April 7, 1887.] 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



229 



But the grand farce was apparent to those who attended 

 tbo hearing when the Hon. Lewis Barker began the 

 closing argument for the defense. He showed them, by 

 the constitution of the State, that Mr. Harmon had 

 brought his charges to the wrong tribunal: that to re- 

 move such office? impeachment was necessary, and that 

 impeachment could come only from the Legislature. 

 But he suggested that they should go on and try out the 

 case there lor the sake of seeing what the complaint 

 amounted to. He then proceeded to handle the case as 

 it so richly deserved. He said: 



I make the point that your Excellency has no authority 

 even to initiate the movement here asked for. This is not 

 the depart ment of the government in our State to do what is 

 asked here in the form in which you are asked to do it. The 

 constitution has wisely provided how a man shall be re- 

 moved from a civil office, It provides that: "Every person 

 holding any civil office in this State may be removed by im- 

 peachment for misdemeauor in office; and every person hold- 

 ing any office maybe removed by the Governor, with the 

 advice of the Council, on t he address of both branches of the 

 legislature. But. before such address shall pass either House 

 the causes of removal shall be stated and entered mi the 

 journal of the House in which it originated, and a copy 

 thereof served on the person in office, that he may be ad- 

 mitted to a hearing in his defense." The Senate shall have 

 power to try all impeachments, etc." The charge here is in 

 the nature, of an impeachment, but instead of by the House 

 of Representatives, to be tried by the Senate, to be followed 

 by a call upon your Excellency to exercise your power as 

 Governor, we find one George M. Harmon, a gentleman from 

 Connecticut, coming in here as the impeacher and filing his 

 charges, assuming the authority of the House of Representa- 

 tives of Maine. This gentleman from Connecticut comes 

 here and asks you to usurp the powers of the House and 

 Senate and remove arbitrarily, if you can get the consent of 

 your advisers, these commissioners from office. 1 say you 

 haven't the power to do that thing. The power of removal 

 is with the Governor and Council, not upon charges for mis- 

 demeanor in office, that is by impeachment, but by virtue of 

 the power of appointment which is given to the Executive. 

 Tn the formation of our government, both state and national, 

 in contemplation of the change of the administrations and 

 parties, the power of removal through the power of appoint- 

 ment is given to the Executive. Removal follows as a con- 

 sequence of the appointment and as au incident to it. And, 

 as our court say: "This should obviously be so, else the 

 Governor might create vacancies he could never fill; because, 

 the Council not consenting to his nomination, the offices 

 would remain vacant, Hence, removals have been by con- 

 firmed nominations. The removal is in consequence of the 

 appointment of au officer; it never precedes it." Now, I 

 grant that if the question here were the appointment of 

 say John Brown, of Rangeley, as a fish commissioner, in 

 place of Mr. Stilwell, your Excellency would have the power 

 to make the nomination and get the consent of the Council 

 thereto; and in consequence of that Mi - . Stilwell would be 

 removed. But that is not what is asked for here, and we are 

 not trying that case to-night. They ask for this arbitrary 

 removal. Whether they took advice of counsel in this State 

 or another I do not know. I only know we find a gentleman 

 from another State asking the Executive Department of 

 Maine to usurp an authority that the constitution never in- 

 tended it should enjoy. 



* * * As my brother Bisbee said, no citizen of the six or 

 seven hundred thousand people of this State comes here and 

 makes these charges. Nobody in the State of Maine has 

 filed charges. These gentlemen, Mr. Stilwell and Mr. 

 Stanley, have been at the head of this commission ever since 

 we started this vast enterprise. Our forests of ten millions 

 of acres had comparatively no game within them, and our 

 large rivers and inland waters no fish. I was in the 

 Legislature when this movement was inaugurated to restock 

 our forests and streams, and I remember the sneers with 

 which E, M. Stilwell and H. O. Stanley were met iu their 

 attempts to do what? Why, to restock the waters of Maine 

 with fish, and bring back the game that had disappeared 

 from our forests. These two gentlemen stood in advance of 

 almost every other man upon this matter and they were 

 pointed at with derision, and as crazy men who did not know 

 what they were talking about, and niggardly appropriations 

 were made from year to year for this vast interest. But 

 these gentlemen have stood by the work until now, and I 

 need not repeat to you the great change that has been 

 wrought within the last fifteen years. To-day our forests 

 are alive with game and our waters with fish, and the State 

 of Maine owes that to these Fish and Game Commissioners, 

 E. M. Stilwell and H. O. Stanley. 



* * * The second charge reads: "2. That Commissioner 

 Stilwell has caused said George M. Harmon to be maliciously 

 prosecuted, when he knew said Harmon was not guilty of 

 the offense charged, thereby causing him great iuconven- 

 ience, expense and discomfort." 



