Newspapers / New Berne Weekly Journal … / Feb. 16, 1915, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of New Berne Weekly Journal (New Bern, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
4, semi-wSeeely- NEW. BERN NEW BERN. NORTH CAROLINA, FEBRUARY it 1915- 3 Solicitor Declares That Judge Carter Solicitor for This District Defends Himself and Denies- Allegations of Judge ' Carter Which Reflect Upon . His Character and Integ rity; To the People of the State He Sends Out A Mes sage Fully Explaining the Affair in Which. He Was Adj udged In Contempt and the following Incidents Which - Have Tended to Cast ' ' A- - Reflection Upon Him Files Numerous Af fidavit.' Ai a sequel to the filing of a mem orandum by Judge Carter on the Court records yesterday morning in which he heartily condemned Solici tor Charles L. Abernethy of this city for bis'eonduot of the case of the State vs James H. Baugham of Wash ington in which the defendant is accused of murder, Solicitor Aber nethy has given to the people of the State a statement in which he sets forth hi aide of the matter, -showing that he was aoting in a manner which .he thought was exactly right and in which ho states that Judge Carter has 'done him a great injustice in the manner in which he has aetod toward him. The statement, which is of interest all, over North Carolina, together with several affidavits of interest, follows: - What The Solicitor Saysi To The -People jof the State: . On Monday last when the qase of the State vs.. Baugham was reached, ' . when the criminal docket was being called $n. Craven) Superior Court, the Honorable Frank- Carter, -'-Judge Presiding, adjudged. m in. contempt v ijstateme tpUhe SheriJffha I should be : jtreated flike- any - othr criminal, arid unless the. fine wag paid by three o'clock-it then being about .11:30 a. ra., that I should be committed to the common jail, and that he would appoint someone else to pro- secute the criminal docket. On Wed nesday following I gave to the press a statement of the facts rcforring to the alleged contempt, and on Thurs- day I caused to be published a copy of the iipte which I had directed to the Court, and in which I took the position ' that I had been fined for contempt, that I had paid under pro test, and so far as I was concerned, It was at an .end. ; , . Tells Of The Affair .- I, do not deem, it now necessary to reiterate in detail the facts which I have heretofore given tp the pub- lie,: but. after-the occurrence in the i Court this morning I think it proper to again .call the, attention of the public to the matter., : The trial of the docket! haying been finished, the . ' court ; met again this Saturday , at " ten o'clock,. A few minutes after ten, . the Court having inquired if there - was other business before the Court, ' 1 indicated its intention - to adjourn oourt and .leave the bench,' but be fore doing so, took from, his pocket , a type written memorandum,--abd ordered the clerk to enter it upon the minutes in the case of. the State-vs. ' Baugham in the - Minute Docket. Thereupon;' toy counsel requested of , tne.- Court the information, if ' the memorandum contained any reference to -myself, either personally or offt- cially, and if so, to permit an inspeo- . -tion of the memorandum to be made by me and my counsel Wore order- ing it to be entered upon the minutes. Thereupon his Honor, inquired, of counsel whether or hot, tfeCourt ; didn't havff the right to have such ' .en trios made in a ose pending in his court, as seemed proper to the Court, to Which oounsol replied, "that we - made no , objection to big' . Honor filing orders that he had a right to r file,: but if the Court ploaso, if the memorandum which the Court was filing in any way concerned the 8o lioitor and .the matter which had ( been hoard heretofore by the Court, then we think" we should have the right to inspect the- papor before its boing spread upon the minutes;" then the Court said that the Clerk would permit counsel to inspect the - paper, and ' adjourned oourt until twelve, mid-day, to permit my coun sel to examine the papor, instructing . - the clerk in the meanwhile to record the same. Upon ' examination by my council and myself of the mem orandum filed by the Court, it was round that the paper contained a serious reflection npon my personal and official character, Among other thing", the Court found as a con clusion, without a hearing, entirely ex parts, and without notice of at.y k nd to. His apd haying uln-mly or Anernefliy Is In dered it to be recorded in the minute docket, that my refusal to report as requested constituted a - moral, if not a legal dereliction, which the Court "heartily condemns," ' the re quest referred to by the Court hav. ing been made after the Court had already adjudged me guilty of con tempt of Court, bad committed me to the custody of the Sheriff, to be treated as any other prisoner, and after I had already been adjudged in contempt by the Court and paid the fine under protest. The Court hav ing directed the memorandunm con taining the reflection upon me to be recorded during the recess of the court, I had prepared, after consul tation with my