Judge on Trial

Mary Ritter Beard has spent much of her life writing U. S. history, notably The Rise of American Civilization in collaboration with her famed husband, Charles Austin Beard. In Washington last week U. S. history in the making touched Author Beard when the Senate sat to try the 13th Federal impeachment in Congress' 147 years. The defendant: Mrs. Beard's brother, Federal District Judge Halsted L. Ritter of Florida.

"Hear ye! Hear ye! Hear ye!" cried the Senate's portly Sergeant at Arms Chesley W. Jurney. "All persons are commanded to keep silence, on pain of imprisonment, while the Senate of the United States is sitting for the trial of the articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives against Halsted L. Ritter, United States district judge for the southern district of Florida."

When the 13th impeachment was voted by the House last month (TIME, March 16), Chairman Hatton W. Summers of the House Judiciary Committee declared that Senate proceedings in the twelfth impeachment, of California's Federal Judge Harold Louderback in 1933, had been "the greatest farce ever presented." At one point 93 out of 96 Senators were absent from performance of their rarest and highest Constitutional function. Washington still believes that Judge Louderback was acquitted partly because many a Senator declined to vote guilty on evidence which he had not heard. Last week, stung by Chairman Summers' rebuke, 82 Senators were in their chairs when the Ritter trial began.

Halsted L. Ritter, 67, moved to Florida in 1925 for his wife's health, four years later was appointed to the Federal bench by President Coolidge. Chief of the "high crimes and misdemeanors'' with which the House charged him last week was that, as party to a champertous proceeding, he had "corruptly and unlawfully" received $4,500 from his onetime law partner, Albert L. Rankin. Champerty, it was explained for the benefit of nonlawyer Senators, is a proceeding whereby a person having no legitimate interest in a law suit abets it with money or services in the hope of profit. Judge Ritter. the House managers asserted, had connived with his onetime partner and others to throw Whitehall, a Palm Beach hotel, into receivership, had thereupon granted Lawyer Rankin an exorbitant fee of $75,000, got $4,500 of it for himself.

Other charges were that Judge Ritter had practiced law after mounting the bench, filed false income tax returns for 1929 and 1930, accepted free meals & lodging at the Whitehall during receivership proceedings.

Chief defense attorney was brilliant, liberal Frank P. Walsh, who has made his name & fame by dramatic defenses of everybody from Edward L. Doheny to Tom Mooney. Of the three House managers, Alabama's chunky Sam Hobbs bore the brunt of the prosecution.

Throughout the six days of complex, technical testimony, the Senator-jurors had the painful experience of being forced to sit virtually speechless. When they had questions to ask, they scratched them on pieces of paper, sent them up by page to the presiding officer. Witnesses had to stand while testifying. First to be called was Lawyer Rankin. Stoutly he insisted that the $4,500 he had given Judge Ritter was payment on an honest debt--the sum for which he had bought out the assets of their partnership.

Less positive was he of why he had paid the money in cash, with no witnesses and no receipt. For one thing, he had been frightened by a Miami bank run. For another, "I did not wish to subject Judge Ritter or myself to criticism.'' Pressed by Representative Hobbs next day, however, Witness Rankin conceded that the two banks with which he did business were "very substantial," that he could "not recall'' of any Miami bank having closed.

Why, asked Senator O'Mahoney, had he insisted that the receivership proceedings be delayed and kept secret until Judge Ritter returned from hearing some cases in Brooklyn? "It was because I did not want any publicity on it until the receivership appointment," replied the witness.

Up stepped one Bert E. Holland of Boston, chief of the Whitehall bondholders, on whose behalf the foreclosure suit had been brought. He testified that he had changed his mind after the suit was filed, journeyed to Miami to ask Judge Ritter to stop proceedings. The Judge refused, said he, declaring that he did not like the idea "of people from out of the State coming into court in Florida, starting proceedings and then trying to have them dismissed."

Up stepped Chief Justice Fred Davis of Florida's Supreme Court. "It seems to me," he declared, when asked about the size of the fee which Judge Ritter granted to his onetime partner, "that $75,000 would be unreasonable."

Skimming through the remaining charges, the House managers rested their case after calling only 13 out of 28 witnesses. While Easter tourists gaped from the galleries, a procession of defense witnesses marched up to testify that Judge Ritter was innocent of all charges. Last and most ardent of them was Halsted L. Ritter himself. For three hours the small, white-haired old judge stood on his feet before his Senator-jurors, arguing, pleading, explaining.

"It was a perfectly honest transaction, gentlemen," cried he, "in payment of an honest debt arranged at the time I left the firm."

Had it occurred to him, inquired Senators McGill and Clark, that he could get his money by handing his ex-partner a fat fee?

"I never thought a thing about it," declared Judge Ritter, ". . . I can honestly say it never occurred to me at the time."

Said Defender Walsh, summing up: "[Judge Ritter] is an honorable and upright man who has been subjected to the most searching examination of any man in the history of this land."

Said House Manager Hobbs: "This man cannot be excused as ignorant. He has sinned against the bench he occupied and therefore against the people of the United States. The evidence demonstrates his guilt on each of these charges."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.