Personal Reminiscences of Early Days in California with Other Sketches Part 12

After the Narrative of Reminiscences was written, the Proceedings of the a.s.sembly of California of 1851, on the pet.i.tion of citizens of Yuba and Nevada Counties for the impeachment of Judge Turner, were published. Annexed to them was a statement by the editor of the causes of the indefinite postponement of the matter. They are there stated to be: 1st, That it was supposed that I had acquiesced in such a disposition of the case, because by the act concerning the courts of justice and judicial officers, Turner had been sent to the northern portion of the State, where he could do no harm; 2d, That the legislature did not wish to extend the session for the period which the trial of an impeachment would require; and, 3d, That the whole matter had become extremely distasteful to me.

A copy of this statement with the record of the proceedings was sent to the surviving members of the seven, mentioned in the Narrative, who voted for the indefinite postponement of the matter; and they wrote the replies which are given below as part of this exhibit. They are preceded by a letter from a member, written soon after the vote was taken.

* * * * *

_Letter of Mr. Bennett._

HOUSE OF a.s.sEMBLY, SAN JOSE, _April 23d, 1851_.

HON. STEPHEN J. FIELD.

DR. SIR: I take pleasure in adopting this form to explain to you my vote upon the question put to the House in the final disposition of the case for the impeachment of Judge Turner.

Had the House been called for a direct vote upon the question of impeachment, I should certainly have voted for the impeachment; but finding that some of the members thought the wishes of the citizens of Yuba County had been accomplished by the removal of Judge Turner from your district, and on that account would vote against the impeachment, I thought there was less injustice in postponing the whole matter indefinitely, than in coming to a direct vote. I will also say that it was understood by many members that you would be satisfied with such a disposition.

I am very truly your friend, F.C. BENNETT.

TO THE HON. STEPHEN J. FIELD, _SAN JOSE_.

* * * * *

_Letter of Mr. Merritt._

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, _May 4th, 1879_.

MY DEAR JUDGE:

Your letter of the 27th of April reached me day before yesterday, and the copy of the proceedings in the matter of the impeachment of W.R.

Turner, on yesterday. The editorial comments on the case, so far as I am concerned, are exactly correct. I remember distinctly having voted for the indefinite postponement of the charges against Turner on the distinct understanding that you consented to it, or at least acquiesced, for the reasons:

1st, That Turner, by the pa.s.sage of the bill concerning courts of justice, etc., had been sent to a district where he could do no harm and was out of the way; 2d, That you did not desire to extend the session of the Legislature; and, 3d, That the whole matter was extremely distasteful and disagreeable to you. I remember further very distinctly, even after this great lapse of time, that I was very much astonished when you told me that I had voted under a misapprehension as to your views and wishes. It is very certain that Turner would have been impeached had not a false report, as to your views and wishes on the subject, been industriously circulated among the members of the a.s.sembly a short time before the vote was taken.

That report alone saved Turner from impeachment.

Very truly your friend, SAML. A. MERRITT.

HON. S.J. FIELD, _Sup. Ct. U.S._

* * * * *

_Letter of Mr. McCorkle._

WASHINGTON, CITY, D.C., _May 8th, 1879_.

HON. S.J. FIELD.

MY DEAR SIR: I have received your note and the printed record of the "Proceedings of the a.s.sembly of the State of California of 1851, on the pet.i.tion of the citizens of Yuba and Nevada Counties for the impeachment of Wm. R. Turner, Judge of the Eighth Judicial District of California." The simple reading of the record recalls vividly to my mind all of the circ.u.mstances of the case and enables me to answer your inquiry in regard to the indefinite postponement of the motion to impeach Judge Turner.

