New-York tribune., 1872-08-15
MR.. BFACHs ARGUMENT.
BARNARD A. A MODEL JUDGE-ALL HIS ACTIONS
SHOWN TO BE HIGH-ToNED AND PRAISE
WOETIIY.
GENERAL PRESS DlsPAToHl

SHOWN TO BE HIGH-TONED AND PRAISE
WORTHY.
GENERAL PRESS DsPAToHl
SARATOGA, Aug. 14-The Court met at 10 a.
IB "a members being present Mr.. Beach. Of counsel
foI the respondent resumed his argument at the point
where he stopped yesterday, namely, Article VII"
charging Judge Barnard with issuing order directing
the receiver OF the Union Pacific Railroad Company 10
open its safe possession Of the books OF the
company The order issued on the report Of the
receiver that the key had been secreted and
charged that the report was unyerhed ana there
fore Judge Barnard acted irregulary and with wifu
end corrupt paTtiay to James Fisk jr Mr Beach said
the practice was for 10 act upon the report Of
its Office receiver without requiring verihcation
The next article charges Judge Barnard with wfu and
corrupt conduct, and with acting beyond his jursdic
ton In making the aforementioned orders after the case
had been removed 10 United States Circuit Court
Counsel said IT unnecessary for him TO meet this
charge as was dispos OF il the he had made
70 preceding ones
THE ALBANY AND sUsQUEHANNA BUSINESS.
MI Beach then proceeded speak Of the susquehaRna
case and the orders issued the matter. He detailed
the condition Of the affairs OF this Company when these
proceedings initiated, showing that there great
dissatisfaction on the part
management that these stockholders had most pow
erfu opposition contend with; that short, they
poweress TO get the slightest information salts
faction concerning matters in which they deeply
interested It then that these applied 10 Fisk
and Gould for assistance. II Is III evidence that Fisk
and Gould were not voluntary intererers in the affairs
Of this Company. They applied TO because they
had control Of very important road to which IT would
be great advantage connect the Albany and Susque
hanna and yet when they applied 10 they did
not at once acquiesce They directed their to
make an investigation There delibeTatiOn their
part The Investigation shOwed that by the purchasing
Of 10000 worth Of stock the control of the road could
be secured, and the relief sought by the dissatisfied
stockholders could be attained This stock secured
and then struggle for possession. The action
instituted by stockholders met by couneracton
the part Of the directors, who had become close
pOraon and had managed the affairs Of the road
detrimeut Of the interests of the stockholders.
Counsel then examined the proceedings instituted
claiming that the stockholders had the right 70 appeal 10
and avail Themselves Of all the nights guaranteed 10
them by the law He pointed the necessity and the
authority Tor the movement and explained that there
other under the circumstances to reach the
end which was a perfectly justihable one He also in
that everything done IN the was regular H.
said counsel the charges against the President of tbe
company which 10 correct and truthful
10 indge could act hastily too promptly in fsspino
orders which would nterpose check 10 his conduct and
the charges which have been freely but iInpronerv
bestowed Oh the respondent should be applied TO this
President Counsel then glanced at other articles bear
ing upon the action case and called the at
Of Court the evidence taken in support OF
these articles which, he said went TO prove that every
thing was regular and proper far the respondent
was concerned. He then proceeded 10 comment upon
tbe action Of the parties who he said endeavOred 70 Oh
sruct the proper and legal proceedings Instituted by the
stockholders both before and after the legal
were Instituted for their protection.
OTHER JUDGES As CULPABLE AS BARNARD.
In course Of his remarks be referred 10 order
issued by Judge ParEer who afterward revoked 1t,
saying as he did that bs original order improperly
Issued Why he asked Is not this Judge impeached for
his aeuonf tits because be simply erred. He did not
do what he did wllfully and when be found he in
error be hastened 70 correct and eefy IT, Then why
this discrimination against Judge Barnardi IL is not
iuet ~ not rght 10 hold Judge responsible
lake winch ne may make. He also called attention 10
The order Isued by Judge Peckhan appointing pruvn
receiver Of the property Of the company when the a
dsyit attached 70 the application was very detective
Counsel said be referred 70 this the purp0e Of
making any complaint al the action Of Judge Peckbon
but TO show the haste with which these prooeedtnes
were carried on. He impugned no ones uotivSs IL
believed all acted Oh both sides with good motives bnt
did want 10 have this Court act npartialy N one
judge IL 70 be condemned then let all the other udges
acting IN TINS case be condemned alike and in common
DO not ne hald single out one Judge who has the same
excuse that all the others condemn him while
you let the Others GO Above ALL DO not mpute corrupt
motives 70 judge who acts iD the manner than
other judges act and leave the others unscathed Treat
kll alike.
Counsel then cited large number OF precedents esta
nshed by other and eminent Judges Tor the action of
Judge Barnard IN these cases said he was at loss
20 know why these acts Of Judge Bernard should be s
locted for even anlmadVerson II be s condemned
then must condemn many Of our most learned and
bench.
THE CONSPIRACY QUESTION
Counsel then referred fact that in the course OF
tb trial the respondent bad been shut Of from giving
DO prOof against ibe charge Vf eSnvpt s0nsprsey for