counsel for the pur pose of submitting to the Court when it should re-convene at twelve, mid day, the following protest: Abernethy' Protest North Carolina, Craven County, In the Superior Court. To the Hon. Frank Carter, presiding: Judge When your Honor was about to leave the bench this morning, having announced that the Court was about to adjourn and having- inquired if there was any other business, your Honor delivered to the Clerk a mem orandum in the case of State vs Baugham, containing among other things, serious reflections against me as an officer of this court, and against my . personal character, and ordered the Clerk immediately to spread the same upon the minutes of the oourt. Immediately upon the announce ment of this fact by your Honor from the bench, my counsel request ed the privilege of reading the paper, provided 'it made any reference to me before it should be made a part of the minutes of the court. Your Honor thereupon, authorized the Clerk to permit my counsel to in spect the paper and adjourned the court until 12 o'clock; tnid-day,- di- rtigrhe'jurkitt-4h eaiiwhile to spreaa the paper apon the minutes of " the court. : During the interval, the document having been read by my counsel in my presence and, con sideration having been made thereof by my counsel and myself, I now desire to solomnly protest against the said memorandum in so far as any personal or. official reference to me is concerned, andifithe paper has not already been spread upon the minutes, I now enter my solemn protest against its entry, and in the event it has" been spread upon the minutes, nevertheless, to enter this, my solemn protest,, for the following reasons: The Reasons Firsti Because there is no matter pending before your Honor ' which wOuld authorize your Honor to find any ; facts whaffever concerning' me personally or officially. , Second j That there is no legal authority vested in . your Honor to make and cause to be spread upon the minutes of this court alleged facts which reflect upon me either per sonally or officially. Thlrdi That the references made by your Honor in the paper writing, of the history of the case of State vs. Baugham at the present term of the court are not before the' Court, your Honor having - taken cogni sance of the same heretofore, and held me in , contempt and pronounced judgment against me, which- judg- iiibut unuer provesi, nas uueu com plied with. Vvv ?, M, :" Fourth i That the references to me in said paper writing containing as it does intimation and reflections against mras an individual and as an offioer of tho State, are unwarranted, unjustified and unauthorized.,' Flfthi -Granting to your Honor tho right, both as an Individual and as a court, to draw your own con clusions, and with all resqect due to tho ; Court,- nevertheless, recognising ray responsibility to the people of the State, and will full consciousness of my integrity, and my proper oon- duot of my office,-1 am constrained, of necessity, to declare the conclusions of your Honor, in so far as they refer to me personally and officially,' are unjustified and unwarranted, and I protest , that your Honor has no right to cause the same to be entered upon the: reoords of the Court, . .. Respectfully submitted, , CHAULES L. ABERNETHY This HHh of Feb. 1015.. ' . ".'' Read Protest. At twolve o'clock tho court re convened, and then in person I read tho protest above recited, and axked thst 'ho samo be entered upon the minutes of the court, the Clerk hav ing at that time, recorded a portion of it, already, or all of the the mem lorandum of the Judge, whereupon the Court made.e supplement!)! mem ornndum a follows: - ; North Carolina, iiii'ior Court Wrong Crave County, February Criminal Term, 1915. 8ute ys. James H. Baugham, Supplement memorandum and or der. ' Upon the call of the docket on Monday, the first day of the Criminal week of the present term of court, instituted at inquiry as to the status of the record in the above entitled case with reference to the date and manner of-its institution and the for mer continuances thereof, and as to the reasons of the Solicitor for 'con senting out of term to the further continuance of said ease at the pre sent term. Said inquiry was defeat ed for the time being by the disor derly and contemptuous behavior of the Solicitor. The Court held said inquiry in abeyance for two whole days in the hope that the Solicitor would come to a realazation of his duty in! the pre mises and concede . the right of the Court to be informed upon matter so vitially .affecting the administra tion of publiq justice, and upon Wed nesday afternoon, made the request in writing for the information afore said, which, appears upon the minutes of the court for that date. On the opening of the court on Thursday morning the Solicitor hand ed to the court the categorical refusal to furnish the information asked for Which appears upon the minutes of that day's session. The Court has allowed the Soiici- tor two whole days in which to re consider his refusal aforesaid and to perform his manifest duty ip the pre mises. The court convened at 10 o'clock a. m., on Saturday, the last day of the oourt, and