The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1915-02-17


witness that had not been previousl,
developed
Afternoon Session.
Attorney W. b. Ware was recalled
At the afternoon session and said that
Judge Dayton was a man OF very
strong preiudices. He said that he
had heard him. in a charge TO a grand
Jury. at Philippi. refer To the iniative
and referendum. showing disapproval
and stated that the judge said such
ideas would tend to undermine and
destroy the constitution.
Witness told OF case in which no
was arguing before Judge Dayton In
Federal court. in which he believed
that the Judge had written his
opinion on the first day OF the trial
The reported opinion had previously
filed with the committee az q hearing
conducted in Washington. and il was
produced for the purpose OF having
Attorney Howard. for Judge Dayton,
examine H.
Witness denied that he had taken
any part in filing OF Impeachment
I charges against Judge Dayton. al.
though he said he had been asked
to 20 10 Washington. and had been
asked FOR statements there. and To-
fused 10 give them.
Witness for Defense.
Chairman McGillicuddy announced
that in conference during the noon
hour. the judiciary committee had de.
cided to grant the privilege TO the
defense 10 have witness brought
TO testify today, Attorney Howard
having asked the privilege At the
morning session. sayinF that the wit.
ness had volunteered TO testify since
seeing articles in the newspapers
The expense OF the witness trip will
De PAID by the government. il was
decided.
Judge Geo. c. sturqiss.
Judge George &. StuTgiss. OF tbs
Circuit court OF MonOngalia county.
was the second witness called at the
afternoon session. lie said thai he
had known Judge Dayton since the
early EOS They were opposing can.
didates TO- Congress at that time. ne
said, prior to Judge Dayton's first
term. The witness said that judge
Dayton had the honor Of winning out
by one and a half votes.
Reluctantly the witness entered
INTO the past history bringing the two
nv " ~ hNkF'A concerning "a
case in which the MOrgantown Roll.
ing NH Company was a party. The
case was tried In the United States
court. about eight years ago. before
Judge Dayton. The witness said the
case involved a large sum OF money.
something over 100000. The case
went 10 the Circuit Court OF An
peals. at Richmond. four times. and
was reversed three times. One ap.
peal was taken By the people on the
other side. he said. aud judge Dav.
tor was sustained
Witness Shed Tears.
During the trial. In my oplnion
Judge Dayton not only cast a reaec.
ton on me o. an attorney and bugi.
ness man, said Judge Sturglss. "and
attacking my honor. but said that /
had not come into the case with
clean hands" At this point the wit
ness showed great emotion. although
Tears flowed from his eyes a. he re.
counted 10 thc committee on the iu-
dietary the acts OF that case. 1t was
not because Of the amount of money
that was involved that ] felt so keen.
iy the statement. but the reflection
cI me- he continued but A was
sustained IN every respect
y did not think ~ would be 10 the
interest Of my client that I appear
in the Federal court ever after that.
b'caus" n Dayton's relations toward
mo personally. told them when
they EouEh. my services that other
counsel would be- better. without
"f"1sinE any antagonism.
" have been witness In JUDGE
I'a tons court hu' once about four
or five years ago At that time was
r'Tr.u7ndsd once hy him Do was
ir 'T" case ~ 'hc F1kins Coal q coke
Company ve. s. O. FuImer Company.
1td during CruEa.eyamiuafion AZ.
f"r answering question put 70 me
d'. red % add an explanation that
Thought was essential fo on par
tee had No interest in tho case
wia.f.n- Judge Dayton stopped mo.
] iu .'Ud on making ON explanation.
and no very sharply made some re.
Warkr 90 me that were not intended
Tor tho Jury or counsel told him
mat bad no intention Of casting
any reflections on the court. az Z
feared that he thought vas doing.
I'm my answer.
AFTER the termination % the Nor