The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-06-04

OAOo|AA to be a judge?'' queried Senator Mo. Donough.
 You Republican members need not follow me, follow your own leader said Senator NTcDonough. The reso- 1ution was lost, IS to 19, as follows:
 Yes-Senators Cheney, Stevens, Col ton, Frohlich, Isbell, Kelsey, Neebe, McGrath, Newman. McNeil. Reach, Wadhan1s, e. H. Johnson.
 No-Senators J. MICA. Johnson, Hook CT, Purcell, Landers, Quinn, shanley, McDonough, Hurley, Mccarthy, Miner. F. A. Johnson, Whttcomb, Peck, Per ry. Weed Welch Gaylord Mountain, Keeney.
 MT. wilson's speech denouncing the Walsh ring was as follows: My objection to the passage of this resolution, appointing MT. Rungee, judge of the Greenwich court, is based upon no narrow, or personal grounds, but upon the circumstance that to so designate him to be a judge would violate the soundest principles Of pub lsc policy, and do violence to the pub lie opinion, which demands that the courts at least shall be kept free from ] the grosser forms of political manipu 1ation.
 My first objection to this appoint ment is that it proceeds from the judi ciary committee, and that MT. Rungee, the appointee is himself a member of | that committee, and sits therefore, in
 
 case. 'It has 1mmernoria11y been a maxim l of our common law that the trustee | should not profit by his trust, and | neither is 1t proper for member of an important committee of this body to raise himself to judicial office through the agency of the committee of which he is a. member. My eecond objection to this ap- pointmeht is, that Mr. Rungee, while | while assistant prosecuting attorney of the court, frequently tried cases be- 1 fore his own court, civil and criminal cases, and met in those cases with pe- culiar success.
 "I need not say to this house, in which there are so many lawyers, that | such action upon the part of the pros ecuting officer of a court is of gross est inpropriety, against the ethics of the legal profession, and calculated to | bring the courts into odiun and dis repute.
 My third objection to MT. Rungee is that his appointment is demanded, and | apparently secured, by the So-cal1ed l Walsh ring, well known in Fairfield county, which has long had control of | the Greenwich court, and has made I the name of that court a stench in the nostris of decent people.
 l My fourth objection to this propos- 1 ed appointment is that it is in defiance of the expressed and certain wishes of the people of Greenwich, who neither asked for the appointment of MT Rungee, nor knew Of it, nor desired it, l But the people of Greenwich did ask for the appointment to this office of William l.. Tierney. In the hear ing before the judiciary committee upon this matter the enormous pre- 1 ponderance of testimony was in favor | of his appointment.
 l '"The evidence showed that a Demo cratic caucus had declared in his fa- | vOr, the largest caucus ever held in the town. A petition in his favor was | signed by hundreds of persons, includ- ing the leading clergy and professional men of Greenwich.
 1 Upon the other side the evidence showed the Greenwich court the seat of grossest evils. The evidence relating to the official character of Charles D. Burnes, was especially noxious. but convincing
 1 ttIt was fully proved that officers of I the Greenwich court were interested in Island Beach corporation, and that li- quor was illegally sold there, and yet they refused to act,
 'It was fully proved that in this town of Greenwich gam bling house occupying two floors Of a substantial building was running wide open, with | roulette wheels and the usual para | phernalfa of such an establishment, under circumstances that made it cer- tainly known to this court and to the prosecuting officers thereof, which in cluded MT. Rungee, and yet they did nothing, all of which was and has long | been a scandal to justice in Greenwich. 1 Three other persons who testified 1 in that hearing against this Green wfch court ring, were visited soon thereafter by financial reprisa1s, in
 called upon suddenly to pay accounts
 upon which their credit had hereto fore been most acceptable.
 And this, gentlemen, was not the
 unusual, but the usual method of this group of political buccaneers, which will be strengthened and given new
 lease of life, if this resolution should prevail.
 "Quite recently the majority leader in this House challenged and properly challenged the vote of Democrat upon this side of the House, in that he had voted for himself for an office. Could MT. R,ungee, then, partici- pate in a deliberatfon by which he
 should receive an office? Could any member of the committee who was
 also to receive by his own presence on the committee an office, properly
 participate? Must 1t not be assumed
 in such a case that each of these ap-
 pointments, whick were entirely
 against propriety, was part of a com
 mon understanding, and that no man could vote to give employment to the other with any legality whatever?
 They were trustees benef1tting under
 their trusts, and what they did was utterly illegal, and there is no legal } majority report before this committee for MT. Rungee.
 t'I cannot relate to you the number of instances in which justice in that court has been denied, Or delayed, to meet some private end. Notable is State vs. Ellis, defend
 ed before the borough court by MT Rungee accused of the illicit distilline