Mrs. GREER. No, sir; he refused. Counsel for the Government asked to do that. He said if he had overlooked that, he would like to reopen the case to introduce some evidence to that effect, and Judge Baker remarked that to do so would be reversible error. Mr. NESBITT. Then what happened to the case?

Mrs. GREER. Then some member of the district attorney's forceI do not remember which one, whether Mr. Matthews, Judge Brown,. or who it was-came out and said that Sistersville was an incorporated city; that it was incorporated under an act of the State legislature and had something to do with Congress. I do not know what that was; but the court would take judicial notice of the act of the legislature; and that Sistersville was in Tyler County, a part of this district.

Mr. NESBITT. Then what did the judge do?

Mrs. GREER. The judge demanded we prepare a brief on that point. and adjourned the court until next morning. Mr. NESBITT. Until the next morning?

Mrs. GREER. Yes, sir.

Mr. NESBITT. What time of the day was it?
Mrs. GREER. Quite late in the evening, sir.
Mr. NESBITT. Quite late in the evening?

Mrs. GREER. I would say, without going back, it was 5.30 or 6. I know I was very, very tired.

Mr. NESBITT. A brief was prepared, was it?

Mrs. GREER. Yes, sir; I had to work that night preparing the brief. Mr. NESBITT. Oh, it only required the exhibition of one West Virginia authority, did it not?

Mrs. GREER. I was the only clerk at that time in our office and doing all the clerical and stenographic work at that time, and I did not get away from the office any night until especially late.

Mr. NESBITT. That is not what I asked you, Mrs. Greer. All that the brief consisted of was the disclosure of one single West Virginia authority, was it not?

Mrs. GREER. Judge Nesbitt, we should have those briefs in our file, and you could tell from the length of them. I do not recall how long they were.

Mr. NESBITT. You say you were driven to work late at night that night on the brief?

Mrs. GREER. Yes, sir; that is true.

Mr. NESBITT. Now, as a matter of fact, Mrs. Greer, this discussion occurred late at night?

Mrs. GREER. Late in the evening.

Mr. NESBITT. On the evening of May 29?

Mrs. GREER. I could not give you the date, sir; I do not know. Mr. NESBITT. And the next day was Decoration Day and the court adjourned over until the 31st?

Mrs. GREER. That may have been.

Mr. NESBITT. That is the fact, is it not?

Mrs. GREER. It probably is.

Mr. NESBITT. So that you were not forced to stay late that night to work on the brief?

Mrs. GREER. I did stay late that night to work on the brief. Mr. NESBITT. Oh, you did stay late that night to work on the brief?

Mrs. GREER. Yes, sir.

Mr. NESBITT. Not because you had to stay?

Mrs. GREER. Yes, sir; because I was called in by one of the assistants to take that brief and I remained there and wrote it out.

Mr. NESBITT. You say that once in Wheeling, when a night session was held, that you went into the court room to see Charles V. Price, the official reporter

Mrs. GREER. Yes, sir.

Mr. NESBITT. And you saw certain things occur?

Mrs. GREER. I did.

Mr. NESBITT. And you say Judge Baker was then in a condition you regarded as-what?

Mrs. GREER. I say, from Judge Baker's appearance, I believe he was under the influence of liquor, and after court adjourned, when he came down the corridor with Mr. I. Wade Coffman, he was grossly intoxicated, so much so that before court adjourned he was sitting in his chair and could hardly stay at the desk.

Mr. NESBITT. Now, Mrs. Greer, I asked you about Judge Baker's condition.

Mrs. GREER. Well, when he came down the corridor with Mr. Coffman, I thought he was intoxicated.

Mr. NESBITT. That is the question I asked you.

Mrs. GREER. That is only my honest opinion. I did not smell his breath, but that is my opinion.

Mr. NESBITT. I understand. When was it' this occurred; what term, in what year?

Mrs. GREER. I could not tell you that, but it was during the trial, I think, of one of the conspiracy cases. I know Mr. Price was there reporting that term of court.

Mr. NESBITT. And had the jury stayed?

Mrs. GREER. I am not certain it was the conspiracy case. I know Mr. Price was the reporter and I know the court had a night session. I went in just before adjournment of court to talk to Mr. Price.

Mr. NESBITT. Had the jury been in the box?