after dispos ing of all the unfinished business of the term and after repeated inquir ies of the Solicitor and all the counsel present in Court as to whether there was any other matter upon which they wished to be heard, making suit able pauses after each of said inquir ies, and hearing no repsonse the Court handed to the clerk a written mem orandum and order entitled in the above 'case remitting to the due consideration of the Judge regularly riding the Fifth Judicial District all questions involved in the afore mentioned inquiry and the consid erations moving the Court to such action. . .. - ; The Solicitor makes written' nro- Hestrjgwnst nte8"of;'lht meinerDfuB -and order aforesaidijQ?;;.5':. ' The Court, directs that said pro test be entered upon-the minutes of the court together with this sup plemental memorandum and order (Signedr FRANK CARTER, Judge Presiding. ordering the protest recorded. Then, for the first time, the Court read in the' hearing of the people there as sembled the memorandum or order whichjhe had ordered the clerk to enter upon the minute docket, with out notice to" me of its purport, or contents, containing, as I . state, serious reflections upon me as quot ed heretofore in this statement: Not Disrespectful. L desire. solemnly to affirm that at no time on, Monday during the trou ble between Judge, Carter and my self was I disrespectful to the Court, either in word or .manner, and was only endeavoring to, make an expla nation on account of .the .remarks that the - Court had made relative to. the particular case of State vs. Baugham, and that the' -continuance was procured as the result of undue influence, . I further desire to solemn ly assert that. at no time during the Whole controversy between, Judge Carter and myself did the . Judge ever state that he would jrive me any further time to be heard relative to the reasons for continuing the. Baugh am case,' though I had informed1 him that the continuance had been made subject to' bis approval, "and also stated . to ; the , Court , that I stood ready then and there' to notify coun sel for the defendant 'that I would take the case up Monday of the fol lowing week fof trial, if ''the Court so desired, and thereupon 'the' Court ordered the case continued after he had adjudged me in contempt' as aforesaid, and the case now stands continued, as appears from the 'min ute docket of Monday. ' . ' i- Submits Affidavit, t :X I am submitting herewith affidavit of Mr. Angus' D. McLean, counsel for defendant,, at whose -; instance the continuances were procured. It has been, my desire all along, to try the ease at the present time, and en deavored to so state to the Court on Monday, but was not permitted to do so. Insofar as the defendant not ha vine been arraigned h con cerned, I will say that Judge Peebles was presiding at the term of o urt.lt which , time indictment was -found and he fixed the bond for the defend ant, at the same time stating that the defendant could not be held for any higher crime than manslaughter and for that reason the defendant was not arraigned for murder. At the Oo tober term, Judge Peebles was also prexiding and continued It, and the defendant was permitted to go. under the same bond. I am ANui)iiiiitli(igotbtr s's!avit of e(T;, replllpllq 1. li Wei) JiJIWU eitiseas of the city of KW;Bnu whs Were present at the time aid's w and heard whatoeeuired at the tints of the altered eonteinpt. and I will say that I am abl. to f urmua substantially the same affidavits from Very many other eitiaens of Nsw Bora whose truth' ilness will not be questioned. beemesl Matter Qae4. When Judge Carter adjudged me guilty of contempt, impoe4 the fine, and committed me to the custody of the Sheriff until the Aas was paid. followed as it was by my Jtaymejit of theHine, I deemed the matter closed, insofar as further hearings . before him were concerned, bull the Judge having enterred judgment against me when I was 'endeavoring to be heard, I have not deemed it necess ary to again submit any hase of the matter to his further censi deration, particularly as the matter had been, as I construe it, ended (by my per formance of the judgment of the Court, and but for the fret that the matter was again reopened by the judge by placing on th minutes of the oourt matter reflect mg upon my personal and official character, 1 should not uow again be calling the matter to the attention4 of the pub lic. I desire to say that I yield to no one in the respect entertained for the courts of the State- and for the judiciary, but I, too, am an officer of the State, and as it. is important that publio respect should be main tained for the judiciary,-it is likewise important that the- people in this district should continue to feel that the proseoution of crime has been entrusted to honest hands, and when the Court, without cause, as I feel, publicly suggested, in, -the case , of State vs. Baugham, that it had been continued for - reasons - other than those which should prompt a faith ful officer, I felt that it was only due the public, and myself at the represen tative of the publio, before the crowd-' ed court room that had heard the suggestion, to make a full and can did statement of the case that prompt ed me to agree,' witlj. the Court's consent, that the case ' might stand continued for the term. It was my desire to make this explanation, ut I was denied the opportunity to make it, which desire caused' the Court to hold me in contempt, impose a fine and commit niei to prison. At no time, either bfciwd or man-r nor did $ treat the tour with eon- requesting the. .Court to heaf me, when I would state to the Court the facts which had moved me, at the instance of the defendant's oounsel, and with the consent of counsel for the private prosecution, Air. R.