The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-05-26

on letter sheet, may De OBTAINED at our counting
room.
Judge BOND took occasion, yesterday, for the |
third time since his recent elevation to the Bench
to give the community the benefit of his judicial
views upon the cases in which violence might be
committed with propriety. A short time ago a
reporter of The Clipper was tried for assaulting
man who had posted him, and Judge BOND, in
dismssing the case, expressed his opinion that the
traverser had done exactly right. few weeks
previous to this decision an individual had been
held to answer before him, for entering the o1hce
ofan ex.magistrate, armed with cowhide and
pistol, and attempting to infiict summary punish
ment upon the quondam Justice. After hearing
tho evidence in the course of which it was assert
ed that the accused was indicating some ady's
character, the JUDGE remarked that the assailant
was perfectly justified in using the cowhde; but
the Court felt bound 10 fine him twenty-five cents
for threatening to the pistol and this sentence
was duly recorded. Yesterday JAMES, alias ToBE
MADISON, was tried for participating in an attack
on this Office nearly two years since, and was
found guilty of a common assault, and fined fifty
dollars and costs. On this occasion, too the
JUDGE thought proper to indicate to the public the
correct mode of taking private vengeance, es-
pecally where the parties to be assailed are editors
or reporters. His sentiments on this point he may
think are popular, but we take the liberty of sug-
costing that no man is fit for the position he &C.
cupies, who honestly entertains or dis
honestly expresses them We refer our read
ers to the evidence in this case and to the
&c Al oh he
in another column. We reproduce the paragraph
which Mr.. BARRY read, and which is said to have
provoked the attack on our office. 1t was, as will
be seen, merely '1ocal item, " giving an account
of a steamboat excursion, gotten up and partici-
paed in by 4 number of Mayor SwANN's police
and upon which a series of fights occurred. in
which MADISON and others took part and in
which also knives and revolvers were freely
brandished. Cur statement of the dsgraceful
transaction has never been, and cannot be, con-
tradicted. Now "a newspaper" says Judge
BOND, lis a public Journal intended to record
''public events, and he thereupon proceeds to
mis-state the tenor of the account complained of,
and to charge that we had no business to insert
it. We should like 10 know upon what ''public
"events' a newspaper has a right to comment,
if it is not authorized to describe desperate
riot, in which three of the city's police officers
and a number of notorious ruffians, who had
gone on pleasure excursion together, were en-
gagged? We mentioned MADISON, simply as we
named the other participants in the fight and in
so doing we followed the usages of the press the
wide world over. II is utterly false to allege
that we alluded to the number or character of the
females nv whom he wac occonn,n;ad TI,o ;r,;,
uation that we published, in connection with this
affair, any matter that was mot true is false like
wise But if we had erred this score, the injured
party, no matter who, would, according to Judge
BONDS ruling, have had the right to call on "the
editors and demand the author and an apology
and failing to receive such satisfaction che would
"be justified in taking cowhide and infllcting such
punishment on the editors, or reporter, as he
would think sufficient" "The Court" he
said, 'could not have approved such conduct, but
''the community would The indeceacy and in
science of such an announcement from the Bench
we will not discuss. We presume however, that
many editors will be thankful 10 his Honor for ac-
quainting them thus, in advance with the advice
he is prepared TO give TO ruffians, and they will
doubtless know how to act when the latter call to
demand the author and an apology" We may
also suppose that the travcrser will keep the law
in view if he should unfortunately be ever tempted
to commit another outrage 'MADIsoN," the
Judge says, FUSED very little discretion" che
should not have gone 10 Mr.. CARTER, who was a
''cerk in the office" Certainly not He had
better follow the plain intimation of the Court in
any similar difficulty, and armed with cowhide
and oIyf od;
themselves. IT is not merely on our own account
that we call attention to this disreputable opinion
of the Court. We have not been accustomed to
look to that tribunal for protection, any more
than we have been in the habit of shielding our
selves by asserting editorial or reporlorial prvi-
''leges 1t is only because we desire to see the
laws fairly and honestly administered that we
criticize the course of Judge BOND in this instance
We have no hesitation in saying, that the views
he expressed yesterday, utterly discreditable
to him as lawyer, and indecent, when promul-
gated with the sanction of his official position No
student who has passed year in a lawyers
Office can fail to know that it is impossible for a
Judge TO counsel or countenance violence in any of
the cases to which he alluded, without gross
violation of his official oath and character Unless,
therefore, Judge BOND should be more prudent of
speech hereafter, he may find that the public will
esteem his judicial opinions precisely as they now
value his affidavit concerning an e,ection-or
his statement as to the place of his residence. AL
though we cannot but be aware from the tone and
the occasion of his remarks, that he abused his
judicial position for the purpose of avenging, upon
this journal. in characteristic way, the just
comments heretofore made in itupon his eligibility
to the place he occupies, we assure our readers
that we have too much respect for ourselves, and
too just an appreciation of Judge BOND, to regard
his conduct in any other light, at this time, than
as public outrage and an official indecornm.