Jenkins, Of Graz
vile, next addressed the Hous.
making a rather humorous talk. y
favored impeachment.
Representative Whitaker, Of GuJ|
ford, then spoke, testifying to tI
character of Judge Douglas,
constituent of his, though Of difsI
ent political faith. He thought iDI
parchment unjust and unwise.
AT 2 o'clock it looked as if d v0p