New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-11-25
consideration" by which, suppose. You meant TO be
understood that designed TO be considered oy me
individuality and not rs n Court.


tory this paper 1T appears to me- This paper was
evidently prepared early June last Tor the first
signature is that OF David Dudley Field now and for
some months absent I believe 10 Europe. Mr.. Bluri
has written to me letter on inc sud'p h a
solute OF all knowledge OF tho TACT tnat the paper
to be presented at the tlne In us ",er ne s'ates
that this paper prepared some months ago, ana
counsel win not dispute that the paper was prepared
prior to the sitting OF the Court !, was evdenty pre-
pared meeting OF counsel TO make prepafat0ns ana
with the mutual consent OF all the counsel ana
they must he held 10 have adopted ~ though they d9
sist III its preparation On Que OF le rst Gay OF
the trial application was made 10 move trla aud the
Court granted an adjournment to hear motion by
Tn paner was not brought in the following day and
the Court made adjournment 10 tne OCTOBER term
No counsel came into Court on those occasions WIN tue
paper in their hand they were willing to take the
chance OF trial rOn dlsqualted Court Inc paper YVES
Inc individual VINO happened To preside. Notice was
Given that this case woud be moved for trial after the
Gsg came in and mads motion for postpone
ent and again they were ready 10 tako thor chance Oh
a favorable decision OF the Court which they have,
on the following day the case being set down for the
day after the election the moved for trlal Mr.
Fullerton wa not IN court, and We allowed 80 minutes
for him 10 arrive Then there was consultation be-
tween and this paper was handed to the Court
for the first time Counsel knew very well what took
place The objections TO the paper are tneSe Tue ntsl
apparent object of presenting the document signed by
distinguished counsel was TO intlmdatc the judge about
form tho dnties that devolyed upon him.
The second apparent ntent OF the paper IN my mind i
that it would he spread upon the records and pub
lsled in tue newspa persa formidable document-prO-
claiming before the pubic ana those IOui whom the
jury 10 be drawn that the Judge presiding at the
trial partial; that he had expressed opinions hostile
to the individual on trai, and opinions on the facts
against the defendant and that he ruled IN various
propositions Of law arising on the case against the de-
PENDANT contrary 10 the decisions or other Judges,
and tnsf a me- naSfetv and person,l 0i i%
10 the defendant not proper Judge 10 SIT ID he case
These statements being spread before the public would
A.. a.rf,u fufra
called to sit the jury Thirdly IDs paper was what
the law does not recognizean attempt to challenge OF
the bench Judge whose duty placed MN there as pre-
siding officer the COurtan innovation on all practice
tina. had previously existed and upon grounds not at
of law The paper contains matter impugnug
think on erroneous grounds, the past con
II declares mat the Justice had formed, and upon pre-
yious trial bad expressed, most unqualiiiei and
decided opinion uniayoraOle 70 te Geenaant, upon tne
facts Of the case That statement rs not correct IA point
of fact The Judge expressed opinion upon the facts
and although the Judge charged the jury IN such form
that IL probably Impossible tat tney should not see
what his opinion really was YET nowhere IN inc ehafge
can be found any expression OF opnoe isen; ana 20
upon the facts the Judge expressly warned them That
his opinion did not govern tnor ACTON III any degree
that they TO determine on tue iacs iof themselves
although they could not fall to sec what the opinion OF
the Judge was. The language III tue Court In that
charge very clear THINK 80 as To enable the Jury
to understand it. The Court SAID;
The sr proposition aAi charge that question: Of fact
enle or he jar 20 de Ibai ,e yoa are ,s lases me
ucNcf proves thl NvAt' iH.- ''' ~ y
.s aHt 90 ne "rsf ini dual, land ,ioad
bn one OPINION % tlese ~ 20 a., =, H. .,'.s5 =,
opinion ALL II nk these tbias' Just 'ni fair ~ no con
Tnat was the statement which the Judge made 10 the
Jury; which, as / sand before, was no expression OF an
nust have been understood that the jury could
