Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1868-02-18
A PURITAN JUDGE.

cial Circuit in East Tennessee, is
reported by the Knoxville Herald as a
man who enjoys uncommon piety, and
opens his Courts with prayer. He
promised before his election to admin
lister justice according to Radical ideas,
and his proceedings on the bench are
said to be very affecting, moving citi-
zens, juries and criminals to tears, and
possessing uncommon junction. The
first case on trial coming at Rogersville,
was an action OF Trover for n mule, and
the following is the report of his honor's
charge to the jury, which we take from
the Herald
You, gentlemen Of the jury, are
solemnly sworn to try the issues OF this
cause, under the law as it shall be given
to you by the Court This is an action
brought by James Smith against Thos.
Robinson on a mule for damages, Some
of the lawyers have told you that this IS
an action of Trover. The Court tells
You it matters not whether it is Trover
or not, the thing in consideration, in the
first place, is a mule. You have been
referred by learned counsel to some
gentlemen by the name of Blackstone,
Kent, Chitty, Greenleaf, Coke, etc,
etc, but, although the Court is not
very we'll acquainted with the gentlemen
mentioned, it will charge you that
according. to its best information
they are all profane writers, and are
not entitled to any respect or authority
in Christian and loyal community, for
gentlemen, Christianity and loyalty go
| hand in hand To be loyal, man must
be a Christidn-hence it follows these
4 profane writer's, who ar but lewd fell
lows of the baser sort" cannot be re.
garded by you, in your deliberations as
Christian Jury. Therefore, we must
recur to first principles. We must go to
the source of law. That source is the
Almighty. himself, and the manifesto
tions of His law were first made through
Moses, who was made the leader of the
children of Israel. 1t is true there is a
second law-the law of the New Testa-
ment. But, gentlemen, this only applies
to a Christian, and not to rebel people,
and you will bear in mind that the
law is to be administered in this
Circuit entirely according to Radical
ideas. Hence, I cay to you that the laws
of Moses are the, true laws-moditied to
suit the purposes Of the rulers. Now, as
to the case in point. James Smith has
sued Thomas Robinson on mule for
damages. 1t is true the proof shows
that the mule was blind, thatit had not
been able to work for three or four years;
in fact that it was dead expense to the
family. And the Court is compelled to
say that it is not satisfactory whether
the family ought to have mule or not.
But, gentlemen of the jury, talking
about this mule brings US back to the
consideration of carnal and earthly
things. What was the law OF Moses Z
Let your minds follow him through the
wilderness. See how they rebelled against
the authority OF the Almighty. Often
was the Divine anger kindled at their
rebellion, but they would not believe.
This shows you, gentlemen, that rebels
are not to be trusted at all and further
more, we are shown that the sons of
Amelek were destroyed because they re-
belled against Moses, and this is another
reason why the loyal people should be
preserved. Again: Korah and his host
were swallowed up because Of their re-
belion-another striking instance OF
Divine rebuke to rebellion.
This case, nominally, involves a mule
for damages. The Court has no right to
say what is the value of that mule. As
he stands, the Court would say lwhat is
the writ Mr.. Clerk2 Answer, $40, ,00O)
that he is worth about $25, 900 if well fed
in Tennessee.
But you, gentlemen, are judges Of the
testimony in cases of this sort. This
mule, it seems, belongs to, or did belong
to, a Union man. The defendant was q
rel bel-a vile rebel Now, gentlemen,
the question arises what is rebel and
what is a Union man2 | mean loyal
man, a Christian man. According to the
principles already laid down by the Court
YOU will have no difficulty in seeing who
were loyal in the olden time. Look to
Daniel in the lions den. Who but a
loyal man could have been saved See
how loyalty was exemplifed in the fiery
furnace. What saved the Hebrew Chill
dren but loyalty2 Nothing-absolutely
nothing.
Now you will observe that in my charge
have made no reference to many impor-
tant occurrences recorded in the Bible.
Samsons catching the foxes and burning
the rebels grain; Judith in her attempts
upon the rebel Holofernes, and various
other matters / have not thought proper
to speak of Now as to the conclusion of
this case. You will observe that under
the Mosaic law the rule is an eve for an
eye, and tooth for tooth. ! charge
you, gentlemen, that this is the law
to day among loyal people. This man
Smith has lost his mule. 1t matters
not how. Smith is loyal, the other is
disloyal 1t makes no difference wheth-
er Robinson had anything to do with the
taking of the property or not Loyalty
settles the question. The value or quality
of the mule is not to be considered. 1t
is the mental suffering that we are to go
for. Think what Daniel suffered in the
lions den-think what Shadock, Mesh
ach and Abednego suffered in the fiery
furnace-thiuk what the Israelites,
through their long years of pilgrimage,
suffered, and then can You have any
doubt as to your verdict2
At last accounts the jury had not rem
dered its verdict