Show CHARGE OF corruption THE edmunds tucker law is responsible sible for the most peculiar and tangled up situations that ever grew out of a statutory enactment since the creation of the world it is a wart ou on the nose of the body politic and every standpoint from which it is contemplated it has a forbidding aspect it is to be trusted that when the supreme court of the baited states takes a square look at the ugly thing it will be treated by that august body to a vigorous ap location tiOn of judicial aqua fortis that it may be burned out of the nasal protuberance of our national system and no longer lay the rulers of the republic open to the charge of anarchy in seeking to escheat the property of peaceable citizens without due process of law the scene of jan 21 inthe territorial rit orial supreme court is but one of a series of pictures of the same description in considering it the admission must be made that it is very much mixed the opinions of the judges upon the question of the contempt of receiver dyer or rather more particularly in relation to the scope of the investigation into the charges preferred against him by judge zane are in some respects out of harmony with each other in perusing these learned disquisitions upon what appears to be esteemed to be a knotty point the person who is not supposed to be possessed of what to is sometimes designated as a legal mind is led to exclaim what do they mean anyhow or he may be in the position of the little boy at the show who asked which is the lion and which is the sacred ass the show mans reply comes neatly in place my little boy you pays your money and you takes your choice the charges preferred pret erred by judge zane against dyer williams and peters are corruption fraud and aid unprofessional conduct we observe two preliminary points that the gentleman planting these charges is seeking to attain he wishes it to be understood that he does not stand in the position of a prosecutor but rather as a public benefactor he wants no squandering of the property es cheated to the government under a law regarding whose constitutionality he was in serious doubt this doubt existed in his mind at the time he together with his brethren on the bench decided it to be constitutional judge zane is exceedingly anxious that this doubtful shall be protected that being the sole desire actuating his proceeding in pursuit of P F H dyer P L williams william and george 8 S peters whom he charges with corruption fraud and unprofessional conduct he does not wish to be viewed by the court and others in the light of a 9 prosecutor of those gentlemen this amounts to his saying I 1 mean to conduct an official slaughter if I 1 can but it is all for a beneficent object that the large amount of property taken from a church 12 by a process of doubtful constitutionality may go to the purposes for which the estment was made the other point is to make the scope of the examination as wide as practicable those whose characters have been assailed owe it to the public and themselves that it should assume as great a breadth as can be legitimately given to it but if it be possible to keep anything connected with or growing out of such a legal monstrosity as the edmunds tucker law within legal bounds it should as all other judicial matters beso be so restrict edThe common sense position on this question is that as a general charge his has been preferred the specific allegations made under it only should be considered si we understand this to be in consonance with a vital principle of law that the pursuer may not be permitted to spring unexpected traps upon the pursued this point of scope is a prominent contention between betwee ix the parties and necessarily so this of course will be governed by the order of court which judge powers of counsel for the receiver has been authorized to draft subject to the approval of the other side this business is developing into a gigantic scandal and if the parties to it know what is to their best beat interests they will insist that the investigation vesti gation be complete and speedy all of the three judges held that mr dyer was in contempt because he refused to answer certain questions put to him by the other side he is now given an opportunity to purge himself of it the mitigating element in his favor being that his refusal was the result of advice from his counsel suppose this exculpatory ingredient had not existed it would have devolved upon the court to punish him there is no knowing whether the receiver will not still persist in refusing to answer or may decline to answer some other interrogations with or without the advice of his hie counsel this would evolve another peculiarity of the edmunds tucker eccentricity it is not improbable that the result would be that mr dyer would be ordered im prisoner until he should conclude to answer and for that purpose would be turned over to the custody of the 17 S marshal in other words he would be turned over to toe the custody of himself the receiver and marshal being officially distinct but individually one and the same person the consequent question would naturally arise as a subsequent is sue as to whether mr frank H dyer united states marshal was a proper person into whose custody to place mr prank frank 11 dyer receiver would it be a competent proceeding for the court to order the former to take the latter to the penitentiary and there keep him in confinement until he should learn to pay due respect to the authority of the court seeing that the latter Is the former and the former the latter the peculiarity of the situation can be estimated should the marshal proceed to arrest the receiver and take him to the pen and hold himself in custody would he not in his capacity as marshal make the warden toe the mark with ti treatment that would enable the receiver to have haie a splendid time during his incarceration these are grave questions and it is as well to take time by the fo forelock pe by considering ahe the probabilities of this very peculiar pecullar situation which has grown out of a legal monstrosity st |