How does this question present itself to you to-day? George 

 M. Harmon of Connecticut, by his own concession, occupies 

 what position? This impeacher, this imported House of 

 Representatives to frame articles of impeachment against 

 these men, how does he stand here? On a day in June, 1881, 

 he hunted a deer; he killed a deer, or caused it to be killed, 

 by his own voice ordering it to be done. His man Thresher 

 having first struck a blow, was of course responsible for 

 that; but when he had done that the next act was by the 

 order of Harmon himself — "cut his throat." The order was 

 carried out, and he packed the deer and carried him out of 

 the State, This is not denied, and it was on Sunday. This 

 innocent man accused of an offense of which he was not 

 guilty! There were three distinct offenses. . The Chief 

 Justice said there were two distinct offenses; they would not 

 allow us to read it, as the best lawyers in the State will also 

 say, two offenses beyond a doubt and one about which there 

 may be a question. 



The hunting and killing and exportation were two distinct 

 offenses; two men, each guilty of the hunting and killing, 

 and each liable to the same penalty for that, and Harmon, 

 guilty of the transportation and liable to a penalty for that. 

 Whether or not lie would be liable under the Sunday clause 

 of the fish and game law there may be some ground for 

 doubt, although here in New England, thank God, wehaven't 

 quite outgrown the idea that it is an offense to violate the 

 Sabbath. But there was a violation of the Sunday law 

 under another clause, and there were three distinct offenses. 

 And yet he says that he is not guilty, and Mr. Stilwell 

 caused him to be prosecuted for an offense of which he was 

 not guilty! This man not guilty, with the blood of the deer 

 upon his hands, going and hunting up a citizen of Maine, 

 desiring to commit a fraud upoii justice and the admin- 

 istration of law by a collusive prosecution! There are law- 

 yers in this board of advisers who know that it has always 

 been held that a prosecution by one's own procurement in 

 that way is a fraud upon the law and will not stand, and the 

 court, the Chief Justice, so ruled to the jury; that if by his 

 procurement that was done, it was no such prosecution and 

 no such judgment as the law in its purity and the purity of 

 its execution will recognize anywhere. This man goes and 

 solicits a man to accuse him and to defeat the ends of the 

 law. Liable for a fine of $40 and costs, he uses his money 

 for a partial payment. But he does not even pay for one 

 offense. He pays his money into the hands of a man whom 

 he says he thought was a warden. The man was not, and he 

 did not sign the warrant as a warden. He knew himself that 

 he was not a warden. The statute gives fish and game wardens 

 exclusive authority to institute prosecutions for fourteen 



days after the commission of offenses. If an offense is com- 

 mitted and no warden prosecutes within that time, then and 

 not until then somebody else may step in and institute a 

 prosecution. So in this case the party making the complaint 

 was not a warden and the fourteen days had not gone by, 

 yet the next morning at 4 o'clock, the day after the offense, 

 they go through this farce of a compliance with the law. A 

 nice hour to hold a court for the convenience of a foreign 

 gentleman not guilty! He procures a citizen contrary to and 

 in violation of law, to institute a prosecution in his own be- 

 half, for his own purposes and for his benefit, a prosecution 

 that he could not inaugurate himself ; and they g" at 4 o'clock 

 in the morning and wake up counsel and a justice, and up 

 there on the Rangeley shores, in the chamber of a man's 

 house, with a court in shirt-flaps, as it has appeared from 

 testimony heretofore, they held the proceedings. And here 

 he says he is not guilty! This innocent man falsely accused! 

 Up there accusing himself and pleading guilty, and shelling 

 out his $40 to this barefoot fellow and paying it to the wrong 

 man, then! lie pays it to the man whom he solicited to get 

 up these proceedings, instead of paying it to the justice as 

 he ought to have done, and getting the judgment and sen- 

 tence he ought to have had. He got no adjudication, I ask 

 the lawyers of this council to look at that record and they 

 will find that there has been no adjudication, no sentence 

 imposed, and no compliance with a sentence. I say there 

 was a prosecution without legal foundation, without legal 

 force, and one that would not lie sustained for a moment in 

 auy court in the State, and it was so ruled in the trial at 

 Bangor. 



