The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1869-12-21

IT."
CarnINAL CouBT - Judge nshsr.-This
court was engaged Yesterday In the oousid-
sratIou Of the prayers for instruction In the
schursman case. ~ - ~ - -
a Tho argument 70 the Jury will begin to-
DAY, -. ~. ....r. -4.-.,, ff-II
4 Adjourned. .....r .-+ ..-.-,
ri.-a...1. a. n
hQuirr CouRT-Judgs WpN.zThh court
nae ne following orders yesterdayr
hedstreAk ". pougberty et OIL. The de-
fendann no< having appeared, Il was ordered
that nouce Of tns suit DO given them BY ad-
Verusement. rgl bda .,s7trr .-f ....
,uu,.. DIVORCE. .rrx -.
ssne piAnkman - NJ Blankman. Order
Rlhnung ioavo 70 Wundrhw one answer and
ME anotner, ana also OF divorce from the
nonas Of mstnmony fof me reasons stated
In the Dill reported In this paper In August
last ~ t's.rt- 49, ~ m ..
60. go ,,..Int
CIhcuir COUNT yndge Odrter.- This
cour' "ns occuPeo ~ iouows yesterdays
b. - III hswsr. .,l sui. 80.
49, ThI. ~ y, .,,a ne ,,V ,h Associa,
Won. inns ~ an action ior tne value OF
copies Of certain secret testimony In the I'm
Peachment chse, Iurnisned oy the conductor
OF ,no IIPrsn Newspaper 70 the artonne
an wssnng.on, ana oy nun opposed
~ 70 ,ne T r,osponaont o. certain western
Journas. .ne conslderation OF the case
v,un.s s ~ ye., e mornlngIT ana
slnoss ~. piAi"u"s' n'ouie anu mussey ior
ae ,s
t. pennoN VIZ cahed " tne plaintin,
ana ~ 'nc Soursc o. ciamination was asked
~~no'o ~ .iv", wnom va op'armeu tne IN
Sara,nsS ~ 'o 49,. - sne , iJ lug M,.ness
decnneo 70 answer, alcging that tue COM
munication was In confidence.
M mussey argued tnat tue witness was
pound 70 answer.
MI. ENJOY neld that the law did not re-
qu.,e .ne w'nos s,, 70 am, ans.er quesuSn wnen
sucn answer wouid tend 70 degrade MIN.
MI. Riddle argued that the honorable obli-
gatlons OF secrecy among gentlemen Of the
prese were not snen conndentlal communi-
cations as were protected BY the law. No
policy OF the law protected such communi-
cations. a.. Ia. .,.
M. rayne COMMENDED that when II was
might tend 70 degrade the witness, the whole
con.rossrsy as 70 tne iaw vas A. an end.
disposition to place the court in opposition
to the press, N''.
Judge Cartier said that there could DO no
opposition. The Court would administer the
strict rule OF law, whoever II might strike.
He would apply II TO anybody that conspires
TO violate law, whether they arc newspaper
men OF IOuOWerb Oh WneelOlrrOwH.
Mr.. Payne continued, urging that II the
censure degrades him under the general rnlcs
Of the Newspaper profession, at which he
makes his livelihood, he is not bound to
answer. Ofthat, the witness was the Judge.
The Court. Yes he must be the Judge
under tho rule Of the law as erpounded By
the Court.
AMER the argument. Judge Cartier said.
II the information which became the sub.
ject Of the question which the witness re-
fuses to answer was procured without con-
be the subject OF personal degradation In the
| contemplation OF the law. II the procure
ment Of this material for publication was In
the ordinary course Of newspaper enterprise
| which marks the majority OF their efforts to
furnish information, 1t cannot touch the
! character to disclose II. II the Information
'-s procured In contravention OF the law II
W.
may b. nwas or not 10 fact Is made to
Mn9ner :. ION Of privilege on the part
depend the ques'. yer or not. The law
OF tne witness 70 ans Wedge possessed.
steps 10 and says tnat KIM. = the viola.
.nat in,ormation acquired ,. -vlolat-
lion OF tue law, may exempt the pany N
ing tue law from disciosing the facts up;
the stand; ana whyi Because OF that faml-
lar principle OF Justice that no man shall DO
compelled 70 convict himself.
Inc Jaw also looked at It's moral effect
upon the witness, for the reason that no
man shall be compelled upon the stand to
oring nimseit INTO moral iniamy, ana this
very principe steps IN between the witness
upon tne stano and ms answer, and entities
MIN 70 inc interpretation ofthe law.
IL u was not there 10 no reason why the
witness should not disclose how he got II,
huu ,Iom "nom nc Bot "
Hh was against public policy that the In
iormauon, when should DC confined within
the archives OF the Government, was made
public through the newspapers, the witness
=, may not oe called upon 70 imRlicafe himself
In tnat violation OF puohc policy. He con-
cluded that under this Information as to his
duties tne witness must 90 LETT 10 decide
whether he would answer.
Mr., bennett SAID that under the instruc-
t,on OF tne court nc would decline TO answer
tue question. ~
H., u n, Harris, p recalled; Mt. Payne said
the penang question, In the case OF Mr..
Harris, was In substance the same as In that
OF III. benneu.
Inc Court ruled that he was bound to
privilege. inc question was not pressed,
ana ai.er detaiiing some OF the facts
reiatiye 70 lhe saie OF the Information 10 the
1rlo"ws agent, Mr. Harris lett the stand.
Messrs. Adams and others were examined
ior me plaintiff, and Mr. Young and others
Tor the defendant.
After argument, Judge carter instructed
Of information, made secret by legislative
act, was turpf ed,sd ana void. Ike there
fore instructed the ,ury to find verdict for
the defendant. -
The ruling was excepted to, and the case
win 20 up 10 the general term on appeal.
North American Life Insurance Company
", Shepherd, Referred to Cox as arbi-
| traitor, -
Lippencott & Co. vs.. Coylc & Towers.
Plea stricken out, and Judgment BY default.
Appeal from order striking out plea.
Garser VS.. Behrends. Motor, to strike
out plea.
Davis Thorpe vs.. David. Ordered to be
placed on calendar by Agreement.
Havs, administrator vs. Prepch. D,s.
missed Nv niaintifT.
T1vott " Rrown e. IN. Judvme,, nv