The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-04-18
CAMPBELL
And THE; !. {; LAW !. ..I''I.|,|
Legal .Snag IS Struck M l:;lt IN the the
Famous Amherst Case.
THE ACTION Of ! ] THE i 4. f HOUSE J.'1
Senate Courts Of Justice Committee
Questions It's Legality-Faalluure
to Enter Charge Upon
the journal. y
THE ACTION, OF THE HOUSE

the Senate Committee for Courts OF
Justice held long session behind c'oseu le''
doors yesterday afternoon, ostensiply "A 5ta 20
nix q date for taking up the Cafnppell p'
case, referred to It BY the Senate IN the
informal discussion In the committee y
Is said that tho point was made that the
House. ia It's actor failed to obey the
constitutional mandate that N such a a
proceeding the cause for the renoVal o.
the fudge must be entered on the Jour-
nal of the House, and that the Elouse,fln IN
H tra nsmItting to the Senate the Joint reso-
luton passed byIit, failed to state therein Ell,
the causes for removal OF the jud ge. sas
There was no discussion Of the subject
IN the sense OF formal speeches, but
rnerelv a. conversational conference, With
h free exchange OF views by the Sena-
tors composing the committee. and that
in this 1t was claimed that the House
journal OF the day, on which the re-
moval resolutions were passed, did not
contain statement OF the causes OF
removal.
Law on the Subject.
t1ero n the section OF the Constitution
snrovidng the method Of removing judges.
{ the terms OF which, It Is claimed. have
mot been fully complied With
3 section 1ot-Judges may bo a removed
from office for cause, by q concurrent
vote OF both houses OF the General AS
sembly; but majority OF all the mem
bers elected to each house must concur =
in such vote. and the cause of rem oyal
shall be entered upon the journal Of each
house. The Judge against whom the
{ General Assembly may be about TO pro-
ceed shall have notice thereof accom-
panied by "A copy Of the causes ale geo
for his removal, !. at least twenty h days pc pc
fore the day on which either house Of the ,l''
General Assembly shall act thereo on.
The clause .'and the causes OF removal
shall be entered upon the journal Of each
house, IS the one fwhich8ittis claimed By
nearly ali the members OF the committee
has not been complied with. The dis
cusslon In the committee room was Sc
cret; and very little was given out by
the members concerning 1t.
No Specific Charges.
From what could be CLEANED from mem
bers OF the committee however. It ap-S
pear; that the resolutio OF the House
sent to the Senate for Its concurrence
does not contain the specific charges for.
which the House voted to remove the
Amherst Judge. and Furthermore that
such causes for removal were not entered
on the journal on the day the resolution
was passed. How we'll founded these
claims may be. that was tho statement
that came from the committee room.
Certainly the committee came to no
conclusion and adjourned until next
Thursday to resume consideration Of the
after.
Granting that the contentious Of the
House committee are based upon posi-
tive knowledge of the facts stated. the
question that naturally arises Is. What
is the remedy? One Senator, who is a
member OF the committee. stated late
In the afternoon, after the meeting. that
Sit(the Senate voted to nom concur In the
resolution OF the House. that body might
then reconsider the resolution and amend
1T 30 as to cure the defects and then
again pass II and transmit It to the
Senate for its concurrence. 1t seems to
be agreed among lawyers that the two
houses must agree ms I O the causes for
removal in order that they may be en-
tered uponlthe journals Of both bodies
Any Time Would Answer.
IN this connection a we'll known member
of the House. who Is a lawyer by educa-
sion. stated last night that he saw no
reason why the House might not al any
time enter the causes OF removal on Its
journal, He further contended that the
constitutional provision did not state at
what time the entry on the journal must
be made. and that the House, not being
able alone to remove. could not state
what tho causes of removal were until
tho other house had concurred in It's
action. or until they had agreed on the
causes for removal Suppose the Senate
adopted but two of the causes OF re-
noval embraced In the action Of the
House. while the latter body had voted
Continued on Tenth Page.)