A bill introduced by yourself, increasing and changing the numbers of the judicial districts of the State, had pa.s.sed the Legislature, and became a law some weeks before the motion to impeach Judge Turner was called up. By this law Judge Turner was banished to the Klamath--a region inhabited almost exclusively by savage red-skins, the elk, and grizzly bear, and as Turner was supposed by anthropologists to be a resultant of that mysterious law of generation denominated atavism or reversionary heredity, and bore the impression, in not only the bodily form, but the instincts, pa.s.sions, manners, and habits of the "cave-dwellers" of the rough-stone age, there appeared to be a fitness and adaptation in the new locality and its surroundings to the man, which was at once appreciated and approved by all persons familiar with him, and his conduct and behavior, both on and off the bench.

Under these circ.u.mstances the report obtained general credence, that you and your const.i.tuents were satisfied with the removal of Judge Turner from the bench of the Eighth Judicial District; and I have no doubt influenced all or nearly all who voted to indefinitely postpone his impeachment.

As for myself, having a personal knowledge of the truth of the charges made against Judge Turner by the citizens of Yuba and Nevada Counties, I am free to say that no consideration other than that you and your const.i.tuents were satisfied with Judge Turner's removal from the Eighth Judicial District, could have induced me to cast my vote for the indefinite postponement of Judge Turner's impeachment.

Do you realize the fact, my dear Judge, that more than a quarter of a century has elapsed since these events transpired? Though my respect for you as a man, and my admiration for you as a jurist, have increased since we were actors in these scenes; yet I am frank enough to say to you, that if I had to play my part again, with my increased experience, I would not vote to indefinitely postpone the impeachment of a judge whom I knew to be guilty of the charges made against Judge Turner by yourself and others, _even though the report were true_ that you and your const.i.tuents were satisfied with his simple removal from your judicial district.

Respectfully and truly yours, &c., JOS. W. MCCORKLE.

* * * * *

_Letter of Mr. Bradford._

SPRINGFIELD, ILL, _May 8th, 1879_.

JUDGE FIELD.

MY DEAR FRIEND: Yours of the 27th April should have been answered ere this, but before doing so I desired to get all the reminders that I could. I looked carefully over the journal. All that I had recollected in the whole matter was that I had an intense feeling in favor of sustaining your position, and when you informed me that I had voted to dismiss the proceedings I was profoundly astonished.

I thought you must be mistaken until I saw the journal....

Some very satisfactory a.s.surance must have been given me that such vote would be satisfactory to you, and I only wonder that I did not have the a.s.surance verified.... I a.s.sume that the Editor is correct in the explanation as given.

Very truly, J.S. BRAFORD.

* * * * *

_Letter of Mr. Carr._

SAN FRANCISCO, _May 15th, 1879_.

MY DEAR JUDGE: I have received your letter and a printed copy of the record of the proceedings of the a.s.sembly of California of 1851, in the matter of the impeachment of William R. Turner, Judge of the then Eighth Judicial District of the State. In reply, I have to say, that the statement of the Editor as to the vote on the motion to indefinitely postpone the proceedings is correct, so far as I am concerned.

It was distinctly understood by me, and to my knowledge by other members of the a.s.sembly, that you had consented to such postponement, it being explained that the postponement was not to be taken as an approval of the Judge's conduct. On no other ground could the motion have been carried. If the vote had been taken on the charges made, articles of impeachment against the Judge would undoubtedly have been ordered.

Your consent to the postponement was understood to have been given, because of the change in the judicial districts by an act introduced into the a.s.sembly by yourself, under which Judge Turner was sent to a district in the northern part of the State, where there was at the time scarcely any legal business, and which was removed to a great distance from the district in which you resided, and because of the general desire manifested by others to bring the session of the Legislature to a speedy close. The impeachment of the Judge would have necessitated a great prolongation of the session.

No member of the a.s.sembly justified or excused the atrocious and tyrannical conduct of the Judge towards yourself and others.

I am, very truly, yours, JESSE D. CARR.

HON. STEPHEN J. FIELD.

[1] By mistake, there are two Exhibits H; they are, therefore, marked No. I. and No. II.

* * * * *