Mrs. GREER. I can not tell you that now. My recollection is it was, but I could not say positively.

Mr. NESBITT. The jury had been back for the night session? Mrs. GREER. That is only my recollection. I can fix that date for you, Judge Nesbitt, in this way: Russell Barrett was coming to Parkersburg the following morning. He came into our office to see if there was anything he could bring down for us, or anything he could do for us here, and he was to leave on the 10 o'clock train the next morning. Young Mr. Barrett was called up and told not to come to Parkersburg, and he took charge of the clerk's desk in the court the next day. If Mr. Barrett could fix that date, that would show it to you. I can not recall it for you.

Mr. NESBITT. Was Russell Barrett there that night when you say Judge Baker was intoxicated?

Mrs. GREER. I can not recall whether he was in the court room that night. I hardly think he was. I know Mr. Coffman was sitting at the clerk's desk.

Mr. NESBITT. You surely know whether the jury stayed that night?

Mrs. GREER. No. sir; because I went into the court room-I probably knew at that time, but I do not remember now-I went into the court room just before adjournment to speak with Mr. Price about something.

Mr. NESBITT. I believe that is all.

Mr. DYER. You will try to furnish that transcript, will you?
Mrs. GREER. I will, sir.

Mr. SCHUCK. I hold in my hand now the order entered October 20, 1921, by Judge Baker-a copy of it. It was examined by the other gentlemen and is conceded by them to be a copy of the original as entered at that time, which I desire now to offer in this case, by which all the liquor was required, from October 20, 1921, to be sent to Elkins.

(The paper above referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 6" and appears in the record, supra.)

Mr. DYER. I think we had better take a recess at this point and come back this evening. Those witnesses that have testified, unless there is objection or desire on the part of counsel to retain them. here, will be excused. The others will report here at 7 o'clock. (Thereupon the subcommittee took a recess until 7 o'clock p. m.)

EVENING SESSION

(The committee reconvened pursuant to the taking of the recess.)

TESTIMONY OF HON. THOMAS A. BROWN-Continued

Mr. SCHUCK. Judge, confining this part of your examination now to the question of Judge Baker's drinking and intoxication, I want to ask you whether, during the time you have been district attorney, during the time he was on the bench or presiding at various terms, you have ever noticed him under the influence of liquor?

Mr. BROWN. Yes; I have.

Mr. SCHUCK. How frequently was that?

Mr. BROWN. Well, I would not attempt to say how frequently. I recall one incident right near the close of the January term held here in Parkersburg in 1922. It was near the close of the term and he came to my office to discuss some matters and he was noticeably under the influence of liquor. I could tell that and I smelled the odor of liquor on his breath.

I remember that he was discussing some matters in connection with the office and about his visit that he was going to make to Washington as soon as he got away from here. That was one time. Another time was, I think, during the May term at Parkersburg, in 1922. It was, however, probably in the month of June, but it was in the term that began in May.

Mr. SCHUCK. Usually termed the May term at Parkersburg?

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir; that was the time that he had his head done up in a wet towel. He came into my office for some purpose. As I remember, he was in his shirtsleeves and he was then noticeably under the influence of liquor. He claimed that he had a splitting headache and court adjourned early that day, as he said he was going to adjourn the court early or had adjourned it early on account

29045-25-PT 1—— 9

of having such a splitting headache. It was either just after court had recessed for noon, recessing at an early hour, or it may have been in the afternoon when court had recessed for the day. I know that it involved an early recess of the day's session.

Then again at Wheeling during the fall term

Mr. FOSTER. What year?

Mr. BROWN. 1923. It was during the conspiracy trials up there. They lasted for about six weeks, near six weeks. It was a special term which began in September, about the 20th of September, and ran on into the regular term. It was on that occasion, I think the same occasion Mrs. Greer referred to. There was a night session of the court, and we had convened there for some purpose. I do not believe there was any jury, but I am not sure about it.

It seems to me it was for the purpose of discussing some legal questions involved, and I recall this incident, that Mr. Coffman, the clerk, was grossly intoxicated in the court room. He came to me and talked all kinds of silly talk.

Mr. FOSTER. The judge or the clerk?

Mr. BROWN. The clerk was the one that was intoxicated there that evening, and I say Judge Baker, who was on the bench, was under the influence of liquor, markedly so, from his appearance.