from the whole drift OF the charge what was the opinion
Of the Court and guard against 10 and not be controlled
nv II. The paper then proceeds - state: But the
Court declined charge tue jury that they were NOT to
he influenced by such expression OF opinion have
Just read what ] said OH that subject COUNSEL have
Thought proper to state that tho Court declined to
charge that tho jury wero not 10 be Ia
nuenced by such expression Of opinion. What
Mr. Field asked TO charge was quite different IRON that
he asked 10 charge that "they are u find verdict
without any influence from the court whaiever, ana
said 81 decline To charge otherwise than have
charged" and said they are the sole judges OF the
determine the facts without any influence from the
ion from the court and il would be Improper because
the ury are never 90 act without any influence tho
court the contrary they bound to take the law
from the court This paper then proceeds to argue that
NV the opinions OF justice formed before such nia
wonId be had under bias and prejudice and not By Az
Impartial jury such as the Constitution secures to the
The paper goes On 10 ssy ale has assumed position
toward the case and the defendant winch under t9e law
ncrsonai Grounds against the defendant Ii was clearly
Objectionable 10 say he has assumed position. for
waie yer errors the Judge may nave committed the
Grsf trial Inc did nothing but what duty imposed upon
him under the extraordinary evidence given. This
carries the sung with lt-tha he Is disqualh By mis-
position toward the case aud the defendant himself,
which disqualified him from being tricr OF jurors
1t says. "What would dsqualiiy Juror formerly under
the challenges would disquay the judge now" have
lust read. The paper goes on The most important
questions of law involved the trial have been de-
cided by said Justice adversely To the defendants and
some Important points his rulings Were Is we re-
spectfully suggest. In opposition to those OF other
Judges and t would b. clearly violation Of the spirit
of our present Constitution, which prevents Judge
from sitting on the trial OF his own yiews.' IL Is
.fNfv.ar q. "a giFfI fsa FrnTt
Bench because he has opinions on questions OF law.
They conclude BY saying; The objection u Judge
the law in this the more apparent from the fact
that In many States where the judges are rcrs OF law,
Hected before signing the paper, they must have
Guided that upon most judges the effect Of such paper
would only be 10 make II duty TO preside, thar tho
Justice could not shrink from II without discredit.
felt when read that paper, though made strenuous
from the country take my place. that under no circu.
stance could entertain the idea Of retiring. after such
feel to-day, that counsel. who officers of the law.
Judicial officers and cassed as such with judges, were
0rgetful of the obligations to the law and Justice tho
state in which they live when they sat dOwn and pre-
pared that paper TO be placed before judge for the
purpose Of either intimdatng him or surrounding him
with such embarrassmens, placing him iD such posi-
tion would render every decision and act preudged
against hm the minds OF counsel, 50 that lie would
occupy position OF entire Independence 10 the
parties, and impartalty az to Ms Views OF duty called
public mind aud those summoned for Jurors by lead
Ing them TO think that they were coming before judge
committed partial, prejudeed, aud not entitled
spect.
These are the views OF that paper and unless IN
PLANTATION DC made feel IL duty to the adminsira-
ton of Justice while hold this honorable position and
though my views may be only those OF single Judge.
feel bound In some manner " enforce them an 10
show members OF the bar that courts be
influenced II they have any explanation, the Court
will hear them.
Judge Fullerton-I beg 10 disclaim any suoh inten-
tiois al those expressed We desre 10 put this DIS
cIe,ar - nrOper form, and want time prepare H.
am an eaaed or this trial ungersols, aud 40 Mr. Root
Jndee Dsvis-Ve-v WELL the Court will adjourn the
further hearing Of this LAYER until Salurdsy'
TWEED's TRANSFERS or PEAL ESTATE.
LARGE PARCELS OF PROPERTY FoRMcRLY BELONG
ING To VIM. NJ. TWEED, DECIDED TO ius LAW
YERs BoNDsMRy, AND Ills SONS WIFE
Il. u. -. % a