Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1872-08-15

The trial of the unjust Judge Barn
ard, before the High Court of Impeach-
ment at Saratoga, is one of the most
peculiar in the history of American law.
For weeks our readers have been in
formed from day to day of its progress,
and few trials have been watched with
more interest by the people of New
York and of the whole country. The
evidence in the trial has exposed the rise
of extraordinary power in granting in
functions which were in direct violation
of every acknowledged principle Of law,
setting at nought all requirements which
are intended to protect the right of the
citizen. He has appointed receivers of
the property of individuals and corpor-
ations, which is required to be done in
open court, anywhere the applicant
could run him down without an exam
nation of the papers or little knowledge
of the case. 1t is in evidence that he
kept open court at theatre, street, or
While in the country, wherever, in fact,
the party applying could find him. He
made general raids upon railroad cOrpor-
ations, and his rule in such cases seemed
ito be judgment first, trial afterwards.
When conspiracy was on foot, the
parties applied to him, and he appears
to have been the alder and abetter of
all the commercial robbers of New York
city. He was shown to have exhibited
great temper and discourtesy towards
those who appeared in court in opposi-
much has been shown which is deroga-
tory to an upright judge.
4 statement of the case will perhaps
be interesting to our readers who have
not followed closely the progress of the
trial. There are thirty-eight articles in
the bill of impeachment, and sundry
specifications which cover in all thirty
seven printed pages. The evidence con-
sists largely of documents and papers is
sued or filed in his own court, showing
the purpose of his &c parte orders and
iniunctions, in behalf of James Fisk, Jr.,
and the Erie directors. 1t appears that
he used his office as powerful agency
to aid Fisk and his comrades in accom-
plishing whatever they desired relating
to certain great corporations, acting
throughout upon the principle that none
of these corporations had any rights
which he was bound to respect.
This will be better appreciated by q
simple statement of his summary pro-
ceedinSs against the Union Pacific rail
road company. Fisk claimed that he
was entitled to certain shares of their
stock, and as the directors did not admit
the validity of his claims, he instituted
suit against the company therefor. In
order, however, to compel the directors
to issue the stock at once, before he
could establish any legal claim by his
suit, he applied to Judge Barnard, and
obtained upon his own representation,
without any notice to the company or
hearing, an injunction prohibiting the
company from holding their annual
meeting or any meeting for the election
of directors, as their bylaws and the
laws required them to door until the
right Of said Fisk to the stock claimed
by him, is determined"
This he followed within nine days
upon the same erparte representations,
by preemptory order iii the Fisk case,
wherein he substantially declared the
Union Pacific Railroad company bank.
rupt concern, and appointed William
M. Tweed, Jr., the receiver of said COM
pauy's property and effects, and author
lied him to take possession of their
books, bonds, and papers of every de-
scription, wherever the same might be,
and to this end to use any force which
might be needed to break open with
picks said company's office and safes, or
blow them open With gunpowder.
All this was done without the least
notice to the company, and without al
lowing them to appear or to be heard, in
utter disregard of every principle of
right, justice and law, as eXpounded and
settled in every legal text book from the
time of Coke and Littleton to the pre-
sent hour. The result was that the
Union Pacific Railroad company fed to
Boston for protection against the as
saults and robbery which Judge Barnard
had thus authorized Tweed to commit
in the interest of Fisk, and did so at a.
loss of several million of dollars as they
allege. Afterward Judge Barnard OPEN
ly boosted that he had driven them as a.
''set of scoundrels out of the State"
The evidence upon this and other
equally grave charges is full, complete
and overwhelming. Never in the annals
of the judiciary Of this country was
similar case presented. 1t is to be hoped
that this will be the last. Judge Barn
ard has been arbitrary, overbearing, and
wilful in trampling upon the law and
it's requirements, even transcending its
utmost limits in his reckless disregard of
justice and right. He shines alone in
this extraordinary career, rivaling on
the civil bench the turpitude of the fer
ocious Jeffreys as criminal judge.
The result is inevitable On the ma.
terial counts he will be convicted. The
Senate is divided politically, % Repub-
licans and 6 Democrats the Judges Of
Appeals, 2 Republicans and Demo-
Gratis. Hence the High Court of I'm