- A Nunn to continue the case, and there can be no doubt that, had the Court give me its hearing, the explanation which I would have made to him at the time would have appealed to him as just grounds for a contin uance. CHARLES L. ABERXETHY Files Affidavits. In support of S(Mtbr Abernethy's contentions, he has filed the follow ing affidavits for publication: L. I. Moore's Statement North Carolina, Craven County. L. I. Moore, of the firm of Moore & Dunn, submits the following state ment concerning the matter of State vs Baugham pending in Craven county. My firm, together with Mr. Mc Lean of Washington, represent the defendant in this- criminal action. and in a civil action ' growing out .of the same matter, as fully set out in the affidavit of Mr. McLean. At the October term of Craven Superior Court, on the call of the docket, by his Honor R. B. Peebles, Judge, motion was , made by Mr. William Dunn, Jr., to continue this case on ao ount of. the conflict of the Court here an,d at Beaufort county, necessitating 5 the. presence in Washington of Mr. McLean and Mr. Harry McMullan, brother-in- law of the defendant and a necessary witness 'for the defendant. His Honor then asked for some statement. of the facts pertaining to the alleged homicide' looking .toward the fixing of bond. The Solicitor then stat ed the contention of the State, but his Honor replied to the Solicitor that he doubted under the circumstances Whether the defendant could be con victed' of any grade of homicide, but certainly no greater offense than manslaughter siiouiq oe contenaea for. The Solioitor in open oourt stated that he would not prosecute de fendant for a greater offense than man slaughter, 'The Judge granted the continuance and prescribed the bond, and bond was the same afternoon prepared and presented to his honor by Mr. William Dunn, Jr.; with the defendant in person, .and. his Honor directed that ' the - bond ' should - be filed with the clerk, which was done by Mr. Dunn. Mr. Dunn came immediately to the office from the court house and related to, me what had transpired In oourt, and subsequently upon the controversy arising at this term of court concerning this case, he reit erated the statement then made, On account of serious illin-? Mf, l)uun was forced Inst nhf. lo go to jlVj'mouJ o a hoipl'.nL au FRIDAY "ARBORS DAY'I AT FARM LIFE SCHOOL An Appropriate Program Was Carried Out There IuMATMDED Teachers and Pupils Parti pated In the Ex ercises Vanoeboro, Feb. 13. The teachers and students of the Farm Life School observed Friday as Arbor Day. . A number of trees, shrubs and flowers were planted. The eighth grade girls in the Domestic Science Depart ment, served' dinner to, teachers and students .'and all had an enjoyable time., Mr. Covington, the Methodist Min ister, was the school's guest on this occasion, ' ' " This afternoon the Seaman Knapp Literary Society held its regular weekly meeting. The following was the program: "Some Benefits of A Good Liter ary Society" Fred Whitehurst. r "Some Old Towns in North Caro lina" Harriet Brown. Recitation Lena Ewell. "A Selected Reading" Edith Har vey. Debate: Resolved that North Car olina should have a state wide dog tax for the benefit of the public schools. Misses Helen McLawhorn and Neva Warren upheld the victorious affir mative and .Miss Margaret Brown and Miss Celia Bonner the nega tive. statement, is made by me upon in formation given at the time as to what had occurred,- and reitterated to me during this week.. It was understood at the time de fendant was present at -court; at the October term," the" announcement be-- ing :", made . . that time, that . i no dutffwt and that an arraignment was unnec essary and uncalled for under all the circumstances -then appearing, and thereby the defendant waived the right to require an- arraignment and the actual plea of not guilty, his plea of not guilty being entered, and he never at any time proposed or intended for himself or by his counsel, to make any techincal plea to the bill of indictment, but intend ed and desired to contest the charge upon its merits, insisting upon his innocence of any crime. L. I. Moore A. D McLean. North Carolina. Craven County. A. D. McLean, being duly sworn, says: My firm, with Messrs Moore & Dunn, are attorneys for the de fendant in the case of State vs James H. Baugham, a young boy indicted for criminal homicide -on acoount of an automobile accident. He and his mother (his father having died some years ago) are also sued in a civil action for damages on the same' account by a