New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-06-13
Fourth District Court.

morning, Judge Lynch called up the case
Of Jacob Hawkins VI. the New Orleans
Printing and Publishing Company" Mr..
Albert VOORHEES, arose and objected to the
court going into the trial Of that case then.
He said that certain case IN when he
represented the plaintiff, was to have pre-
cedence of trial to that of the former case
He argued that under the Jules OF court his
case must be tried first: that the court had
not observed its own rules, and that 1t was
not competent for il 20 take up the libel
case of Hawkins.
Mr.. VOORHEES, was followed by another
attorney urging the same views.
The third attorney, who spoke ID support
OF the same views, was William NJ. Ran
dolph, Esq, who proceeded to urge his
views in language which, though guarded
and polite, seemed to imply tha. favored
preference was granted by the court to the
plaintiff in the Hawkins case.
Judge Lynch promptly interrupted the
speaker, and informed him that as he I'M
derstood his language 20 be covert attack
on the integrity OF the court, no such
language could be permitted in the Fourth
District Court or be there uttered by any
attorney, however high his prestige, with
impunity. Mr.. Randolph disclaimed any
intention of attributing any bad motives
to the court IN relation to this matter,
but persistently urged that the court had
erred in assigning the cause for trial, as the
first in order yesterday. He made long
argum ent to prove that, under the rules OF
court, the case had been improperly and
prematurely taken up. Mr.. VOORHEES, rose
a second time to address the court, when he
was informed by Judge Lynch that as he
had already been heard on the subject, he
could not be heard a second time: that the
| matter was not Of much importance; that
there were many attorneys in the case, and
| that one argument was sufficient for each
counsel. Judge Ogden also participated in
| the debate, and took ground against the
action of the court.
Judge w. H. Cooley, in a mastery and
| able argument, showed that the action OF
Judge Lynch was authorized by the rules
of court, and by the practice which has
obtained and still obtains in the other dis
| trict courts of the parish. in reference to
Jury trials. He indicated the action of
Judge Lynch as sanctioned by law. expeS
! diency, and the long-continued practice Of
! the courts. He was followed by Judges
Cotton and Dibble on the same side. Those
| gentlemen made able and forcble argu-
ments in defence of the action Of Judge
Lynch, who remarked, when passing upon
the motion TO take up the case Of Mr.. Voor-
HES, substantially as follows:
! am. sorry to see that certain attorneys
! have thought proper TO endeavOr to fasten
| and engratt upon the issue OF a pecuniary
nature presented in this cause, political
| character This court is no place for poll
tics. am no political judge. l am acting in
the interest of no party, class, or Clique,
| but in the interes: Of all the people OF this
great city. Some of the attorneys of the
| New Orleans Printing Company have used
| language which might be taken to imply
that l had unduly and improperly given
I preference in the trial OF this cause. Poll
| teal capital is sought to be made at this
time. The court room is crowded, and
arguments have been delivered more to
the bystanders than 10 the court.
But this court shall not be used for
defamation on political subjects, or for q
| school of oratory for those who want to de-
| liver themselves of political harangues. Its
present Judge will have no rule OF action
| but the law and his oath Of office. He has
! held several important positions IN the
| State of Louisiana, in all OF which he has
| acted so as to leave behind him an unsul-
lied, unimpeachable record. He will do go
| as Judge of this court, under his solemn &C.
| countability to his conscience and the pe0-
pie Of this city.
The Judge then explained how the con-
tinued and partly tried case Of the Teutonia
National Bank was 10 be taken up on
Wednesday at II NJ. On The docket were
three other cases: first, the case Of Croft
VS.. Taylor, continued by consent Of coun'
sci: second, Jacob Hawkins vs. the New
Orleans Printing Company, and third. Dun
can vs.. New Orleans Printing Company.
The first case having been continued by
! consent, the case Of Hawkins had to be
called to be reass1gned, and the large array
of witnesses discharged for that day, it be-
ing known that the case Of the Teutonia
National Bank would occupy all OF Wednes-
day. The case of Hawkins being the first
on the docket was fixed for the next day
yesterday. The judges explanation sat
isfactorily settled the whole matter, and
showed that the case of Hawkins VS.. the
New Orleans Printing and Publishing Com,
pany was properly taken up yesterday at
IL NJ.