New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-07-07

%
the bar IN cease practicing before the court
over which he assumed to preside. For THIS
no brought a libel suit in the lVth Dlstrict
Court. claiming 100000 damages. The Judge
Of tbe WITH District is gentleman OF some
local celebrity. commonly known in New
Orleans "a Barney" Lynch, and ~ Is an
interesting fact that he owes MS JuaicN'
bonors entirely to the Lynch returning poalu'
of which Mr.. Hawkins was sucn 'a'u'p'o
member. Thus Mr.. Hawkins was cerIainiy III
the hands of friend. Indeed IL IL curious ~
notice all through this story, now we con
stantlv come around to the mutual prlnclpie'
and find Judges, Governors, anu nninoi
of,c;oIs holding one another up and scratching
ono another,s back. The propretors
Of The Picamne met the complaint
18th plea of justification. They
nronosed 70 show that Judge Hawkins took an
oath. as returning officer, that he would care
{" fully and honestly canvass ana compile VI,
" statements of the votes, and make true anu
" correct return of the election" ana that nc
violated this oath. They proposed 10 sno"
that the law required the votes to be can
,,ossod and compiled " from the statements OF
" votes made by the supervisors OF registra-
" tom and that Judge Hawkins, a1ter Ihahlhs
I'D his returns from totally dinereht source
(tbe statements of the supervisors never nav
ing been in his pOssession), certified under
oath that he had made "a true ana correct
" compiIation" according to law. This GER
taiply looks like perjury, if we understand the
English language, and according to Senator
Carpenter and other unprecedented authorities
it is very much like "perfdy" also, if perfidy
means what Webster calls it, the " violation
of a trust reposed."
Under the laws of the State of Louisiana
the defendant in libel suit is allowed to
prove the truth of the alleged defamatory
publication, but Judge Lynch infexibly ruled
out all the testimony on this point, as well as
all evidence as to the general character OF
the plaintiff and after four days spent in
ingenious but unavailing efforts to get their
testimony before the jury, the defense was
obliged to close. 1t is perhaps not remarka-
BILE that Judge Lynch should have objected
to the introduction of testimony which would
demonstrate that he himself was not properly
a judge nor is it surprising that his rulings
were all strongly against the defendants, ana
that he refused to permit the plalntiH
TO be called az witness by the defense.
The Jury were out two days and one night
AT the end of that time they rendered YER
dict of $4,000 for Judge Hawkins, and one
of the twelve stated publicly IN court that
they had been forced to it," while another
attempted to make a statement WHICH the
Judge refused to hear. A new trial was asked,
and in the affidavit accompanying the motion
the defendants swOre to some very startling
allegations. They declared that two of the
jurors had confessed that they were bribed,
and that one George Walker, cTier of the
court, had acknowledged being the instrument
of the bribery and had been dismissed from
his situation in consequence. They alleged
also various errors in the rulings of the court.
The motion, however, has been refused. No
proceedings have been taken against the de-
linquent Jurors and it is believed in New-Or-
leans that none will be taken, and that
Walker, who is relative of Judge Lynch,
and has disappeared since the trial, will not
be found
Our readers know that we believe in libel
suits but this case looks like gross and un-
vanished oppression. The acts of public
officer are legitimate subjects of discussion
and if any functionary has violated his oath,
or proved unfaithful to his trust, 1t is not only
the right but the duty of the press to de-
nounce him in language of appropriate sever
ity. We doubt whether any terms could be
too strong to characterize justly the shameless
proceedings in Louisiana. 1t is certain at all
events that the comments of The Picdyune
were amply justified by the formal report
presented in the United States Senate by
the political friends of the very men
whom it arraigned, and that every
charge that paper made against Judge Hawkins
had the sanction of one of the highest branches
of the United States Government. Whether
the trial was conducted in violation of the
letter of the law it perhaps does not become
laymen to say-though some of the ablest law
yers in New-Orleans declare that it was; but
that it was a political assault upon the free
dom of the press no one can doubt for an in
slant. The violence of partisan newspapers
often runs into vulgar license; but the press,
with all its faults, is one of the stoutest de-
tenders of popular liberties, and the people
will not fail to resent any infringement upon
its rights,
MARRYING 4 TITLE.