The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-08-12
What is Consistent with an Unbiased
Judiciary?

JuuiCldEy'
TIE trial of John II. Surratt which has taken
place at Washington, has developed line of
conduct on the part of certain members Of the
bar which is as novel as the verdict, or rather
the non-verdict of the jury. Setting aside the
testimony adduced during the trial, and the
singular method of examination adopted by the
counsel for the prisoner, we would call atten-
ton to the amazing and disgraceful conduct of
Joseph H. Bradley, Sr. Our readers cannot
have forgotten the insolence which character
lied that gentleman's conduct and the AFRO
ganoe of his tone at the very outset of the
case. But not content with insult, he went
further, and after the adjournment Of the
Court assaulted Judge Fisher in the hall of
justice, seized on him, sick as he was, and
within the very confines of the Court struck its
presiding officer. Nor was this assault for
any conduct of his Honor while off the bench.
Had it been that a personal difficulty
had occurred away from the routine of official
duty, or had it been that the grounds for
offense were laid at any other time than during
the sitting of the court, such conduct might
have had some feeble palliation. 1t is not to
be supposed that the ermine can protect its
wearer when the wearer transgresses in his
private character the courtesy which is due
from gentleman to a gentleman. For words
spoken off the bench the Judge must be as
responsible as the common drayman. But
when in the discharge of his official duties,
when from his seat on the bench judge has
occasion to censure or correct an attorney
practising before him, and to compel from the
attorney that Difference which is due to the
official position of the judge, it is contrary to
all principles of common sense, 1t is sub
versive of all freedom land unbiased
action of the Judiciary, to allow the
attorney to avenge his assumed wrong by an
assault after the Court has adjourned. Sup
posing even that justice be on the side
of the lawyer, and that the judge was
really the offender, who is to decide whether
the grounds for an assault are sufficient or
not Is every lawyer to be the only arbitra-
tor as to whether the court has transgressed
its privileges ? Is every judge to be exposed
to the rage of defeated practitioner If such
Ia to be the rule, then justice is farce, the
Judiciary is no longer free, the court is little
better than the prize-ring, and the only
quality necessary for a successful advocate is a
well-developed muscle. Why not extend the
principle further, and let each juror be respon-
sible to the lawyer, and let him form his YER
dict with the fear of a castigation before his
eyes Then would Heenan and Morrissey
excel, and Webster and Benton and Dallas
take inferior places, to make room for the
champions of the prize-ring.
Mr.. Bradley assaulted Judge Fisher for a
decision on the bench. The case was pecu-
iarly aggravated one, and had it occurred in
our city would have received an instantaneous
punishment. Within an hour after the act
the name of the offender would have ceased to
appear on the list of attorneys. Judge
Fisher, however, pursued a milder course,
and allowed the trial of Surratt to continue
and come to a conclusion before he took any
step towards vindicating the dignity of the
Court. When, however, the jury had been
discharged he then directed that the name of
Mr.. Bradley be erased from the list of attor-
neys. In doing so he acted in the only man
ner possible which was consistent with the
respect of the Court and the preservation of
the dignity of the judicial tribunal. The fact
that four days previous to this action Mr.. Brad
ley had written challenge, is another argument
to prove that the expulsion of such a member
of the bar was eminently proper. The state
ment that the bar of Washington is opposed
to such an action is, we believe, an error.
Every right-thinking lawyer will heartily
approve of the preservation of the freedom of
the bench, and the action of Judge Fisher was
essential to vindication of the sanctity of
the ermine, and the preservation of the free
dom of that department of government on
which the people must entirely rely for
justice.
RumOred Intention of the President IN