Saint Paul weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1858-1859, 1859-01-15

heart of stone? Alas we fear so; as without
even conjunction in behalf of their innocent
and unoffending families, they are consign
ed to obscurity. They have our earnest SYM
pathy but what is this in comparison to the
blow! For Judge COOPER, who has been
many years in the profession, and has attain
ed something of position as lawyer, we feel
serious concern; as, when we remember his
age, there is but little hope that he will live
long enough to overcome it; but as to Mr..
NoRroN, who is yet comparatively young
man, though he also had position very near
the head of the Bar in his part of the State,
and the descent is terrific one-yet for him
we live in better hopes. We think he may
outlive the effect of his overthrow
Still, as Christian editor of Christian
journal, in this age of Christian enlightenment,
and Sin these latter days of Judicial Retorus,"
we submit that it is a sad thng-very sad
thus, in the midst of their professional pros
perity and success, attained after years of toll
and with fair promise Of life of usefulness to
their fellow men, to strike down with one re-
lentless blow, two of our hitherto prominent
lawyers and citizens; and that, too, by a re-
fined cruelty, which even Sampson eschewed
when he slew the Philistines. He used only
ajaw-bone, while the editors of the Times en-
ploy the whole animal!
"The question of jurisdiction, in our opin-
ion, should never have been recognized" -
In our opinion " the writer of that sentence
has written himself, after the manner of GER
tain Dogberry, and shows that he is wholly in
competent to treat any judicial question. The
question of jurisdiction was the main question
in the case: and, as we learn from several
who were present, was presented by Mr.. NOR
TON with fitness and perspicuity which elic-
tied from both Bench and Bar anuiver-
sal expression of admiration. But, before
making our comments upon the case, and the
manner in which it was conducted, we will
quote again from the Times article:
1.-The Constitution, most clearly, makes each
branch OF the Legislature the Judge of the election
in the State has any jurisdiction whatever in sett
ing disputed rights arising between applicants for
| seats therein. Mr.. Colby's attorneys, instead of
| conhnlng themselves to this single point which
attitude before the public had it still claimed juris.
diction pleaded to the merits of the CASE and thus
| waived the question ofjurisdiction. So that now,
when the Republicans as party wish to arraign
solely to a coordinate branch of the government,
they will be met with the reply that the two prom
inent Republican lawyers who managed the case
for Mr.. Colby, admitted the jurisdiction of the
Court by pleading to the merits of the case. We
speak thus in no spirit of disrespect to the abilities
OF Messrs. Cooper and Norton but this is q matter
which may affect the interests of the whole Repub-
lican party much more than it affects their own in.
dividual client; and journalist of that party,
we claim the right to canvass the manner in which
| they got up their case"
We have quoted this entire paragraph to-
gether, for the purpose of exposing its false
hoods in as few words as possible 1t will be
observed that for the purpose of skillfully ex-
cusing partizan Judges while pretending to
censure them, for their having made parti-
IAN decision, the author of the article has not
only misrepresented and falsified every ma
terial fact, but has attempted to place two
prominent Republican gentlemen in grossly
| false position before the people of the State
This, Republican journal Ia paper that not
only attempts to screen offending Democratic
officials, but to misrepresent leading men in
the Republican ranks Out upon the knaves
But to the article: We before remarked,
that Judge COOPER had nothing to do with
the preparation or argument of this case; we
now add, that he was not the attorney of Mr..
Colby, nor did he in any manner participate
| in 1.-THE case. We make these remarks-not
for the purpose of relieving Judge COOPER
for we feel assured he most cordially approved
of Mr.. NoRToN's course-but in justice to
the latter gentlemen, who is entitled to the
whole credit Oh the very able manner in which
the case was presented to the Court.
The statement, that CoLBY's attorneys
pleaded to the merits of the case and thus
oaeiod the question of jurisdictions" is not
only absolutely and unqualifedly talse so far
as pleading to the merits" is concerned, but
the idea of giving the Court jurisdiction which
they otherwise would not have had, by thus
"waiving the question of jurisdiction" is
| simply ridiculous, and could have only Or
ignated with such Justinian as the writer of
the article in the Times.
In the first place there was no "plea to the
merits" and in the next, if there had been
fifty, it would not have affected the question
ofjurisdiction, one way or the other Still this
learned editorial Justinian was not satisfied
with asserting this absurdity once-in subse-
quent part of the article, he gives it great ad-
ditional, force like an unskillfully thrown BOOM
erang, by repeating it in an inherited form, thus:
they admitted the jurisdiction of the Court
by pleading to the merits of the case."
Poor sirnpletons silly knaves! They
have thus basely and wickedly lied-lied for
the purpose of pleasing Mr.. NORTON and
Judge COOPER in false attitude before the
people: but without information amongst the
whole of the little Times little clique, or Sib-
ley's Kitchen Cabinet to know, that their
falsehoods, once exposed, are fruitless-nay,
worse, ridiculous! We would, therefore, in
the spirit of kindness suggest to these gentle
men, that for the future they had better con-
fine themselves to stale news and oenar,1