Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1913-09-19

court shall be certified by the presi-
dent of the court and clerk of the
court"
HeRriclS Argues ON Challenges.
b. Cady Herrick, leading counsel
for Governor Sulzer argued in behalf
of the challenges he announced yes
terday he would make to the sitting
as members of the court of Acting
Lieutenant Governor Wagner and
Senators Frawley. Transporter and
Sauper
Judge Herricl stated that the OBJ
iection to Senator Wagner was based
uppu the fact that las acting iieuten-
AMI governor he is interested in the
result of the trial. as in the event OF
the conviction of the respondent he
would succeed to the dignity, profits
ami emoluments of the office of lieu
tenant governor.
'erhis case. said Judge Herrick, in
some respects is the greatest since
ths impeachment of President john
son. Ii has aroused the country.
There can be no question that the
senators on the F-rawley committee
have formed and expressed opinions
IN every article Of impeachment.
T,dge Herrick then read the articles
nj impeachment as adopted by the
Assembly. declaring that the de-
lenses challenge is founded on the
,ight 10 seek trial by an impartial
trihnnaI-one that is not prejudiced
IN ADVANCE" lie cited court opinions
hearing on the absolute necessity OF
ali the Judges being uncontaminated
nv bias. =. ;.
nc said. SHOULD be free from even a
euspicjon of bias. in order that the
governor might be given such fair
trea+rent as is accorded the meanest
criminal accused of the smallest
crime"
AZ the completion of his arguments
he formally challenged the right OF
tho four senators to sit. As Judge
Herrick closed, Judge Alton b. Par
ler rose and began to speak without
notes
sspowerIexx 10 Exclude the Four.
ct shall contend before this high
court" he argued, that you are With
out authority to exclude from It's
membership any member. The people
of the state of New York are soVer-
eign, They said in the beginning that
the court shall be composed of the
Court of Appeals and the Senate,
and you arc without power to say to
anv member, whether judge or sena-
tor. You shall not sit in this court.
Judge Parker declared that the State
Constitution made no provision for
Judge, senator or counsel to challenge
any member of the high court.
Citing nrecedents established in the
trial of the impeachment of Presi-
dent Andrew Johnson and other ex-
ecutives and judicial officers, he ar
gued that the people of each Senate
district in the State were entitled TO
the vote of their representative. He
recalled numerous instances where
members of former courts OF I'M
detachment, who had served on COM
inittees. the reports of which had re-
suited in the adoption of impeach-
ment articles, had requested TO be
excused from sitting in judgment but
had their request denied by their
colleagues
Goes Back Three Centuries.
His preeedents ranged in time from
the seventeenth century in England
to 1909. when, during the impeach-
ment of John II. Shively, auditor of
the state of Washington, sixteen OF
the forty-two members of the Senate
were challenged.
IN the Shively case, Judge Parker
pointed out, it had been held that
senator's vote belonged to his con-
stitnents and to himself"
The only precedent in support OF
tho challenge, he said, was in one
case, in which a senator had been
excluded because he was brother
of the accused.
He did not specifically mention the
case.
At the close of the arguments on
the qualification of senators who ac-
cused Suzer to serve on the I'M
parchment court. Judge Cullen said
it was his opinion that the challenges
could not be entertained. He added,
however. that he would permit the
entire court to vote on the question
after expressing his views
The court voted unanimously not
TO consider the challenges of the four
senators to sit in the Sulzer hearing.
Judge Cullen then directed Clark
McCabe to read the articles of i'm
parchment. The motion by Senator
Pollock. of New York. that they be
dispensed with was lost and the clerk
began to read the lengthy articles.
What answer does the respondent
interpose to the articles of impeach-
rnent filed by the Assembly, queried
Judge Cullen. when Clerk McCabe
had finished his reading
Judge Herrick thereupon stated,
that. pursuant to the notice of yes
terday that objection would be made
10 the validity of the impeachment,
Louis Marshall. Of the Governors
counsel would argue that point.
ATTORNEY Marsahll reading from
prepared brief. first asked that the
entire proceedings be dismissed on
the ground that the court is with
out jurisdiction and the charges are
null. void and OF no effect.
The principal attack was directed
against the constitutionality of the
action OF he Assembly in adopting
the Impeachment articles during an