Now a second prosecution was afterward instituted, mali- 

 ciously this man would have you believe, for an offense of 

 which* he was innocent! He does not claim this here upon 

 the ground that he had once paid, but he says he was inno- 

 ceut of the charge. He had plead guilty to the charge and 

 brought himself out, as he thought, and because a second 

 prosecution was brought by Mi'. Huntoou, upon advice of 

 counsel, he calls it malicious. One of the civil officers of 

 Maine has been malicious in instituting a prosecution, 

 therefore the Governor and Council must remove him. That 

 is it. Where comes in the malice? Mr. Stilwell advised Mr 

 Huntoou to get counsel, and the lawyers of this board know 

 what protection that is to aman instituting any prosecution. 

 No man can know tha t his prosecution is well founded until 

 he goes and takes counsel. If he is advised by counsel it is 

 his protection, and he cannot be held for malice if he acted 

 in good faith. The man goes to the same justice who issued 

 the' preceding warrant for advice, and he gets it. He also 

 gets the warrant and notifies the accuser, who, by a cou- 

 vouient arrangement, appears, and a second farce is enacted. 

 He goes before the justice and claims that he has been before 

 convicted of that offense, and the justice rules that, the 

 former record shall be a bar to the complaint. The man 

 didn't pay then. Now. for that he says Mr, Stilwell had 

 malice toward him. They never had seen nor met each 

 other up to that, time. Mr. Stilwell merely desired to 

 execute the law, and what malicious, motive could he have to 

 punish this gentleman further? Not the slightest in the 

 world. Where begins the malice? On ,1 nly 1 9 George M. 

 Harmon says in a threatening letter to Huntoou: "So far as 

 Stilwell is concerned, I will find means to deal with him 

 through the next Legislature of Maine." Where is the 

 threat? Where is the malice? Who is the malicious man 

 who is actuated by an unworthy motive? Is it Stilwell that 

 is hunting or being hunted? Is it Harmon that is being 

 hunted or is he the hunter? "I will chase him to the Legis- 

 lature." Then he hadn't these eminent counsel perhaps to 

 advise him, and he thought the Legislature the proper 

 place to go tor impeachment. The same threat was made as 

 to Huntoou. He would follow him. On Aug. 20, 1884, this 

 innocent man, without malice and innocent of any crime, 

 writes over his own signature to Mr. Stilwell, a Fish Com- 

 missioner of Maine: "By the time I am through with you I 

 will try to show you that my threat to Huntoon was not 

 brag." He had threatened to Huntoon that he would pur- 

 sue "that old cuss Stiiwell;" he had threatened that he 

 would chase him to the next Legislature and give him 

 enough of it. He now writes to Stilwell himself what Ihave 

 just read. And this is a part of the carrying out of that 

 threat, Mr. Governor. He stands here to-night with the 

 same motive, the motive which has prompted him in every 

 step he has taken in this matter, prompted him in the suit 

 at Bangor, prompted him in the suit at Farmington, and 

 nrompts him here to-night in a proceeding unheard of in the 

 history of our State. This innocent man followed as a crim- 

 inal, as he would have you understand, pursued by officers 

 of the law unjustly and in malice, goes over to Bangor and 

 puts his character and reputation in issue on a technicality, 

 and a jury find a verdict practically against him with the 

 value of his reputation assessed at one dollar and twenty- 

 five cents! This eminent gentleman, who is so liberal that 

 he wants to pay Thresher's fine and wants to get Huntoon's 

 money for the sake of getting at Stillwell, next sues Huntoon 

 for the money he had paid him, half of which had already 

 been paid into the State treasury. That suit was at Farm- 

 ington, and the verdict was in favor of Stilwell. This man 

 has pursued Mr. Stilwell in every form of attack which his 

 malice could devise. He has pursued Mm in the courts and 

 through the press, and now come these articles of impeach- 

 ment, and he undertakes to make the Executive of Maine 

 believe that he is this injured man when his very threats 

 which I have read show the true animus of these proceed- 

 ings. And here is Mr. Stil well's letter that he. complains 

 of. Let us find this malice here, He directs Mr. Huntoon 

 to go to Philips and get a warrant out against Harmon for 

 killing a deer on Sunday. * * * Mr. Stilwell felt that he 

 had the authority of the State behind him, and Huntoon, 

 after taking counsel, inaugurated the prosecution, unsur- 

 passed by any that has ever been iusti tilted in this State; 

 two suits, an impeachment, newspaper attacks, and I do not 

 know what else. It is unparalleled in the history of mali- 

 cious proceedings in all the States of the Union. 



