The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1902-04-29

experiment IL made. VIII prove rs utS-
astrous I'm politics as in a
. He Is not morally fit for he place.
I charge that Judge Clark has sat In
Judgment on cases which he htmSelf
had previously instigated. and conceal
ed his connection with them. It H. 4
well known rule Of law that a new trial
may be had IL one Juror out of the
twelve can be shown to have had any
interest. however remote, in the case,
or to have formed and expressed decti-
ed opinion about the merits Of the case
before the trial Yet here we have a
Judge OF the court OF last resort insti-
eating cases with full knowledge thai
they would come up for hearing In his
court land hiding his connection with
them.) gravely sitting in Judgment on
the very cases he himself had inspired
and writing judgments and rendering
decisions with all the innocence OF viz
tue. There is no parallel in the his
tory Of the judiciary in North Carolina
] charge that Judge Clark prepared
q paper which vas submitted and ten
dered for the use and approval OF Gov
ernor Russell. giving the reasons for
the removal OF the two railroad COM
m~issioners. Ohio Wilson and myself.
when he had every reason TO know that
the matter would come before him for
| decision as associate justice OF the SUI
( preme court % North Carolina; that
A NHiS laESA NaS pItp1iSa ny Juukt
Clark after personal conferences with
| Governor Russell and Senator Butler:
| typewriter. with frequent corrections
and interlineati0ns in Judge Clark's
handwriting; that after the railroad
commissioners were removed by Gov
n Russell, and while they were re-
sisting such removal in the court. Judge
| Clark wrote in his own handwriting a
letter to Governor Russell, of which
| the following Is the substance
There was first a memorandum that
the letter was confidential, or a request
to destroy. 1t then stated that he
Judge Clark mad previously sent to
the governor a paper giving the rea-
sons for the relnoval of the railroad
commissioners; that the paper was in
typewriting. but had nterlineations in
his Judge Clark's) handwriting; that
the paper had not been adopted by the
governor, but he now heard that the
commissioners intended to object TO
his sitting on the case when il came
up for hearing before the supreme
court, therefore il was important to
destroy the paper referred TO, as il was
the only evidence of his connection
with the matter, and requested Gov
ernor Russell TO destroy the paper, if
in existence, and to destroy the letter.
At that time / had no valid proof
that Judge Clark had acted as pro-
moter or inStigator of my removal and
could not therefore object to his sit
ting On the case. Having, as he
thought, removed the evidence of his
connection with the case in it's begin
ming, he did sit in judgment on the
case, wrote the opinion of the court re-
moving me from the office, and was
particularly active in having the mar
shall seize the office by force of arms,
thus depriving me of my office pending
an appeal to the United States court.
If Judge CLARK cares to deny the
allegations l have made, full proof of
my charges is III reach and will be pro-
duced.
In like manne l charge tina he in
spired or originated what is known as
the free-paSS indictments, and after
wards sat on them in judgment. How
many other cases he may have origi
mated or suggested and afterwards ad-
judged, there Is no way of finding put:
but enough is known to warrant the
belief that there have been very many.
In the Gattis Vs. Kilgo suit, heard at
this term, his connection with the case
was SO plain that it could not be hid.
therefore he refrained from sitting on
1t. In Jackson versus Corporation
Commission, heard also at this term,
the reverse is true; it was hid $50 he
thought) and ne sat on the case. Re
4 AOAA Aio ~ III oNhSol sui IL IL ii TX
nificant fact thct Judge Clark appear
ed before Chairman McNeill and Com
missioner Rogers privately, before the
had assessed the railroads for taxation,
and insisted that they should advance
values to the very figures Sheriff Jack
son uses in his complaint.
It appears that he is not content to
be simply a judge. He wants to run
every department of the state govern
1 ~ ont n-1 50
he very nearly 5Icceeded-with the last
enthusiastically awhile.
Senator Simmons chairman of the
state committed, Governor Aycock
Qeader of the party in the state, head
of this democratic administration,
what are you going to do about it? Is
there any bargain which makes it ne
cessary to nominate Judge Clark for
chief Justice? If not, why this gen.
eral and quiet surrender to his am
bition? There are dozens of great
lawyers in the state, any one of whom
would fill the position with honor to
himself and credit to his state; men
whose democracy cannot be question
ed, who have never surrendered to the
enemy and who have nothing in their
records to hide from democrats. These
are the candidates for the associate
justiceships: Judge Common, Judge
Brown, Judge Moore, Mr.. Walker and
Mr.. Lockhart; or Judge hepherd
James II .Merrimon, Charles NJ. Bus
bee, NJ. FL. Justice, w. A Hoke, b. F.
Long. Mr.. PruGen, F. A. Woodward.
T. F. Davidson. ]. T. Morehead and
many others.
Senator Simmons and Governor Ay-
cock. the rank and file of the party are
looking to you for guidance and in
spiration; we have not been disap-
pointed Heretofore when we have fol-
lowed you. What do you say now? II
you think this is a fancifui complaint,
that has little behind II. and will soon
blow over, investigate for yourselves.
feel the pulse of the party. These
charges will be proven, II necessary.
Even your splendid leadership cannot
pilot democracy to victory IL encum-
bered with such a weight.
i. What did Clark ever do for the
democratic parry?
. What did he ever give OF his time,
his talents or his means to promote