The Bridgeport evening farmer. [volume] (Bridgeport, Conn.) 1866-1917, 1911-09-20
JUDGE FOSTER
REPLIES TO
THE PASTORS
His Connection With Steeple-
chase Company as Counsel
Began Two Years Before
Elevation to Bench

Judge Carl Foster of the City Court
makes statement, relative to his
connection with the Steeplechase
Company, as its counsel and replying
TO certain accusations by the Bridge
port Pastors Association. Judge Fos-
ter says:
: i am not blind to the attacks that
have recently been made upon me by
the Pastors association in the
press and pulpit, nor to the editorial
appearing in the Morning Telegram
IN it's issue of this date; But I am
strongly of the opinion that newspa-
per controversy accompl1shes little
other than bringing notoriety to those
engaged therein: and for such motor
iety and advertising I have no desire.
Since the integrity of myself and the
court over which / have the honor to
preside have been called in question,
feel that without discussing the fair
ness or unfairness, dignity or lack of
dignity, sincerity or lack of sincerity
of certain individuals and without en-
tering into the merits of cases that
have during the past summer arisen
In the city court, ought publicly to
state the facts on two questions.
First, / became connected with the
Bridgeport Steeplechase company in
May, 1905. 1 became connected with
the city court on March 1st. 1907.
Even naQ S6VeIcQ my COnIlSCliOIi
with the Bridgeport Steeplechase
company after becoming connected
with the city court, would not even
then have felt that / could properly
act in any matter in which the
Bridgeport Steeplechase company was
called in to sit upon one of the cases
in which the Bridgeport. Steepechase
company was defendant. was criti-
.cized because he acted in that case,
when, as it was alleged, he had some
Years ago acted as counsel for GER
tain persons who sold liquor. Even
more would have been subject-and
properly so-to criticism had sever
ed my connection from the Bridge
port Steeplechase company and then
acted as judge in case which the
Bridgeport Steeplechase company was
defendant.
when, therefore, the Bridgeport
S3eepIechase company became a de-.
zfendant in the city court, was dis
qualified from acting upon the case
by legal business which had trans
acted prior to the time that I was
connected with the city court. Let
II therefore be plainly understood
that I was not employed by the
Bridgeport Steeplechase company on
account of my connection with the
Bridgeport Steeplechase company
before my connection with the city
court
= Second, when the Bridgeport Stee-
plechase company, or anyone con-
nected Herewith. was brought before
The court, 1 declined to have any
thing whatsoever to do with the case.
Following the recognized practice and
custom of all judges of all courts in
our state. whenever cases arise Wnere
the relations of the Judge to the par
ties in interest, either present or past,
are such as would render his action
subject to q possible criticism, not
only declined to act officially in these
cases. but 1 declined also to act in any
manner whatsoever, as attorney or as
counsel for my client in these cases.
4 stood entirely aloof from the whole
matter. Had I called in the same
Judge on each of the three cases. and
such judge had grossly erred in his
decision of the. three cases, there
might have been some ground for
suspicion of the action of such judge
or of myself The three cases, how
ever. were decided by three different
iudeesz from three different cities.
Criticism of these gentlemen is there
fore unfair; and fail to see how I
personally could have more fairly
acted than I did act.
The merits OF the questions brought
before the city court in these cases
Il decline now, as / have in the past.
To discuss. i