The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1873-03-08

q. W. naeoRANIH, Bditor.
CHIEF JUSTICE LUDELING vs.. THE
NEW ORLEANS PRINTING co.
A suit of more than ordinary impOr-
tance has been instituted in the 9Th
District Court, Judge Culiom presiding,
the title of which heads this article.
The amount involved is 600, 900; the
foundation OF the suit being an article
in the New Orleans Picayune Of seve-
raj days ago, reviewing in caustlc
terms the course Of Judge Ludeling in
his railroad operations and as Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court, and
which article Mr.. Ludeling AYERS is
hbellous and damaging to his character
to the extent of 100000. The Chief
Justice has secured as attorneys, w. H.
Hunt, Semmes 4 Mott, and Hays &
New, among the foremost lawyers Of
the New Orleans bar, who are to pros
ecute his suit and maintain the recti-
tude of his course.
We do not remember, since we be-
came a Journalist, now fifteen years
ago, of but one suit brought in our
State to fasten the grave crime of libel
upon one of our papers. Doubtless
there have been numerous instances
where, according to strict rules of law,
suits OF this character would have been
sustained by the courts. In the heat OF
political campaigns editors are not very
choice in the use of terms in which to
demolish the influence Of their oppo-
nents. And so it is, and has always
been in the forum. And we might,
also, point to the bar, from which Judge
Ludeling not very long since came, for
examples weekly of the fiercest and
bitterest abuse and denunciation OF in
dividuals and officials, and yet we do
not recall a single instance from any
OF these numerous exempliflcations Of
tho freedom of discussion, where the
party arraigned has felt it necessary to
go to the courts for relief. The fact is,
libel suits have never been, at the
South, in popular favor. a good square
knock-doWn, such as the Chief Justice
meeting at the Oaks, has always, in
Louisiana, taken precedence, as REM
edy for wounded honor, over u law
suit where scandal is Unfortunately re-
tailed for the delectation of the curious
and the vulgar. An individual may
obtain fifty verdicts sustaining his name
and fame, and still, the defense, by
producing a single fact in the prosecu-
tors history, will infallibly carry pop
ular opinion with him. 1t seems to be
the rule that an individual who is not
competent and willing to take care OF
his own character, without appealing
to the courts, is adjudged to be entitled
to precious little mercy at the hands OF
the public. Hence it is, we presume,
that there have been, in Louisiana, so
few suits brought for libel.
AS to the merits of this particular case,
we do not propose to speak with any
very great particularity. But, accus-
toned as we haveNbeen, to permit and
Glaxercise the greatest freedom Of dis
custom, Subject, only, to strict personal
accountability, we cannot believe that
the course OF Chief Justice Ludeling is
characterized by sound and sober rea-
on tho s,Inthese degenerate times, we
was hcnpcckcu. .->ef better than the
tirashed his wife, tore up r..
of her best dresses, opened: u''' VI jury
and sat down in the y" the law and
feet on the centcr-tnt6f petty juries are
ton of choice books AM. from the
most ordinary, m woIi,aS ,olving the
grave issues Of li,a -dentb. Suppose
twelve 'such men as are now drawn
from the jury box do say Judge Lude-
ling has been damaged in character to
the extent of 800, 900, Would not, ut
last, the character OF the Chief Justice
OF the State be at low standard to
have the decision OF such mon as ito
greatest support? II we had to appe,s Il
to twelve voters, intliscriminately, from
this, or any other parish in Louisi ana,
to sustain our character, we should GER
tainly never bother about the business.