New-York tribune., 1905-04-14
HOOKER CASE UNIQUE.
Legislature Mast CoastrUe COnsti-
tution---Cl,psiRg Arguments.

Albany April 13-GThe legislature will have
TO construe for the 1SFst time in the history OF
this State. It Is said. the meaning Of the word
cause" as used IN Section II Of Article VI OF
the State constitution. in reference TO the re-
moval OF Justices Of the Supreme Court, If the
judiciary Committee OF the Assembly reports
to that body in favor Of the removal from Office
Of Justice Warren B. Hooker. It has been
urged 10 do in the argument OF the committees
counsel, ex-Deputy Attorney General Henry B.
Conan. This is the issue raised before the
committee to-day in the arguments Of counsel.
both for Justice Hooker and 1Or the bar assOcia-
tions which have been Represented at the In
vestigation Of the allegations concerning Justice
Hooker's relations with postOfface appointments
and rental transactions in connection with the
Offices at Fredonia and DunkiElE, ChautauQua
County.
The section OF the constitution involved In
the case after providing for the removal OF
Justices by concurrent resolution OF the legis-
Iature, in which az least twO-thirds Of all the
members elected to each house must concur.
adds:
But no officer shall be removed by virtue OF
this section except for cause. which shall be
entered on the Journals unless he shall have
been served with a statement Of the cause al
legged and shall have had an opportunity to be
heard.
The question urged by cOunSel IS Wnet1ler aets
even II proved. shown to have been committed
prior to the Justices elevation to the bench and
having no connection with his judicial functions
constitute cause" Of removal within the mean
ing Of the constitution. It is urgently eontended
by counsel for Justice Hooker that nothing has
been shown in the investigation even remotely
affecting his judicial conduct.
The arguments Of counsel for the accused Jus
tice. which occupied almost all OF to-day's ses-
sion Of the committee, were largely devoted to
contrOverting the contention offered yesterday
which are alleged against Justice Hooker were
sufficient to call for his removal by the legiSlat
ure. II the committee should follow the ad-
vice Of its counsel and recommend to the As
sembIy that such action be taken. 10 would be
the first time in the 120 years history OF New
York State that a proceeding was brought under
this section Of the constitution for removal OF
justice by this procedure.
1t on the basis of this absence Of precedent
that W. b. HOyt, OF Buffalo. formerly Assistant
Justice Hooker. in arguing the constitutional
question, insisted that the committee should
hesitate before recommending such action. He
said he could not find a single case where JUS
tice had been removed under this section, eS-
pecialy where there was no evidence that he
had committed any offence while on the bench or
in connection with his judicial functions.
Frank w. Stevens held in arguing for the bar
associations. that unf1tneSSs shown even by acts
committed off the bench. WAS sufficient cause
for removal, and he cited cases. including the
Isaac H. Maynard trial in 1899, in support Of his
contention.
The argument was adjourned until tomorrow
morning at $50. 1t is doubtful if the argument
Of counsel can be finished this week. even II a
session is held, as proposed on Saturday.