The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-02-07
sPIRIT or xHn PRESS.
Editorial Opinions ofthe Leading Journals
upon Current 7 Topios Compiled Every
OsY for the Evening Telegraph.

NIT to the consideration of the Bar Associa-
ton, and in fact of the whole bar of this
State, and it is this: What is the press aud
the public to do in the presence of what it
conceives to be gross abuses in the admins
tration of justiceY Ever since the Erie Rail
road fell into its present hands, stories of
corruption on the bench of this city, and
connivance at it by o portion of the bar,
have been widely circulated, and are gen.
orally believed both at home and abroad.
We have never met man, be he lawyer or
layman, who ventured to deny that these
rumors had at least good foundation. We
believe there is not single lawyer of emil
nence in the State who will venture to deny
it. Even Mr.. d. d. Field will not do SO. He
knows that some of our judges are corrupt.
What he says, however, and what O great
many others say-even Mr.. William Allen
Butler came near saying it in his lecture on
the relations of lawyer and client, the other
nights, that we must not mind common
rumor or "mere newspaper utterances" on
these subjects We are to wait for well-ascer-
tanned facts before we impute psrtiality to
judge or improper professional conduct to an
advocate, no matter how outrageous the pro-
ceedings in court may seem to the lay eye.
public opinion" Mr.. Butler says, ''can
only properly and finally pronounce upon
what is undisputed or established beyond any
reasonable doubt, and accepted by common
consent as a notorious fact" cit cannot
proceed to Judgment in a case involving the
relation of lawyer and client to each other,
to the judiciary, and to the public, so long
as any element of doubt remains so long as
issue is to be taken on the main question of
fact, and the merits of the case are entangled
in the meshes of newspaper controversy and
discussion
Now let us apply this to the condition of
things in the courts of this city. We pre-
sumo we understate the case when we affirm
that the large majority of the bar firmly be-
lieve at least two of the judges of the Su-
preme Court to be grossly and shamelessly
corrupt. We think we are also undertaking
when we say that fifty of them could furnish
proof of this corruption sufficient to support
an impeachment before an honest Senate.
There is hardly any division of sentiment at
the bar as to the way in which the judicial
power has been abused during these Erie suits.
But if an editor goes to lawyer, and asks him
to furnish him with proofs of these charges
he will refuse to furnish them. He will fur
nish him indeed with what he alleges to be
''facts," but will not allow his name to be
used as voucbing for them. He will say that
he has not time for controversy, or that
Justice to his clients forbids his quarreling
with the judges, or that there is no use in
saying anything about it; that the evil is too
deep-seated, or that it is the public morality
that is at fault, and that we must look for
publication to improvement in the national
character, and so on. He is certain to pro-
duce some excuse for his not meddling pub
licly in the matter. If we ask him why the
lawyers do not impeach the corrupt judges,
he will say-what is quite true-that Tweed,
whose servants the corrupt judges are, and
who controls the majority of the Legislature
absolutely, would not permit it; that it would
be impossible to get the Assembly to accuse,
or the Senate to convict, on any evidence that
could be submitted to them.
If the editor then calls his attention to the
condition of the Bar, and asks whether the
practice in the Erie cases has not been
marked by great abuses, and whether the
lawyers who have perpetrated them ought
not to be punished in some way or other, he
will say that undoubtedly they ought; that
this, and this, and this charge against them
is certainly true. But if the editor then
asks him to come out and denounce them
with the authority derived from professional
training and practical knowledge of the
facts, he will probably refuse to touch the
matter, and on the same grounds on which
he refuses to deal with corruption on the
bench. Success, he will say, would be
doubtful while the trouble and annoyance
would be certain.
Now, there is no regularly constituted tri-
bunal here, as there is in England or France,
before which lawyers professional conduct
can be brought, and from which an inquiry
into the facts can be obtained. OF course,
we shall be told that this is not correct; that
the proper remedy for misbehavior on a law
yer's part is to bring him before Supreme
Court, and have his name struck from the
rolls. But the very mention of this remedy
brings before us the popularity of the en-
barrassment in which the public of this city
find themselves. What we complain of is the
guilty connivance of the bench, the bar, and
the Legislature at the perpetration of an
astounding series of frauds affecting directly
an enormous amount of property, and which,
from their very nature and success, affect the
security of all property and when we cry out,
we are advised to complain of the Judges to
the Legislature, and of the bar to the judges.
In other words we are to beg the three ac-
chastise each other in the interest of
public morality.
1t is this extraordinary combination of cir
cumstanoes, the like of which we venture to
say has never been seen in any civilized coun-
try, which makes the duty of the press in this
matter one of such difficulty. There being no
formal way of bringing corrupt judges and
bad lawyers to justice, public opinion natu.
rally and inevitably takes hold of the matter;
but then the lawyers step in and say public
opinion must not take hold of it, until ''the
facts" are before it. 1t may see the equitable
powers of the courts of the State used in
way in which no such powers were ever uset
before; it may see such services rendered by
lawyers to notorious knaves as it has neve
seen rendered by honorable lawyers to thei
clients it may see millions of property
stolen from it's owners used by parcel o
adVenturers in the qualification of their lusts
and may see them steadily protected agains
punishment by the connivanee of judges