The New York herald., 1872-08-13
JUDGE BARNARD'S TRIAL.
Judge Pratt's Arguments for the Prosecution
Injunctions and Receiverships-Th
Erie Railroad Litigations.

sARAToaA, August u, 1872.
The Court Of impeachment reassembed at ten
O'Clock this morning, twenty-six members present.
WHAT IMpEACHABLE.
Judge Pratt, OF counsel for the prosecution,
proceeded to open the argument presenting
the legal aspect OF the case. He first no
ticed the claim q, on the part OF the
counsel for the defence, that only crimes which
were indictable In their nature were impeachable,
and insisted that misbehavior on the part of
Judge, conduct which was complete perversion
OF the duties Of his oce, were, according to high
authority and precedent, impeachable. To support
his position he re0d from Russell on crimes by per-
sons in office.
The Judge next, for the benefit oflay members OF
the Court, detailed proceedings in actions at law,
allowing provisional remedies, and explaining OBJ
tects and purposes Of the issue Of injunctons upon
this head He cited authorities to show that the
right to an injunction not absolute,
but was left almost entirely to the
discretion OF the Court, which should carefully
examine into the facts and circumstances and
II the party applying should have it. The CON-
planant must show that he Is entitled to 1t,
and that there Is danger pressing upon him which
delay enhances. He then referred to the
case of the election OF Erie directors.
and said 1t would take three years under
the operation Of the classification act to
do what the complainants claimed was danger.
ousiy pressing upon their interests. There
tore, it was not proper case foT an @ Injunction
He also referred to the issue Of preiml.
be IL The Sooss aS Where sacS nSns
lions have been issued compelling defendants
% sei IN
for the purpose OF investigation, and were not Or
ders compelling psrttes to DO ON acti but in viola
tt0n OF this principle and practice we find these pre-
nminary injunctions issued to compel an a1irma-
Another well established practice was that cause
for an Injunction must be established upon positive
He had noticed that in some OF these cases the alle
T8Ilons were absolute, when, from the nature
G ss 9i He ss neas nosed % se
object Of the appointment Of a receiver,
which was that the property might be preserved
from waste. 1t was requisite, according to the
practice, that the party making application should
have an interest in the property to be put in the
In the property for which he asked receiver in the
Erie case: Receivers, too must always 6e ap.
strange That p New York city Judge only could
hold court anywhere and at any time for this pur-
pose J9,l:es in the country co1dnot DO It, and he
have the privilege. He also criticized the power to
grant writ OF assistance prior to decree BY Court
heard ofits being Issued in ofObtaining posses
sion OF personal property These rules he said were
maQc IOf Jn0 guidance OF COOrJ6 ana Judges WHO
have jurisdiction to issue such ORDERS and the ques
ti0n comes up here before this Court Of Impeach-
ment, has not there been violation in every case
y was possible for Judge to make errors, but In
these cases IL was clear that these orders were
issued in direct defiance OF these rules.
BARNARD'S AVAILABILITY.
Counsel then criticised the complaints, claiming
that they were insufficient He then examined the
action OF Judge barnard, and insisted that for all
our Judges to pursue such course as he had
would result in the destruction Of oil our liberties
and In the establishment OF military rule. He
asked why 1t was that these shrewd, bold bad
yuen always went to Judge Barnard for these
orders and said it was because they knew their
man; and they went to him In the street, OF the
opera house, at Miss Mansheds; they called him
away from the deathbed OF his mother to perform
this service for them; they used him at the very
portals OF the grave. Why, he asked again, was
this Judge selected to perform this work, and why
did lie always perform IT
He closed by appealing to the Court to discharge
its duty fearlessy and without favor, as upon its
decision, he said, rested the main principle which
uphOds our governHent-the maintenance OF
pure and unspOtted judiciary.
THE COLLUsION or BARNARD AND FISK.
MFR. Stickney, OF the counsel for the prosecution,
stances connected with o number Of the cases in
which orders we're issued. The counsel spoke some
two hours, passing in review every circumstance as
detailed In the evidence, with view to
show that Judge Barnard acted irregulary, with
out Jurisdiction and In c0lusi0n with Fisk, Could
and others with whom he was In conspiracy.
Before MIR. Stickney had concluded the hour OF
three O'Clock arrived, and the court adjourned till
tomorrow morning.