relative of the dead man, although a settlement satis factory to him was made before his death, and thereafter his widow and executrix ratified this settlement un der oath, and as I am reliably in formed denounced the criminal pro seoution as unjust and unwarrant ed. ' Both cases are pending in Cra ven county, and as I am also inform ed the attorney for the private pro secution in' the criminal case is at the same time the attorney' for the planitiff in the damage suit. It was hoped and expected by young Baugh am and his mother that the criminal ease ' might be tried in January be cause there were' anxious to have the grave charge against the boy heard and. disposed of, and also because the principal eye witnesses to' the occurence were then available, but because, of the illness of Judge Con nor no court was held in Craven county during January, and in oonsequenoe the case went over to February. The witnesses above referred to are a young man and two young ladies who were riding in the automobile with young Baugham at the time of the accident. Some time in January, after the adjournment of the January Court on'account of the illness of Judge Connor And after the wit nesses above referred to , had . -been returned.'by Iheir parents to .school, I called up 'Solicitor Abernethy by telephone and requested him to agree to a continuance of the case from the February term to the June term of court, stating to him as a fact that our three principal , eye witnesses were away attending school and their parents objected to bringing them back in February, not only because of tho trouble and expanse Involve but alo bucsusf .U would orluiuly hfi fiV into their i!;)igol lrm, ami lip' Another Garter Yesterday sides which I had no way of compeii-1 ing the attendance of one of them who was then out of the State. I further! stated to Mr. Abernethy that, these witnesses would be at home in Jane and that the ease could then be tried as well as now without prejudice to the State or the defendant. After some persistence on my part Mr. Abernethy replied that it was up to the Judge and not to him to say whe ther the . case should be continued and that in any event Mr. Nunn, who represented the private prosecution, would have to be consulted; to which I replied that I felt sure any judge would see the reasonableness of my request and grant the motion to con tinue, and I requested that he men tion it to Mr. Nunn. Mr. Aberne thy finally stated ho would consent to a continuance under the circum stances if Mr. Nunn did not object, and later he informed me that he had seen Mr. Nunn and that they would consent. I therefore regarded . the ease as practically continued from February to June, , being confident that any judge would ratify and ap prove the Solicitor's consent under the. circumstances, and so notified my associates. . I Was away from home until. Wed nesday of this week and saw no ac count of the trouble between Judge Carter and Solicitor Abernethy until Wednesday forenoon, when I at once wrote Judge Carter the substance of the foregoing statement, the receipt of which Judge Carter later acknow ledged. I mailed copy of my letter to Judge Carter to my associates, Messrs Moore & Dunn, but mailed no copy to Mr. Abernethy,. and, -so far as I am aware, he only today learned the oontents of my letter to Judge Carter. . . . , A. D. McLean, , . J. M. Smith State ...of North CarolinnJj County of Craven.--" : '. deposes and 'says: When court op ened on Monday morning, Febru ary 8th, 1915, and after the Grand Jury' was selected and the Judge had charged the Grand Jury, the .case of State vs. Baugham was called for trial. Mr. Abernethy got up and asked that the case be continued, and the Judge wanted to know why. Mr. Abernethy started to explain, but the Judge did not seem to want an ex planation and ordered him .to sit down. The the Judge got busy with the Clerk looking over some books, and it seems as if there was something which the Judge wanted to know whieh the Clerk could not get up right away, and Mr. Abernethy got up second time and the Judge ordered him to sit and then fined him $50.;00. In Mr. Abernethy's efforts to ex plain the cause of the oontinuanoe, the Judge remarked to Air. Aberne thy that he reckoned thait he did want t6 explain because his conscience was hurting him. Mr. Abernethy seemed to bo anxious to explain to the Judge the reason for the contin uance and the Judge seemed not to care for any explanation. - Mr. Aber nethy was at all times very humble and respectful - to the Judge. The Judge exhibited much temper and in bis remarks to Mr. Abernethy he pointed at him with his hand and told him to sit down, which Mr. Aberne thy did. ' J. M. Smith D. P. Henry. State of North Carolina, . County of Craven. David. P. Henry being duly sworn deposes and says: That he is a oil! sen and resident ' of the county of Craven and State of North Carolina, and was a regular juror at the crimi nal term of the Superior Court of Craven county which convened in New Bern in said county on Monday, February 8th, 1915, at which court Judge Frank Carter presided. That after the Court had .charged the Grand Jury and while