Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1860-06-18

any morality which exhibits itself in i0jus-
tice is spurious and IL is doubtful if any inn
morality can be worse than injustice in q
judicial tribunal. The learned say that the
word in the Scriptures, which is translated
righteousness" means justice; therefore, to
affect righteousness without justice would be
aeontradiction. Theimmorality developed in
the case of Stewart Us. Warren, in the Su-
perior Court, although lamentable, was as
Judge Storer stated, scarcely involved in
the question at issue, and his exaggerated
denuheiaton of the offense of the parties, if
# had any weight at all, could only have had
the effect to introduce improper considera-
tions into the minds of the jury. v,- f
A woman sued man for money deposited
with him. they had lived as husband and
wife, six years, without legal sanction; but,
as she claims, the connection began under
promise of marriage. The man deserted,
and she sued for this money, being her earn
ings as an actress. She seems also to have
supported him. The Judge declared in his
charge to the jury, that neither of the par
ties was entitled to any sympathy" that
such an exhibition of human depravity has
never been developed in the Court-house;"
"the moral sense of the community has been
outraged" ur.
Is II true that this Is the worst exhibition
of human 1epravity that has ever been made
in the Courthouse? ofallthe atrocious Grim
inals, hung and unhung, in this city, can
this impress the mind Of any sane man as the
worst exhibition of depravity2 1t is an os-
tentatious exhibition Of the Judges indig-
nant virtue, very much at the expense of
truth and justice and injustice ought to be
quite as discreditable to Judge, as the want
of chastity to woman. .s3r r.
By what code of morality is woman, who
has been robbed, declared not entitled to any
sympathy in a court of justice, because she has
lapsed from virtue (which declaration meant
in this case that she was not entitled to
Justice, for it could only have had that effect.
Not the code of the Old Dispensation, GER
tainly, for Solomon judged u case between
two harlots, and decided entirely upon SYM
pathy, and distinguished his judicial wisdom
thereby. Suppose that Judge Storer had
presided In that case the merits would haze
been lost in the Judges virtue; he would have
declared that neither of the parties was en-
titled to any sympathy" that neither party
is entitled to the interference Of court in
aid of what is to be regarded not only as an
unlawful, but an immoral act" that $50 far
as there was any demand by this plaintiff
that grew out of this unworthy, immoral and
illegal connection, l. can not be sustained
that "the moral sense Of the community had
been outraged" and Judge Storer would
have healed it by sending both the women
i'up for thirty days." and the child to the
Orphan Asylum.
1t is not according to the Christian code o.
morality, certainly. Christ was person O
nearly as high morality as Judge Storer, bu
he did not show it, when the adulterou
woman was brought before him, by declaring
that "Such an exhibition of human depravit.
had never been developed, that "The mora
sense of the community had beeh outraged,
and that the woman "Was entitled to n,
sympathy" Doubtless Judge Storer woult
have thought that Christ's way of disposipI
Of that case showed great looseness of moral
in Him, and the Judge would have been pre-
pared with basket full of stones, anxious t
begin. As this moral code seems TO be unlik
the Bible or the Christian Dispensation, W
suppose it must be new revelation.
We.are aware that the cases are not para
lei, inasmuch as Christ was called upon I
Judge the womans fault; while Judge Store
was not; it being something outside th
question At ;eera bafnra thu Hnnrf and h
Judgment upon 1t being an exercise of pur
benevolence.
To persons whose moral faculties are ne
overthrown by the necessity for exhibitin
their own virtue, the most "outraging" fes
ture in this case, was the mans desertion {
awoman who had lived with him as a wifi
and supported him for six years, and
whom the judge said: " 1t is very evidei
that the woman must have had q strong a
fection for this man, and that she relied O
him" But the Judges incorporate denuI
Citations of the immoral fagrancy of IL
parties could only injure her, and aid tt
man to escape with her earnings; for Il
only impression which it was calculated
make ON the jury was, that neither part
was worthy TO come into Court and demar
justice, and, as she was the plaintiff th
extra-moral view of the case would have
prived her of her claim, for the benefit of d
man whom she had trusted. This is the WI
that Judge Storer would have vindicated Il
morality of an outraged" community.
The woman alleges promise Of marriaG
Had this been fulfilled the money. would ha
become her husbands, and che could ha
made no legal claim to it. She probably
posted her money with him in this expect
ton; aud her claim for it was made becau
he deserted her; yet this just judge said "T
jury might well ask themselves whether su
claim would ever have appeared, unless
separation or some difficulty occurred to
ducs It," So II would seem that for men
inveigle women out Of their money
promise Of marriage, is legitimate bu
mess, provided they inveigle the
into an illicit cohabiAtion also.
this administration of law Judge Stor
would heal the outraged moral sense of h
community"
The more we examine this Outrage,
moral code, the more we find II unlike an
either Hebrew or Christian, and the mo