The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-03-24
CASE AGAINST DEUEL. UP.
NOTHING IN THE CHARGES, SAYS
HIS COUNSEL, LAUTERBACH.

The Jerome Petition Argued In the Appel
late Division by Gans-Court Refuses
to Consider the HapsoOd Record and
Puts the Hearing Over to Monday.
The petition made by William Travers
Jerome, James W. Osborne and Edward III.
Shepard for the removal Of Joseph Nd. Deuel.
from the Special Sessions bench, on the
ground that he had violated the law by
acting 90 counsel for Tom Topics while he
was on the bench, came before the Appellate
Division of the Supreme Court yesterday,
Justice Ingraham presiding.
Howard 8. Cans appeared for the petit
tioners and Edward Lauterbaoh for Deuel..
The latter wal In court, but took no part
In the proceedings.
Mr.. Cans denounced Deuel. for lending
his name, time and influence TO a publ
cation that was devoted to
scurrilous and libellous matter" Mr. Cans
said that the court could satisfy itself as
to the truth Of the charges by q perusai OF
the record In Deuel's criminal libel action
against Norman Hapgood. Ii the court
. preferred not to read that record, 6 aid Mr
Cans, it could appoint a referee TO lnVesa-
gate the charges and report. .
Mr.. Lauterbaoh said that he had not
vet prepared any formal answer as he did
not believe the court would consider the
petition seriously.
This petition" he said, sis nothing more
than a series Of unsupported allegations.
Not q fact is shown. As to the Hapgooo
case record, / am satisfied that your Honors
should read it all IL you wish, but cannon
see how that comes before the court now
We have nothing here but the petition"
This court" interrupted Justice lngra-
ham, knows nothing Of that record ana
will not consider IL. 1t is not a part OF these
proceedings, nor Is it before the court IN
| Mr.. L~auterbaoh looked p~leasedand went
| on to say that there was nowhere an aile-
cation that Deuel. had ehirked any OF his
official duties or performed them negn"
Justice InRraham finally said that he
! would give Mr.. Lauterbach until hlonoay
to put IN an answer to the petition, should
Justioe Deuel. gave out yesterday his letter
TO the committee on grievances OF the bar
Association which preceded his resigna-
ton. He said:
Under ordinary circumstance should
| welcome an inquiry by this association. l
am conscious of having given my fun time
and capacity to the public service
The mere fact that 1 am ready o answer
before the Appellate Division ought to De
a strong factor with experienced lawyers
to induce. meanwhile, suspension OF Juds-
ment and action. / know how paseless
are the cruel innuendoes forming portions
of each of the before mentioned complaints
which is bound 10 appear In O judicial investi.
CATION conducted under ordinarily unbiased
! methods.
To proceed with the pending inquiry under
these circumstances will seriously and UNI
! necessarily embarrass me. This VIII be ap-
preciated by every member OF the committee
| Some Of those who are urging this aetion
have been inspired 80 to do because Oh tue
| public effect hoped to be produced.
Justice Deuel. than requested a postpone
ment Of the Bar Assoclation.s inquiry
| When this was refused he resigned.