Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1913-01-08
Improperly Of a Federal Judge
Corresponding with Attorney.
IN Case Argued Before Him
Basis for Attack,
IMPEACHMENT TRIAL
NEARING CONCLUSION
Evidence is Concluded in Case
Before Senate and Argu-
ments Are Scheduled to Be-
gin Today
nv. Norulnr JoornlI spcrlaI I-ra-ea wlrrl

nv Morning Journai spcriai Leased Wirel
Washington. Jan. THE imprn-
priciy Of a federal Judges writing e.
an attorney on one side Of "a ease
that had been argued before him,
fer Information on for argument 20
clear up doubtful points hefamc the
point around which members OF The
senate fired question after uucs'ioa
today at Judge Robert ". Arch Hit.
Of thc United States commerce court.
now under trial hy Impeachment for
alleged violation ol his federal onih
Cross examination OF the iurist hcgun
by Representative sterling. viripalik
Was taken out of his hands when that
charge was reached involving Judge
Archhalds correspondence with At
torncv Helm Bruce. Of the Louisville
& Nashville railroad. Members nf
the senate demanded of Iudtc Arch
bald time aud ngain whether he dla
Not think il improper ana unfair e.
the other parties fin suit 10 request
of one attorney an explanation or cor
recuon of evidence, without giving
like privileges to the other side lie
insisted he thought there WIS nolh-
ing Improper in his conduct
The end of all TESTIMONY ia the case
came before the close of the days
proceedings There remain now only
the closing arguments aud the vote
81 the senate as 10 whether or not
Judge ARCHIBALD Is guilty The SCR
ate determined te give three days f.
tho arguments. the time TO be equally
divided.
The Louisville q Nashville Charge
conferred about Judge Arohhald's rea
quest of ATTORNEY Bruce for infvrnm
tion as ta ceriain point in The SOC
called Montgomery rate cases. which
had been argued before the commerce
court Judge Archibald said hc had
differed with ihe haiqucc If tho court
and in writing dissenting opinion.
he asintd M irute 10 clear up ron-
troycried question about whether or
not crrtaln rate changes violated tine
old Cooley arhitraucn' agreement
thai long had operated over south
western rates he declared the cor
respondenee became of ao conse-
qnence because iter the other mem
hers Of the court except ludge Muck.
took q view similar 10 his own. an1
Presiding Judge knapp finally wrote
an opinion favorable 10 the railroad
Was If not due tn the arguments
You got hf writing Mir frure ihat
the court reversed It's eariier posi-
iion2' asked Representative Sterling
absolutely not 2 said Judge Aich- |
bald
"Why did you not give the attor-
neys for the other side q chance 10 f
their views Y'asked senator
Reed
The point amounted to So little
that il didn't affect the decision Of +
tile casc. replied Judge Archibald. I
fou set ont did YOU not to write I
an opinion in favor of the railroad I
and you wanted Mr. lfucc to foriify /
you in this asked Senator Nelson.
NO, ! don't think what did ,
coula Pc characterized in that way /
replied judge Archibald
Why did You not give the Bruee /
letters tu your associates on the
bench2' asked Senator Culhcrsou.
Eccanse they practically ala not
enter into tho ease at all" said F
Judge Archibald.
Did sou secure M rruce's assist
ance ia preparing "A dissenting opin-
ienH' asked senator 'ioke smith.
"and then bring he other members
Of the court over 70 your view without
dlsclosine the corraspondenee2
NO, / reached nay decision With
ont Mr. Brure's assistance and wanted
his View on the ono >poini, said
Judge Archibald