The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-03-17
The HOOKER INQUIRY BEGUN,
MS COUNSEL THROW EVERY Oh
STACLE ~ THE JTiI.
They say some One Should Prefer Charges
and Insist That Copies % Documents
From washington Shauld he verified
inquiry Delayed Untf TUESDAY Next.

ALBANY, March i0.-If Supreme Court
| Justice Warren b. Hooker Of FredOnia,
had any burning desire to have the
charges made against him thoroughly
investigated he certainly did not show
! II to-day. Instead Of wishing TO have
the inquiry brought TO speedy determine
! ton, tho attorneys for Justice Hooker
threw every impeachment possible In the
way Of the Assembly judiciary Committee.
| The result OF this was that the first session
Of the committee resulted In doing nothing
more than to adjourn to next Tuesday
to begin where il had intended TO begin
! to-day.
Two Of Justice Hooker's attorneys are
employed by the two railroads In which
Benjamin R. Odells personal friend and
] financial adviser, Edward H. Hartman,
! h Interested. These attorneys are Lewis
L. Carr, the regular attorney Of the Della
ware and Hudson Railroad, and John b.
Stanchheld Of ElmiTa, who looks out Tor
! the Erie Railroads interests in the egisla-
! tive halls. His third counsel Is eIJustice
| William NJ. Goodrich Of Brooklyn.
| When Justice Hooker wrote his letter
| to his friend, Speaker y. Fred Nixon,
asking that the charges against him be
| investigated, It was remarked that tho
! Justice undoubtedly thought that the
/ letter would be referred TO a committee,
which would smother it and nothing
| further would be heard from it. The re-
suits Of to-day's session Of the committee
| showed that Justice Hooker Is very much
/ opposed to having his conduct or himself
| investigated, as objections we're made
to the entire proceedings by his attorneys.
The Assembly Judiciary Committee was
represented by It's attorney, former Deputy
! Attorney General Henry b. Conan. Will
liam p. Goodelle Of Syracuse and S. c.
Huntington Of Pulaski appeared for the
State Bar Association, Frank W. Stevens
for the jamestown Bar Association. Wallace
Macfarlane for the New York City Bar
Association and Herbert p Ketcham for
the Brooklyn Bar Association,
At the outset Mr.. Stanchfeld showed
that Mr.. Hooker was not inclined to have
the investigation continued After Mr..
Conan had opened the case by stating what
the investigation would be and read Justice
Hooker's letter asking for such an in
svestigation Mr., StanChfeld made a lengthy
argument He asked whether the inyesti-
cation was TO be continued under section
II or section IS OF the Judiciary article
OF the Constitution. The former relates
to removal by the Legislature and the
latter to removal by impeachment pro-
ceedings. Mr.. Stanchfeld said this was
most important
Then he rected at great length that he |
and his associates were in the dark as TO |
how they should proceed and what was |
admissible and inadmissible evidence. |
He dilated upon the fact that there we're |
no charges preferred and seemed to think
an injustice was being done to Mr. Hooker,
who was present and who would have 10
60 through a proceeding the course Of
which he had no knowledge. Mr.. Stanch-
field asked some one to prefer charges
against TIE Judge.
Chairman Fish interrupted TO say that the
investigation was being conducted upon
the invitation u Mr. Hooker through a
letter he had directed TO the Speaker Of
the Assembly and that that was charge
enough.
Mr.. StanchRed said that Justice Hooker
wrote the letter when he was smarting
under the notoriety and gossip Of the re-
ports In the newspapers and seemed 20
convey the impression that in writing
the letter he had not weighed the con-
sequences.
Mr.. Conan informed Mr. Stanch6eld.
jurisdiction under section 10, that the in
vest CATION would he under neither section
but would be along the lines Of that he
fore the State Bar Association and would
90 into the matter thoroughly.
Both Judge Goodrich and Mr.. Carr Joined
in MIR. StanChGelds request that charges
Of some nature he preferred against the
Judge.
Chairman Fish declined TO do 80 and
then objection was made that the investl-
cation hninU Ttan mndaV !
Of Justice HOOkers counsel and that the [
committee had no jurisdiction. MIR. Carr |
was insistent upon knowing whether il
could he claimed that, providing impeach- !
Justice Hooker had been heard in his own ,
defence In relation TO the charges and there
fore II would he unnecessary TO give him |
another hearing after the committee made !
its report TO the Legislature. This the
could not answer, saying that |
the investigation was being held at the |
request Of Justice Hooker and would there 1
fore he along the lines indicated 10y the |
counsel for the committee
Mr.. Conan then started the investiRa- !
ton by saying he offered In evidence a
copy OF a letter sent on Oct. H. 1898. by the
First Assistant Postmaster General TO the
Postmaster at Fredonia. This was in re-
lation TO the appointment OF Fred p. Ball
as a laboreT In the Fredonia Post Ofioe
Judge Goodrich made an objection to its
being admitted, but II was explained TO |
him that Il was to be introduced by consent
Then Mr.. Carr created the sensation Of
the day. He announced that under a stipu-
lation he had consented Ia waive the OBJ
jections 20 the copies Of the documents,
but, he added, he had also said that he
would not consent to them being admitted
In evidence until the defence had had an
opportunity 10 60 20 Washington and verify
the copies with the originals. He had not
received his copies until Tuesday night
and yesterday afternoon, and no chance /
to make the Notifications had been afforded
him.
Mr.. Fish assured him that the copies had
been verified by the Copyist, who assured
the committee Of their accuracy.
Mr.. Carr. however, would not reoede In |
this matter one iota. Il meant an adjourn
ment OF some days, but Mr.. Carr said this
was nothing when the honor and character
Of a Justice OF the Appellate Court Of the |
Supreme Court were IT issue.
An executive session OF the committee
was,caled and when the committee returned
TO the chamber Mr. Fish asked Mr.. Carr
II he would not proceed and permit his
representative 10 60 to Washington, and
II he found there were any mistakes In the
copies they could he corrected later. IL
was important that the copies should he
produced in evidence first, before the oral
examination Of any Of the witnesses could