the docket was being called my attention was called to some mention either by the Court or the Solicitor, Mr. Charles L. Abernethy, I do not remember now which, to the case of State vs. James H. Baugham, the court asking if this was one of -those oases of in fluence, or words to that effect, in which tfe ease was dragged along, stating that. he had called the' t- tent Ion or tne Urtnd Jury to the lack of enforcement' of law,' and the in crease 'of crime, mentioning the per centage of the inorease in the last six years, and that he had expressed hinutolf very forcibly to the Grand Jury upon this point. " ' Whereupon Mr. Abernethy arose and addreKcd the oourt in tho niont respectful terms and statm) (hat ftH Jhst t li repiwrks of tin (.V I Sensatio jn Statement Which He. Or- dcrf Sprcad fa Records r r o r. of Craven Superior Court He Condemns Solicitor Ab- ernethy in His Conduct f the Case Against James H. Baugham of Washing ton, N. C The Solicitor Protessed to the. Filing of This . Statement and. the Judge Adds an Additional One to It and Both Go On Records. ; ' ' '"' Craven Superior " Court for tho - trial of criminal eases and which hat been in session here all during the - ; past week, and a post eventful ses- ... sion it has been," came to a close - -yesterday, but before the curtain had ' ? been drawn on the proceedings. Judge :: Frank Carter presiding over ' the session, made a final statement in ' regard to the ease in which he had. found Solicitor Charles Li Abernethy. in contempt and fined, him fifty del- -lars. ' This affair started last Monday and has been one sensation ; after : another all during the weekv-.The1;; Judge on Thursday afternoon -de- manded that the solicitor' make .a ,-, full statement as to the case of the V State vs. James H. Baugham, charged with murder (the ease which caused -all of the trouble) and this the solioi- "- -tor declined to do so, taking as his . stand that the tima for . explanation -. had passed and that he did not deem it proper for him to make the explaB a atioq. However, he did make a state ment in which he set forth his con tentions for not going into the whole affair. ';,"'! 1 ' This . statement-' was , handed : to v judge Carter on Friday morning anal- it was expected that he would have ' something to say in regard to it. on . that day but such he did not do..; . Yesterday, before the close of the session he madVa -statement in 1h i ' form -of a memorandum, which. h or dered spread upon 'the records of. the oourt. This statement sets forth al the judge's side of the affair and in it he explains his act-ion. . It follows:" " Judie Carter's Statement North Carolina, Craven County, Su perior Court, February, Crimal- . term 1915. ' .,.. t State vs. James H. Baugham.uiess " orandum.. ' , In charging the Grand Jury at the ' present term, the presiding judge . felt constrained to direct attention to the statistics of homicide in Korth Carolina contained in the last re port of the attorney general, showing - fifty-nine per cent increase in the ' number of prosecutions for that crime 1 within a six year period; and in.spse ulating upon the causes operating to produce 59 .deplorable a condition he . expressed the fear that the restrain-' ; ing influence of the Courts was being; - progressively weakened by wide- .. . pread feeling that, as administered,' the law was a respector of persons-'-that the courts were comparatively impotent to bring influential criminals . to conviction and punishment. , - Immediately thereafter, while en gaged in the perusal of the criminal docket, the solicitor asked the court '. to note that the case of State vs. James H. Baugham, for murder.'had1' been continued by consent. The Judge expressed a desire to "be in formed as to . the reasons for the continuance, but instead of giving any reason the solicitor stated that he " regarded the inquiry as a reflection upon his official conduct; Ihe judge disclaimed any intention to reflect, upon the . solioitor and, reminding him of the aspects of the charge to the" grand jury above adverted to, stated that he conceived it to be his duty to inquire as to the sufficiency of the -reasons for continuing a" cms of so great publio importance He then proceeded to inquire as to when the bill was found and how often tba ease had been continued,' but the solicitor was either unable to give the information asked for or pre ferred to rely upon his constantly ' reiterated complaint that the court's inquiries reflected upon' hira. Re course Wat next had to the clerk and the minute! of the oourt, from which, after an interruption cause! by the contemptuous behsvior of the Rol icitor, it was finally learned that the prosecution was initiated upon s grand jury presentation ami bill of indictment found at the Kepteiniiw, 1914, term; thst tbeeiwe whs tb. ti e continued to the October, I'M t 1 ' and the defendunt l-t to in.. I 1 1 1' sum of ri,0(XUK, 11,1.1 si. tU 1 1 October term the cm v. h i continiK-d upon 1 li p:.;n- 1 i) .:!!. -I f' '
New Berne Weekly Journal (New Bern, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Feb. 16, 1915, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75