Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 17.pdf/211

 194

THE GREEN BAG

bers of the bar and the public, evidencing in his decisions a fine discriminating mind and great judicial knowledge." He "cordially" endorsed him and "earnestly" urged his appointment, and felt that in so doing he voiced "the sentiment of all who have knowledge of his character and ability." One insisted that "his established reputation as a jurist, his consistent courtesy to the members of the bar practising before his Court, and his long and meritorious services as a member of the judiciary entitle him to the promo tion he now desires"; and still another re ferred to him as "a gentleman of unim peachable character." The italics are mine. Evidently these gentlemen were not then duly impressed with the great enormity of non-residence, or not absolutely continuous bodily presence in the district, or the espe cial iniquity of riding in a private car through the courtesy of the receiver of the road. The resolutions of the Florida legislature which resulted in the impeachment pro ceedings were originated by Mr. W. C. O'Neal, who had been convicted by Judge Swayne of contempt in December, 1902, the action of the Judge being the basis of one of the articles of impeachment. Mr. O'Neal had the resolutions drawn and during a period of sixteen days with his attorney lobbied for their passage, spending as E. F. Davis testifies "a whole lot of money" and "from $200 to $300 for champagne." This seems to have been a champagne-inspired impeachment. The resolution adopted by the legislature of Florida in 1903 — charged Judge Swayne with having been a non resident of his district for ten years, with having the reputation of a corrupt judge, with being ignorant and incompetent and with having so administered the bankrupt law as to waste the assets so that it had be come "in effect legalized robbery and a stench in the nostrils of all good people." These resolutions were referred to the Ju diciary Committee of the National House of Representatives, and by that committee re

ferred to a sub-committee for the taking of testimony consisting of Hon. Henry W. Palmer of Pennsylvania, Hon. J. N. Gillett of California, and Hon. H. D. Clayton of Alabama. Twelve specifications were presented to them as the basis of the investigation. They charged (i) non-residence; (2) im proper appointment of B. C. Tunison as United States Commissioner; (3) refusal to appoint a United States Commissioner at Marianna; (4) partiality and favoritism to B. C. Tunison; (5) oppression and tyranny in the contempt cases of W. C. O'Neal, E. T. Davis, and Simeon Belden; (6) wilfully and corruptly maladministering bankruptcy cases; (7) oppression and tyranny in the case of Charles P. Hoskins, resulting in his suicide, and for the purpose of breaking down and injuring W. R. Hoskins, charged with involuntary bankruptcy; (8) corruptly purchasing a lot and house in litigation be fore him; (9) ignorance and incompetency; (n) failing to hold a term of court at Talla hassee in the fall of 1902; (12) procuring as endorsers on his notes attorneys and liti gants having cases pending in his court; (13) maladministration by discharging people convicted of crime; (10) is missing from the printed record. The impeachment proceedings were char acterized by some very extraordinary, and it is believed, entirely unprecedented meth ods. Prior to March 25, 1904. when the Judiciary Committee had completed its work for the time being, the sub-committee reported to the whole committee, disagree ing vitally as to the facts, Mr. Palmer and Mr. Clayton favoring impeachment and Mr. Gillett, opposing. At this time not a word of the case had been printed, the statement of Judge Swayne in exculpation had not been transcribed, and beside the sub-com mittee no one on the committee had read the testimony! A motion to table the mat ter until the evidence could be printed and the committee could know what it was act ing on was promptly voted down, and with