Mr. FOSTER. Who made the silly talk?

Mr. BROWN. The clerk. I remember he wanted to put his arms around me, and I think it was the same afternoon-I won't be positive about that-I know there was some laboring man; I have the two instances connected together-I think he was a tailor. He was in the court room. It was that afternoon, I think right along about that time--I do not remember the tailor's name-but it was reported to Judge Baker that there was a man drunk back there in the court room. He ordered him arrested, and he was arrested and put in jail.

I remember that that night his two boys, two youngsters, schoolboys, about 16 years of age, came to my office to plead for their father, to get him out of jail. He was brought in the next morning and fined, I think, $25 or $50. Those two instances were connected together. At least, I have them associated in my mind.

Mr. SCHUCK. Was that on the same evening that he fined this man that you say he was under the influence of liquor?

Mr. BROWN. The man was arrested in the evening, or the afternoon, and taken to jail, and as I remember, he spent the night in jail. It was that evening that Mr. Coffman was in the court, while court was in session, and I do not hesitate to say that he was in a gross state of intoxication, right in the presence of Judge Baker, who was sitting on the bench, and the judge himself, in my judgment, was under the influence of liquor and was drinking at that time. It was the next morning that this laboring man, the tailor, was brought in and given the fine. I do not know what his name was, but the records will show. I think it was $25 or $50.

Mr. SCHUCK. How many other times were there that you know of in which you smelled liquor on his breath during sessions of court?

Mr. BROWN. Well, I would not attempt to enumerate the times. It was Judge Baker's habit while we were on speaking terms, to frequently call me up to the bar to discuss matters that were in court, and it was so frequently that I would not attempt to name the times.

Mr. CONIFF. What was that? What was so frequent? Mr. BROWN. That I smelled fumes of liquor on his breath and knew that he had been drinking.

However, I can not say that I ever saw Judge Baker on the bench so grossly intoxicated that he was incapacitated to transact business. That is a relative term. A great many people, even scientists, take the position that a very small drink of liquor incapacitates a man to a certain extent, that his mind is not as clear, but I would not say that he was incapacitated at any time.

I recall another incident. In 1922, we were on our way to Martinsburg to attend the April term of court. The district attorney's force left here on the afternoon train, what we call No. 12. It leaves here about 2.30 in the afternoon. At Grafton, Judge Baker and Mr. Coffman and, I think, Miss-I forget her name now-Cochrane, who was the judge's stenographer, got aboard the train at Grafton. They had the drawing room and I went in to pay my respects to the judge and Mr. Coffman.

When I entered the drawing room, I smelled a very strong odor of liquor. There was a large suit case sitting on the inside of the drawing room, near the door. I will say then that Mr. Coffman was under the influence of liquor to a considerable degree and Judge Baker showed at least that he had had a drink. The suit case was sitting there. W. D. Brown, a prohibition agent, came in and he stooped down and took hold of the suit case to lift it up off the floor. I noticed that he had to take a second try before he lifted it up. I could tell by the strain of his body and his arm that it was quite heavy, but did take another try of it and got it off the floor that time and set it back down on the floor. I could readily see that it had something very heavy in it.

He said to Wade Coffman, "Wade, what have you got in there? I believe you have got liquor in there"; and Wade said, "You ought not to ask such embarrassing questions," or words to that effect, and passed it off as a joke.

Mr. SCHUCK. Was Judge Baker present there at that time?

Mr. BROWN. Yes; Judge Baker was there. He was present in the room-the drawing room. Soon after that the suit case was moved into the little toilet room attached to the drawing room and there were frequent trips made in there.

Mr. Coffman took the conductor in there-that is, the conductor on the train. To the best of my recollection, Judge Baker made a trip or two in there and I think he and Wade were in there together. Wade invited me in and I declined to go. The conductor, when he came out, passed right by me and I could smell the odor of liquor on his breath.

This is hearsay evidence, but he told W. D. Brown-I do not know whether we have a subpoena for him or not, but we sent in his name to be subpoenaed

Mr SCHUCK. For Brown?

Mr. BROWN. Yes. The conductor told Mr. Brown that he had been in there and had been offered a drink and it was so rare that a man had an opportunity to take a good drink of liquor any more that he could not withstand the temptation and spoke about it being against the rules for him to drink, but nevertheless he was taking a chance on his job.