The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1870-01-26
AnOther Oard from Jndge R0blnsOn !

Editors Journal:
It is not necessary for me to an
swer, at any great length, Mr.. Bisch's
abusive article published in your pa
per of yesterday, nor your own edito-
rial on the same subject in your paper
of this date. But as q part of his
statements and representations, and
also a portion of your own, if unoon-
tradicted might create a wrong i'm
preston upon the minds Of your
readers. l propose briefly to notice a
few Of those statements.
Three of the five indictments re-
ferred to In those articles, were for
extortion, and were found by the
Grand Jury during the October term,
1867, of the Circuit Court, and during
the official term of Capt. Hargraye,
and were signed by him as Prose-
cutting Attorney. On a change of
JUDGES, these eases stood for trial
before Judge Gregory, ofthe Supreme
Court, In January, 1S6S-tWo years
ago. On a motion by the attorneys Of
Mr.. Biseh, they were found to be de-
f~ective, and were qudshed, but the
Judge held him to bail for his appear
ance at the next term Of the Circuit
Court. The next Grand Jury, a ma
iority of whom were Republicans, re
found two of those indictments, and
they stood for trial at the April term,
1859, Of the Circuit Court.
Those indictments were dismissed
by Judge Parrett and myself, not be-
cause they could not besustained, but
for the reason that trying them might
endanger the suit brought against
Mr.. Blsch to back the money.
w considered it Of more importance
to the people of the county to recover
the money than to have Mr.. Bisch
punished under the criminal law for
his extortion. Mr.. Bisch is not correct
in his statement that | was appointed
| on my own petition to investigate the
records Of the county officers. That
appointment was made blythe Board
of Commissioners In December, 1868.
ac1thout dny request from me, but /
cheerfully accepted it when offered.
Again, there is no charge of fraud
against the Board of Commissioners,
as stated by Mr.. Bisch, the charge
being, that since 1868 that body has
made allowances to him to the
amount of about tt1eRty Thousand dol
lars, which were not authorized by
law. The members of the present
Board did not make those allowances
there were not three in office.
When a charge of official misconduct
is made against the present members, [
shall expect them to be the first in
demanding a public Investigation of
their conduct. %
Those suits against MIR. Bisch and
Colonel Rheinlander were began in
April last, and In about one month
afterward the present Board Of Com
missioners ordered them to be dis
continued uifh0ut q trial. knowing
all the facts In those cases, and know.
ing hat order to be wrong. | appealed
from their decision, as any other lax
payer of the county could have done.
Mr.. Bisch says that was maLifesting a
spirit Of defiance toWard the Board!
Mr.. Bisch, in his article, further
says:
IF [ have received any money
which | ought to pay back to the
county, it should be demanded of me,
and | should have an opportunity to
pay it back without suit" Mr.. Bisch
forgets the facts. lie had that Oppor-
tuHity. Before commencing suit
against him, | went to his office, and
with the same bill of particulars
which is now on file in the case in the
Court of Common Pleas. I made a de-
nlGnd for payment, and read over to
him the items of the account separate
ly, laying the paper on the desk be-
fore him, so that he, too, could read
them, a0btch payment he refused al q
most c-onte1lptuOus aCay.
l. The main question In this case Is
not whether l am a wise man or a
good lawyer or have an amiable tenn
per, but the question is, has Victor
Btsch got t10eHty thousand dollars Of
the peoples money that he has no right
to hold. Iaver that he has, and that
the records Of the Board of Commits
si0neys pr0Ue the fact. As the agent of
the County duly appointed, in April
last, L begun a suit against him to re
cover that money. In thirty days
afterwards, the Board, at their May
session, had an order entered on their
records, directing that suit to be dis
continued without a trial. l APP
pealed from that order, and the
Board in September following
revoked my appointment as agent,
and now under this state of facts, L
am told by the editors of the Jour-
NAL that l have not had good success
in prosecuting Bisch. 1 am not re-
sponsible for the failure, as your read
ers can well understand. Under these
influences these suits may be defeated
for the present, but a day Of retribu-
ton will ultimately overtake those
who now are trying to defraud public
justice.
Respectfully. A. l.. Robinson,
EVANSVILLE, IND, Jan. 25, 1870.