The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1875-06-09
BY TELEGRAPH.
ArrEnNooN DIsPArCmEs,
Tie OnIVpAIOn CiVII RIghta Cnse,

The Galveston uyii Rights Case
GALVESTON, Juno Sin the United
Slmcs district court yesterday, In the
civil llghla case, Colonel George Flour
nuy, counsel for the defense, was re-
quIrcd 10 give bond for his appearance
for assault md battery upon United
States pstlNt Attorney j, IT, Boyle,
The difficulty occurred on Saturday
during the heat OF Argument when
Colonel Flournoy slapped District Al-
i0ruey Boyle lu the race for using In
mung language In thu altcruoon,
Colonel l'lOurnOH reprc'onlel 10y llis
counsel, Nouem!NHaul, appcuredto an-
swrr TO the charge ofoontempt ol court.
Counsel rcud tho petition Of his client,
which involves the following points.
His u ton Saturday was husly and un-
cEpcctedly called Tor, but In no manner
or form Intended ~ disrespect for the
court, he sincerely regretted his action.
The accusation having been sudden
aud unexpected, the court ordered
Colonel Flournoy discharged.
The Jury In this case were required
to take the iron clad oath, aud were
composed Of eight negroes and three
whites. After being locked up since
Saturday, and failing TO agree, the jury
come IN yesterday and announced that
they could not agree. The Judge In
formed them that IL was not Gust mary
In this court for juries not TO agree,
and that they must retire again. No
Jury had ever failed 10 agree in the
United States court, Tor II was custo-
mary TO keep them out until they could
agree. The longest time he had ever
had n jury to remain out was six days,
but this jury had only been out one
day. The foreman then informed the
remained out until next January. The
court informed them that the evidence
was all clear-there was not conflict
ing point, and unless they had been
reading the Galveston News there was
no reason why they should not agree.
lie then made II careful review OF
the charge given them upon the
case, ana the foreman, Mr.. Sommer-
vile, announced that they had agreed.
lie then handed the verdict to the
clerk: ave, the jury, find the defend
ant guilty"
The following writ in connection
with the above proceedings was served
last evening upon the propretors and
publishers Of the Galveston News:
United States Circuit Court-The
president of the United States of Amer
lea to the marshal of Eastern District
OF Texas, greeting:
You are hereby commanded to sum
mon Willard Richardson, A. II. Belo
and John j. Hand, comprising the
firm of Richardson Belo ~ Co., propri-
etors and publishers of the Galveston
Daily News, if to be found in your dis
trict, to be and appear before the hon
orable circuit court of the United
States, to be holden for the fifth judi
cal circuit at the court house thereof,
in the city of Galveston, on Tuesday,
the Sth day of June, 1875, at III o'clock
A. NJ, then and there to show cause, II
any they can, why an attachment
shall not go against them as con-
tempt of court for printing and
publishing in said newspaper, in
the issue thereof dated Saturday, June
5, 1875, certain editorial article head
ed LAW and Higher Law" wherein
and whereby the proceedings in GER
tain cause therein pending and on trial
in said court was sought to be lnllu-
enced and the court brought into disre-
pute. Herein fail not and due return
of this writ make. Witness, the Hon.
Morrison r. Waite, chief justice OF the
supreme court of the United States,
and the seal of the circuit court thereoI,
at Galveston, this It'll day OF June, III
the year of our Lord 1875, and of Amer
lean Independence the 90th year.
A true copy of the original writ GER
tify.
district fToXas at Galveston.
Witness mr. hand and the seal OF
said court at Galveston in said district,
this 9TH day of June, AID: 1872;
Br1kI SMlEb@ss4T 4. spANN, D 81 n9Ssi i''N'
In the United States district court,
this morning, the case against the pro-
prietors of the Galveston News, the at-
torneys for the defendants presented n
motion to quash the indictment on the
following grounds: ,u
First-The court had no juris liction
in such matter of contempt; aud sucn
n procedure on the part OF the court
was contrary to all law and practice OF
the United States. tB
Second-That while the proprietors3
of the News claimed the right ana
privilege to discuss all questions before
the court in which the public were IN
terested, yet in the article referred 10
on "Law and Higher Law" no disre'
spect was intended to the court as in
timated in the order of arrest, nor was
any attempt made to influence the
cause then pending in the court, or to
bring it into disrepute.
Judge w. p. Ballinger, counsel iof
Richardson, Belo IL Co., expressed his
desire to state the legal points jntolv-
ed. but Judge Morrill, declined to hear
them, stating that he would take the
papers under advisement until to-mor-
row morning. The question in his
mind first to be settled was, II the an
swer was sufficient to show cause why
the attachment for contempt snoula
not issue. If it was, further proceeu'
ings would be unnecessary.
The attorney for the defense IN the
recent civil rights case n: ade motion
for a new trial before Judge Woods o.
49,. n A..