Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1867-08-09


Andr ow among them: in fine, was the He
nan and wore the Champions Belt. -
But we confess that for a while, Mr. Chief
Justice Crozier, in Searle VS.. Adams, and
Craft VS.. The State, made us think OF OF
dering a fig-leaf apron; and while we were
considering of what pattern it should be,
we bethought ourselves of reverting TO one
or two rounds of our Chief Justice in the
judicial prize-ring, as they stand recorded
in the Reports. And Allah be praised
He is ours yet. Mr. Chief Justice Crozier
pressed him hard and threw him upon the
ropes, but our Chief Justice has come to
time. and Mr. Chief Justice CroZier "alnt
no where"
Just note few of the rounds of our
Chief Justice, and we call upon the Bar OF
the State "Frae Maiden Kirk to Johnny
Groats, - to proclaim him champion. First.
Bottoms VS.. Kent, 3 Jones 154, on the
trial of an issue deriSarH UeL non, III reply
to proof that the propounder had used
threats of violence in procuring the eXecu-
ton of the script, held that it was not
competent for him to show that he was OF
an easy, quiet temper and facile disposition,
and therefore not likely to threaten vio-
lence."
PEARSON J. "The only opposing case is
State vs. Tacket, Hawks Rep. 90. 1t is
oyer-ruled by Tilly's case OF SO emascula-
ted as not to be able to generate a princi-
pie"
Now, this is figure Of speech 9 as is a
figure" With the naked eye you can see
the figures in it, but take perspective and
you will behold the members standing
boldly in nto-2'elieco. It is not only per- Sc
a model of a figure of speech, but as pic
ture, by word painting, it is equal to a
wood-cut. But it is even something more,
it is suggestive of the days Of Bob. Potter
and ii, CHI. 81 r. G..
Now We know that in the ring this has
been regarded as a sumner of blow, but
we have always thought that it should have
been counted foul, as it is evidently below
the belt.
Second. State vs. Willis, Z, Jones 1870,
I" An entry at night, through a chimney,
into log cabin, in which the prosecutrix
dwelt, and stealing goods therefrom, will
constitute burglary. although the chimney,
made of logs and sticks, may be in state
of decay, and not more than five and half
feet high" Manly and Battle, Judges. con-
curing.
PEARSON G. J. diSSentiente, in order to
beat it into the heads Of Manly and Battle
that they were wrong, manled them thus ::
&C In the case now before us, the top part
| of the chimney, funnel, had rotted off,
| and but for the few loose boards that were
laid over it, to keep out the rain, upon
which no stress is laid a smart dog could
easily have jumped in and stolen the lady's
meat, and if one or two more 2O10ds had
| been off, an enterprising old SOW could
| have performed the same feat
| When we shall be mortgaged and regis
| tered and shall be reconstructed, and shall
get back into the glorious Union, and shall
not be everlastingly "going home" and
| shall have literature of our own that can
| not be contiscated, we must have the judi
| Clcll OplllOuS vi our NIIIC1 y JUSTICE 11tolld-
| ted and illuminated.
What a picture this judicial opinion
alone would make. Group the prominent
| figures. chimney five and q half feet
high-a funnel that had rotted off THAT
would have to be in the back ground "a
few loose boards that were laid over it to
keep out the rama smart dog-the lady's
meat-an enterprizing old SOW perform
ing a feat It is better than Baiiey's va
rieties. The picture alone would be worth
more than the publishers price now.
Third In the matter of Hughes l, Phil. y,
Ho5eas Co, pus to try the legality of the ar
rest of citizen of North Carolina, upon
the requisition of the Governor of New
York. After deciding that the prisoner
must be remanded, and thus disposing final
ly of the case, by way of keeping his hand
in, the Chief Justice bearing in mind that
Chief Justice Ruffin-(who had worn the
judicial ermine, "whiter than light on
the Supreme Court Bench of North Caro-
lima for more than thirty years, and when
he laid il from his shoulders in 1860, had
added new lustre to it, whose early edu-
cation among the fancy had been neg
| lected, had declined to enter the Ring with
him, takes up the question 'was the Con-
vention of 1865 rightful Convention, for
| the purpose of re-organizing the State Gov
| ernment,'' or was it an unlawful Assembly?
Chief Justice Pearson says " that point
| was not made on the argument, but as the
| objection has been gravely urged e1seeOhere,
decent regard to public opinion makes it
proper to state The ground on which it is
believed that the officers of the State are
rightfully filled"
An article against the rightfulness of the
| Convention of 1865, had appeared in the
| public press of the State and the irresisti-
BILE conclusions of the arguments and the
clearly marked ability of the whole, had
pointed all, even c. j. Pearson, to ex-Chief
Justice Ruffin as the author. And it is
Chief Justice Ruffin whom he calls 'else-
4 L Al