Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-07-10

be suffered to exist in that sadly misgoV-
erned State. The facts of the case are
succinctly stated by the NewYork Tribune
as follows: "Jocob Hawkins, the plaintiff
in the case, is wei: known here by name as
d member Of the Lynch Returning Board,
which counted Mr.. kellogg into office, and,
with the assistance Of Marshal Packard &nd
the United Safes army, set up a Legislature
and full complem ,nt Of State officers who
had been PROFESSIONALLY defeated at the
election. To reward Mr.. Hawkins for
his services, the Legislature thus Illegally
created abolished two CT the New
Orleans Courts and set up anoth-
er, called The Superior District Court,
ofwhch Hr. Hawkins was appointed Judge.
He Leld his position from Mr.. Pinchback,
whom the same fictitious Legislature had
made fictitious Governor, by impeaching
Gov. Yarmouth. Thus Hawkins and his
associates began bogus Legislature; the
bogus Legislature made bogus Governor
and bogus Court; and the bogus Cover
nor appointed Hsp kins bogus Judge, so
that everything was made pleasant all
around. The case was investigated by a
committee OF The United States Senate; aud
the majority, consisting Of warm friends Of
the Administration, reported to The Senate
that Mr. Hawkins and his companions had
i1ny, rrFf1Fvr g-or.I
is nothing, said Senator Carpenter, speak
ing for he committee, sin all the comedy Of
buuders AMI frauds under consideration
more indefensbl5 than the pretended can
vass OF this Board. No person
can examine the testimony ever so cursori-
ly without seeing dat ibis pretended can
vass bad 10 semblauce Of integrity Not
only was the Board an illegal body, but it
had absolutely no returns to canvass; and il
is proved that lie results at which it pre-
tended TO arrive were reached merely by
guessing. When the report Of the Senate
Committee reached New Orleans, the
PicGyURe Of tEat city, in an editorial re-
view Of he case, charged Judge Hawkins
with 'perGdy aad PERJURY IS q returning
officer, and called upon members Of the bar
10 cease prsc,ctng before The court over
Wn.cI he assumed 10 preside. Fo. this be
brought libel suit in the Fourth District
Court, claiming $lO0,0O0 damages. The
Judge Of the Fourth District is a
gentleman Of scne local celebrity,
commonly Known in New Orleans
as Barney Lynch, and it is an interest
ing f-ct that he owes bis Judicial honors
entirely to the Lynch Returning Board,
Of which Mr.. Hawkins was such a valuable
member. Thus Er. Hawkins was certain
~ in the hands Of friend. Indeed it is
curious to notice, all through this story,
how We con family come around to the mu-
iual principle, and find Judges, Governors
and minor officials holding one another I'D
and scratching one anOther's back. The |
proprietors of the PiCGyuae met the com. |
plant with plea Of Justification. They pro. |
posedto show that Judge Hawkins took an
oath, as returning officer, that he would
Carefully and honestly canvass and com.
pile the statements Of the votes, and make
a true and correct return Of the election
and tbatshe violated this oath. They pro-
posed to show that the law required the
vote TO be canvasSed and com.
piled from The statements Of votes
made by the supervisors Of registra-
.ion,' and that Judge Hawkins, after msk-
iDG up his return from a totally different
somca Che statements Of the supervisors
never having been in bis pessession), certi-
ned under oath that he had made "a true
and correct compilation according to law.
This certainly locks like PERJURY, if we IN
ierstand the English language, and accord
rs 10 Senator Carpenter and other uupre-
udiced authorities it is very much like per
Idly also, if peItdy means what Webster
esllS 1t, the violation of trGst reposed.,
Under the lSws of the Stste CT L.ufsians
he defendant in a libel suit is allowed TO
Prove TIE ruth of lie alleged defamatorv
but Judge Lynch infexibly ruled
'ut all the testimony on this point, as well
g all evidence as TO the general character of
he plaintiff; and after four days spent in
1gehlous but unavailing efforts to get their
eSLimony before the jury, the defense was
obliged 70 close. 1t Is perhaps not remark.
ols tia. Judge Lynch shoulI have objected
0 the introduction of testimony which
would demonstrate that he himself was
ot properly judge, ror is Il surprising That
is rusins were all strongly against The de-
sndants, and that he refused to permit the ,,
laintih 10 be called Bs witness by The de- !
snso. The jury were out two days and !
lie night. At the end Of that time they I
IN cred verdict OF $4,000 for Judge /
lawkins, and enc Of The twelve stated pub
ely in court that yhey had been forced TO
, while another attempted to make a state
lent which the Judge refused
, hear. A new trial was asked I
nd i'll the affidavit accompanying the motion v
lie defendants sworo to some very start. 5;
lg allegations. They declared that two of p
C jurors had confessed that they were M NJ
ib2d, and that one George Walker, crier b