The sun., 1872-02-16
Mr.. sheorman's Charges against At
torney-Geueral Barlow.


In his speech on Wednesday last before
the Railroad Committee OF the Assembly,
Mr.. THOMAS G.. SuEARMAN mado some
allegations concerning Attoruey-Gcneral
FRANCIs G. BARLOW, to which the latter
gentleman should lose no time in replying.
Mr.. SHEARNAN was opposing the new bill
drafted Ivy Mr.. BARLOW, repeating what is
known "a the Railroad Directors ClnSsinca-
ton Act, and vcstiug certain extraordinary
powers over the Erie Railroad Company in
the Atto-ney-General. Speaking of MIR.
BARLOW, by whom as the present At
torncy-Gencral these powers are to be
exercised, and who as the framer of the
bill shows himself specially do4irous of OBJ
tanning them, Mr.. SHEARMAN said:
ave are bound, therefore, to inquire whether the
present Attorney General gentleman Of such cxalt-
ference over al the other officers OF hls STATE; shall
and with distinct charge Of corrupt practices, which
it IA impossible for even this modest though s,fcom
lie has for about year past sought in every possible
Of certain jui5is lie has reeentiy Presented to Tie
Assembly mSmorill signed with his own name, charg.
ing expressly that Justices BARNARD and tARDOZO are
corrupt aud that they ought to be removed from odice.
Of an cipfcss ShaTsr against ihe couns Tor nis com.
Eany, as an slhsgffcct proof Of thcr piguty, that
Coutent with charging that particular orders obtained
arspr s & ne mcrc c "f ap"lyne Z" tc. yud@es
i.r any ordus whatever vas an act Of corruption.
immediately after his election TO tho office lie now
VaS ne sacoty OF Sf Justice USHStW6. i Vent fe.
P,attdyi somcliu'a without Invitation 70 ~ beside
only accorded 60 the personal frcnds oi tue Judge or to
Sa."I he tirn.t H'msoit. Sot Only 1iin,ted 6nt Hn
Welcomed, upon Nc bench Ia this manner, to OBJ
to q Gistiuguishcd gentleman from uaothcr couu.
edcnt ncataa q Keeping ON one Y6anfe menace ace
of Improvement over !hc Judgg, while on The other
the encf advocate q impeachment was to be had by
While charges pi erred by him against Judge p,H
NArp we're pending before the Judiciary Iomm,tice q
before another Judge, assigned regularly TO hold court
IN STT n iVIN & & saa % SiSea ts M n6t % m am n
m
hold court 9f that branch Of business PVT before
privately dcnounccd as corrupt This being ycry pro.
ery refused BY the Judge and treated a. 1. was as an
ihe bench before Tie Attorney 90 eneral then begged
yi W ~ ng ,fcn 'i \, esnc " h. b H",Ti 80 ny to
put IN the hands Of Judge instead o the Judge
regularly assigned ~ mold the court the power OF APP
Ths also being refused. the Attorney Gcncrai took
then sitting. anu with tat IN hs pocket. Ia d- lnct yo
10 the house Of Judge BARsARD at night nduced him 60
RSa Seny fond " cans BED Of JS.ct snd
procured from the very Judge whom he has again and
corruption, order apponunga client Of his own g..
uaprec dcnted Tor the deposit Of an the funds eomn;
irto hc hands o the receiver with an ordinary bank Of
ol the Attorney and it, Directors being tie
lcrous Nhl procured his nomination TO the oncc "hioh
"f,-c az inccutroycriblc fact'; an troy arc facts
which Justify me "a adding. not matter ui cert Iiut
bat probable rtuor that Me Iri,uic, OF 60 l.o,,.
/ Gu"d. " p''t..ey e"gdged as o0""'e' jon zee 'c
Nj. SuEARMAN's assertions are positive
AMI unqualified, and the public will await
. with interest Mr.. BARIOW's answer.