August 1 Mr. Stilwell wrote to Mr. Huntoon: "If Har- 

 mon pays his fine for killing a deer on Sunday, you may as 

 well let the penalty for transportation go." How niuch 

 malice was there in that when the men had been guilty of 

 three offenses? For one offense the State had got §20, and 

 by means of a mock prosecution the transgressor had been 

 let out of paying the costs. And to this Mr. Stilwell said, 

 no, t cannot afford to discriminate in favor of this man. I 

 shall not be justified by the people if I do it. I want him to 

 come up and pay What he ought to pay and do as he would 

 make one of our citizens do. If he does that you may as 

 well let the other transportation go. "Our duty is to en- 

 force the law. We do not know friends or enemies iu the 

 matter. We simply seek to do our duty as faithful officers 

 of the State of Maine in the execution of her laws. Mr. 

 Huntoon, do your dut y there, and we will stand behind you, 

 and we want no friendships or enemies iu the matter." Is 

 there malice in that, or is the malice entirely on the other 

 side? 



Now these charges mean more than the striking down of 

 these two men; they mean a blow at this vast interest of fish 

 and game which has grown up . year by year under the fos- 

 tering care of these two men, and I ask that you see that the 

 public interests of Maine do not suffer in this direction, and 

 that there shall be no uncertain sound go out from this 

 department, but that your verdict shall show that the State 

 of Maine knows its faithful and trusted officers who have 

 served it all these years, not for their miserable pittance of 

 pay, but from a devotion to the cause, from an interest in 

 the subject such as no other men in Maine have manifested. 

 Be cautious that no uncertain sound goes out from here to ] 

 encourage such attacks as these from the poachers in the 



State who are in sympathy with this persecution of our Fish 

 and Game Commissioners, who stand, at home and abroad, as 

 the representatives of not only our fish and game interests, 

 but the fish and game interests of every State in the Union, 

 and cited by them as authority in all matters relating there- 

 to; that no sympathy be extended to those who are in open 

 defiance of the law and are undertaking to break up the en- 

 tire department of fish and game in otir State. It won't do 

 to rater to that class. I ask you in the name of my native 

 State to stand by its interests better than that, and that by 

 an immediate dismissal of these whole proceedings there 

 may no uncertain sound go out from this Executive De- 

 partment as to the way in which our public officers are to be 

 treated in the performance of their duty. While you offer 

 rewards for the apprehension of Graves and McFarland, who 

 shot down our wardens iu the forest, I entreat you to give no 

 encouragement to any attempted assassination of the 

 character of our State Commissioners while standing so 

 fearlessly at their post of duty in the vigorous enforcement 

 of the people's law. 



THE LETTERS IN THE CASE. 

 TA.l 



New Haven, Conn., July 10, 1884. 



0eorge SuMooii, Bbq,: 



Beau Sir— I aminformed through Mr. Tuttlethat you in- 

 tend to prosecute me for taking a fleer out of the State or for 

 transporting one. I have no doubt in my own mind that I 

 was entirely free from all liability under any statute of the 

 charge. I have delayed writing you until I could submit the 

 case to my attorney, Judge I. P. Denniug, of this city. In 

 accordance with his instructions I beg to inform you that I 

 am fully prepared to meet any suit which you may choose to 

 bring, ana that I will demonstrate to any court, and so fully 

 that there will be no question about it, that if a deer was 

 transported from place to place at that time I was last at 

 Rangeley Lake, it was under your supervision and your sug- 

 gestion. ' I shall not pay one dollar more than I have already 

 paid in this case excefit ou the decree of the highest court of 

 resort. I shall also hold you responsible for any deviation 

 from the letter of the law yourself. So far as Mr. Stilwell is 

 concerned, I will find means to deal with him through the 

 next Legislature, I have treated the people of Maine fairly 

 and honorably, and having made a mistake, settled for it 

 like a man, and I certainly do not appreciate the treatment 

 I am now receiving. I expect to be at Philips on Saturday, 

 the 20th. Respectfully yours, George M. Harmon. 



[B.] 



