New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1868-10-21
Inc suits Against Butler IN the supe-
FLor Court ae Bmltlmere-- Arxuhaent
OF Caleb CuHht,n.

| 1850 Ab8hnnt nutleE IA the Bupe
Fhor Court at BnItImere-- Argulaen
OF Caleb Cu.hinx. - +
BALTIMORE, October 10. 1863 Consider
able excitement was created here to-dav
over the "Butler trial" as IL IL famiIiarly
termed. resulting from two suits. HciyiID N
their character, brought by Kimberly n
Brothers, for the recovery Of certa nron.
erty seized by General Butter at Fortress
Monroe; and another by Charles WoolIey
for the seizure Of certain dispatches in
Washington. General Butler, it will be
remembered, was served with process and
was temporarily detained, but was released
the case being thrown iuto the courts. Be.
low may be found synopsis of the pro.
ceedings in the cases had tc-iay:
The cases were argued before the Su.
perior Court on motion to vacate the ser.
vice of the notice of the pendency of the
suits. Messrs. Caleb Cushing and William
Schley appeared for General Butler. and
Messrs. r, j. Brent, Il. 7. Merrick and
William Meade Addison for Mr.. Woolley.
The opening was marked by the sharpest
legal play. Mr. Brent contended that the
motion was in the nature of a plea, to
which he demurred, thereon claiming the
right to open and close. Mr.. Schley insisted
that the motion as such gave to Buffers
counsel the right of commencing and con-
cludiDg. Various authorities were cited as
to this point of practice. Judge Dobbin
decided the practice of Maryland to be as
laid down by Evans practice. and sup.
ported the argumeat of Mr.. Schley.
Mr. Cushing read the petition upon
which the motion was raised, setting forth
the facts of the service of the writ and the
circumstances surrounding it. He alluded
to the fact of General Buffers election to
the Congress of the United States from
Massachusetts, and that while speedily
seeking his home Immediately after the ad-
Iournment of Congress he was served with
the notice of the suit, in violation of his
privileges as a member of Congress. He
held, therefore, that the process is nullity.
Mr.. Cushing proceeded with his argument
upon this point, effecting a very able
forensic speech, lasting some three hours.
he was followed by hr. Merrick very
closely in the opposite line'of argument.
The arguments of both gentlemen were
very exhaustive. Their investigation into
the whole subject of personal privilege and
the privileges of members of the English
Parliament and of legislative and judicial
ofhcers generally received the most
thorough discussion. One marked feature
OF the occasion was the absence
of any allusions. such as were
expected by the vast audience
assembled, in connection with the scenes in
which General Butler and Charles w.
'Woolley havelfgured Mr.. Cushng's ar
gument was regarded by the assembled
legal minds of Baltimore as one of the most
dignifed efforts, in connection with all the
circumstances of the case, that could be
made in this country. The urbane and
dignifed manner in which he referred to
the possible openings for illusions that
should! be very foreign from judicial tri-
bunal, was most consummate effort of the
finished orator. Mr.. Merrick, in sarcastic
vein, touching upon the exemption of
public officers from arrest, suggested that
the counsel for General Butler should 20
little further and claim their exemption
from all Productions of character. "al-
though" said he, "in this case the mem
Der probably does not need such priyi-
lege.' Beyond this acrid sentence the pro-
ceedings were marked by the utmost de-
corum. The court room presented an
array of legal and judicial ability seldom
brought together on one occasion.
From the pressure of business upon the
Superior Court the case was continued
until Saturday next, when the concluding
arguments will be made by Messrs. Brent
Schley and Addison. The speech of Schley
with the full lights of the efforts of Messrs.
Merriek and Gushing before him. is looked
forward to with great interest. The inter-
est manifested in the result of the case is
most intense, as Woolley, and Kimberly &
Brothers, the complainants in the case, are
all claimed as Baltimoreans. The court
rom was densely crowded, and the court
house building surrounded by an anxious
crowd; the returned rebel" community
forming, perhaps, the major part.