The Judge Who Played Faro: Port Townsend’s Bar Association Moves to Impeach Morris Sachs

Port Townsend, Jan. 29.—[Special.]—H. Ballinger and B. W. Jennings, members of the bar of Port Townsend, appeared before the Judiciary committee of the House tonight as representatives of the bar association of Port Townsend, with petitions preliminary to the proposed impeachment charges against Morris B. Sachs, judge of the superior court of Jefferson, Clallam, Island, Kitsap, and San Juan counties.

A statement was made by Mr. Ballinger, who submitted to the committee a sworn statement, which was in substance as follows:

Harry E. Morgan, Rufus C. Calhoun, and Lyman A. Bliley, citizens and property owners of Port Townsend, show that Judge Sachs is in the habit of visiting places in Port Townsend and other places where the game of faro and other games are carried on, and of openly and with varying fortune participating in the same. Witnesses will be produced when necessary to substantiate this assertion.

Petitions state that said Morris B. Sachs has been in the habit of prejudging cases tried in his court. As an illustration the following are cited: In the case of P. R. Perrot against Charles A. Moore, on January 30, 1900, at the conclusion of the hearing, Judge Sachs adjourned the court, saying that he desired to examine the authorities. The following day, without examining any of the authorities cited, but after argument had been heard, he drew from amongst the papers on his desk a previously prepared opinion, and announced it as his finding and conclusion in the case.

Between the 1st and 2nd of November, 1899, in a case wherein Charles Eisenfels was plaintiff and C. H. Wake man, E. W. Deoe and S. V. Hill were defendants, in a case involving the construction of a brick contract, the said Judge went through much the same procedure, rendering a decision wherein so much of his opinion as involved the point at issue had been previously prepared.

The petitioners further declare that said Morris B. Sachs has been guilty of malfeasance in office in many other particulars, which can be readily shown by witnesses. The showing concludes as follows:

"Wherefore and inasmuch as said Morris B. Sachs has, as judge aforesaid, not only failed and refused to give a fair and impartial hearing in cases brought to trial before him, but has also outraged the moral and law-abiding sense of the community by countenancing and encouraging open violations of the law it was his sworn duty to vindicate, and by participating in such violations of law and by notorious malfeasance in office, as is hereinbefore described, your petitioners pray that the conduct and proceedings in this behalf of said Morris B. Sachs, judge of the superior court aforesaid, may be inquired into by your honorable body, and that such action may be taken therein as in your wisdom and sense of justice you shall deem just."

Ballinger further cited several instances where it could be shown that Judge Sachs had prejudged cases, and in which he had been asked to recuse himself, but had refused. The delegation appeared rather to ask the advice of the committee than to prefer charges, and submitted its statements as indicating what could be proved.

Following the statements of the delegation, the committee engaged in a lengthy discussion as to its duties and powers in the premises, and finally advised the gentlemen in an informal way to bring specific charges. The method will be to present such charges to the House of Representatives, which shall pass upon them before presenting them to the Senate, which alone has the power of impeachment.

Messrs. Ballinger and Jennings stated that they would return tomorrow to Port Townsend, and would employ counsel to bring proceedings of impeachment. These will probably be presented to the House by the Jefferson county delegation, which has been awaiting the action of the Port Townsend Bar Association before it would agree to proceed.