State of Maine, ) 

 Commissioners of Fisheries axd Came, >• 

 BANGOR, Aug. 1, 1884. ) 

 Dear Mr. Huntoon— If Harmon pays his fine for killing 

 the deer on Sunday you may as well let the penalty for 

 transporting go. Our duty is to enforce the law. We do 

 not know friends or enemies in the matter, Mr. Harmon is 

 as deeply interested in having the law enforced as we are. 

 As I have never seen the gentleman and do not know him 

 by sight, and I presume the same is the case with Mr. Stan- 

 ley, we certainly cannot be accused of any personal feeling 

 in* enforcing the law iu this instance. If Mr. Harmon does 

 not pay his pen altv for killing the deer on Sunday, then 

 have him bound over for killing on Sunday and also for 

 transporting. Yours trulv, E. M. Stilwell. 



[C] 



Lake Point Cottage, Aug. 20, 1884. 



E. M. Stilwell: 



Dear Sir— On Monday evening tthe 18th) I answered to a 

 writ brought by your order through George D. Huntoon. 

 The suit was dismissed as being malicious and frivolous. 

 The expense to which I have been subjected through your 

 action amounts to about S50, and unless you at once reim- 

 burse me for the amount I shall bring an action against you 

 not only to recover the above amount, but also to recover 

 damages from the scandal which your ill-advised suit has 

 caused, and by the time 1 am through with you I will try to 

 show you that my letter to Mr. Huhtoon was nob brag. An 

 early reply will much oblige, yours respectfully, 



George M. Harmon', Greenvale, Me. 



In the speeches Messrs. Silsbee and Barker answered 

 fully all of the charges. When Mr. Baiker concluded 

 it was far into the evening, but Judge Wing was to make 

 the closing argument. He labored hard to show that 

 Messrs. Stilwell and Stanley should be removed, tut for 

 so eminent a jurist it was a hard case to argue. The 

 hearing was prolonged till nearly 10 P. M., and the next 

 morning closed. 



The Council has taken no action, for the Governor has 

 not submitted anything to them. It is evident that 

 the proposition in Mr, Barker's argument has fallen with 

 due weight. It is also suggested the defense all the time 

 had that point in view — that the removal could be made 

 only through impeachment before the Legislature, but 

 they allowed the complaint to go on. A private letter 

 from the Secretary of State says that when asked if he 

 was going to remove the Commissioners the Governor 

 answered most emphatically "No! There is no occasion."' 

 The Governor evidently sees the whole case in the 

 light of a sublime farce. I would not do Mr. Harmon 

 the slighest injury or injustice, and all I have ever writ- 

 ten concerning the case has been out of pure love for the 

 cause of fish and game protection. Mr. Harmon I have 

 never met, but I must say that it looks to me as though 

 he had utterly failed in the State of Maine to bring two 

 honest and eminent men into disgrace for trying to do 

 their duty. Special. 



Drowning Deer. — Bismarck, Dakota. — At this place 

 and in fact all along the river for fifty miles, the spring 

 flood has been playing havoc with the deer and other 

 game. Timber and brash line the bank of the Missouri, 

 the bluff is about a mile back from the river. When the 

 river breaks the ice forms gorges at different points, and 

 this throws the immense body of water and ice out over 

 the lowland and it flows out by the bluff first, thus cut- 

 ting off all escape for the deer. One gentleman told me 

 that he stood in bis doorway, eight miles above this place, 

 and with a field glass counted at one time thirty-three 

 deer surrounded by floating ice 2ft. thick, water 10ft. 

 deep; a few hours after the poor little fellows were seen 

 to plunge into the ice and water to meet the same fate as 

 hundreds of others all along the river. The morning the 

 ice broke two deer were seen passing down the river on 

 a big cake of ice, there was ako a 1 e r and a man as 

 well. The man was crying and pleading most pitifully 

 for help, but no help could - be given. It was nearly 

 night. T have not heard of his fate. The water on the 

 bottoms at Bismarck was from 10ft. to 20ft. deep. Down 

 iu the timber three or five miles lived parties who did not 

 get out in time; when rescued, two days afterward, they 

 were on a high piece of ground, but the water was up to 

 their feet, and in another hour three men and a woman 

 would have perished. I have been told that the few deer 

 that did escape are being killed along the bluff. One man 

 killed seven in one coulie; another three. We will attend 

 to their cases.— W, H. Willlamsosj'. 



