New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-04-15
JUDGE BARNARD'S PLEA.
CAN THE LEGISLATURE REMOVE HIM WITH.
OUT FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS

CAN THE LEGISLATURE REMOVE HIM WITH
OUT FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS
A REMoNsTRANCE FROM BARNARD's COUNsEL-A
PROTEST FROM THE ACCUSED-THE LAW or
IMPEACHMENT AND REMOvAL-BARNARD
RIGHT TO A FORMAL TRIAL-LIMfrATIONs
OF TIE LEGISLATIVE POWER TO REMOVE
JUDGES.
The subjoined protest Of Judge Barnard
against his removal without formal trial was read TO
the judiciary Committee Of the Assembly, March 49, at
the close Of its investigation into the charges made ny
the Bar Association. Messrs Curtis and Andrews cou-
Judge Barnard also issued the following card
in reference their clients and the protest in ques-
| ton:
LETTER FROM BARNARD's COUNSEL.
To The Editor Of The Tribune.
SIR: In consequence OF the absence Of Mr.. Cur
tia from tic city during the past week, the counsel
for Judge Barnard did not promptly take notice OF tho
extraordinary document purportlng to he report
made by Messrs Van Co Parsons, and Stckney, to the
Bar Association, and published on the 10th inst ~ ap-
pears that the Bar Association voted to print goo CORES
OF this report for distribution among the members OF inc
Legislature. We are concerned Win that part OF IL Oy
| which relates to Judge Barnard. ,.
It to n singular proceeding on the part
OF the Association to- endeayor to foresall the
ton OF the Judiciary Committee, and to affect tho opn-
lens of members OF the Legislature with tho views OF tho
entertained by the prosecutors IN advance OF the
hearing which the Legislature must give TO the accused
move by concurrent resolution OF the two Houses We
think that every just will ask what the members
sided opinions entertained Of the evidence by the com
panants and prosecutors, before the accused can De
heard, before the judiciary Committee have recon-
mcDded proceeding whatever, and while the seal OF
secrecy st rested upon most youminons mass of tes-
presses the OF all Justice, and which the Bar
seem 10 DC dohS d.er pest r 70 E nn
although lie decide rightly. does not decide justly
It il great violation OF this essential principe OF
justice 20 induce Tie members Of any public tribunal to
form their opinions before Gaze Is heard as Is 10 take
| steps to deprive party of the hearing itself.
fgtIfr or rtrr Pa rNl mn
The publication of this report with its necessarily
preudced conclusions and unfOunded assertions Of what
has been proved, DC accounted for only upon the
superstition that the prosecutors expect or desire the
Legislature 10 exercise the power Of removal by con-
current resolution to have the removal decided upon
the evidence taken by the Judiciary Committee. and
without any other hearing" than opportunity for
That evidence. II the Legislature be persuaded to
put such construction upon Art. W., See IL OF the
Constitution, public ciamoT, gotten up tnrougn tne
newspapers may doubtless help on the result. But as
we not without confidence IN the wisdom ana iair
ness Of both Houses and do not believe that the Judi
diary Committee of the Assembly viii adopt that con-
iruchon OF tho Constitution we 90 NOT intend 10 oe
drawn into any Gse's SION III the puDc primes Oh tc GN
Gence taken by that Committee or into any expression
case. II would he very easy for us to ehow that the
| evidence before tie Committee, rishtly regarded,
tons, or their differences; and It would be equally
easy TO express Individual opinions that MOTH
ing was4eveloped before the Committoe. that ought to
calse Judge Birnard's removal from ONCE But there
f. something of vastly greater importance to the people
the counsel GA either sde ana therefore. without adduc-
iag any l-oc whatever Of conclusions on the
evidence, auIli oOnhne ourselves TO statement OF
I've manner M which tne inquiry before the Judiciary
Commute was cGn0uctcd.
TIE RULES OF EVIDENCE IGNORED.
Before the Committee lett Albany 10 nod their sessions
here they adopted uton that they would not hear
d. eussons q tie admi stability competency OF evil
Gcnce Ills rule, rather Ills negaton OF all rule. was
followed t.o,laiout. Everyth.nc rom documentary
.vinnec Drawn .IH.n public records down TO hcarSay,
~. .. ,,e tI' ,.rrrss;y. nif.sc cf the Chairman
often :! Dcatcd, " ia 20 FOR WHAT IL was worth Al
teo,S We HiSs % lied ss fo prorric,y Of
aud found it very some not To he permitted t. argue
oGectons we Understood their theory to be hatt they
were conducting merely preliminary yestigation for
the purpOsc OF enabling them 10 determine whether they
ou2t. publicly and formally 20 accuse thc Judges 81
official misconduct requiring their removal or lnpeach,
meIt IAe theory was one when we rua NOT I've te1n
TO discuss, and we had only 10 a'aieaee III WHAT Wae
ruled. But We arc hound 10 say tha' inc 0oninittee
administered it to US with fairness; ana Ilso ana us
10 other injustice tlah X hecess..ily ilHrtent Al
any mode OF conducting an investigation IN winch
The fan ianeatal rules Of evidence are entirely set
aside. Bat all lawyers who are dsAtereSted ana we
pre.ume most laymen. viii see low pfepOster0Gs II
would try charges of official misconduct upon tcs-
e0ns opinions of anybody, formed upon mass "t
scirniious man would not allow 10 operate upon bis "n
mind; and how lie II would be 10 look Tor correct
ycrGit upon evidence ;i was iakh en-; l"f thc put-
pose of enabling an 'h'tar..h- Committee, CohG"c.-
igr an inquiry entirely CriiES TO their own pleasure,
to dccitc NhtiacI t-'r' 'lha - '' "
on tr Tor hnrcac.lplo o. nscs, or Tor oienses de-
me- ii. ihoi- removal bv concurrent resolution.
Ia order save ne rights uf Judge Barnard IN n
formal and authentic manner, his counsel read protest
to the Commttee at the close Ot the investigation, ana
rcouested that X might be entered upon their records.
This rcaue,. was taken into consideration, but no
answer TO 1t has yet been received. It's formal
enirv upon the records Of the Committee IL not
ycrv IMPORTANT. az 1t be presented directly
Ia the legislature. But it seemed to us the most re-
suectfnl course ask have II reach the Assembly
through their Committee. AZ it dif not IN any manner
undertake To discuss the evidence, its publication VIII
Inc
lie the peope OF the State how important to their
best interests l., the correct determination OF one OF me
preliminary constitutional question: involved III tus
matter We therefore, request you, MI Editor, 10 give
Il Mace ia your columns preIaced 10y this letter. and
We I,luaIu, very respectfully, yours, ~
GEO. IfCHNOR CURTIS,
RUFUS +. ANDREWS,
Counsel iOr Judge Barnard.
Ntic- York, April 10, 1872
rIrrAcE pARNARn.s pR0IESr.