The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1876-10-12


! District Attorney, Hon. Bion Bradbury, Hon.
| Josiah II. DrummUnd
| Gentemen-You were. we believe. the coul-
sci in the case of Bradish johnson V. Neal Dow,
| lately heard in the Circuit Court for this dis
trict; lIessrs. Rand and Bradbury being for the
| plaintiff, and Messrs. Webb and Drummond for
Dow, the defendant.
| You are aware, we presume, that Mr.. Blaine,
| as represented in the public journals, in his re-
cent speech delivered at Warren, Ohio spoke
Of this case as follows
| "And, now, gentlemen, more startling than any
thing else, on Thursday of last week there de-
els on rendered in the city of Portland, state of
AIaine in the United States Circuit Court. Judge
Nathan clifford presiding with Daniel Cla district
Judge Of New Hampshire, sitting with him-and |
want the attention of the lawyers again-conirm-
ing the judgment obtained against Neal Dow, of the
| 18th Maine Regiment in Louisiana, giving Judgment
to the rebel against Dow personally for the sugar
seized on his plantation by foraging party from his
| regiment. They were out foraging and seized some
sugar, and the man sued for it, and Dow said "If
You will easily get YOUR Day for it Now the sugar
was used, and large part OF 1t sent to the hospitals
| Dow says "It you will show me your loyalty, will
give you receipt" and he declined to do it, and got
Judgment in Louisiana court. The United States
| Circuit Court at Portland confirmed that judgment,
| and ordered execution to issue for $l,73O That be
in. SO, say, gentlemen, will it not enable the
that owned the field at Appomatox to collect ground
rent from for the occupancy of it and destruc
ton of the fences and crops There has never been
SO mcnacing cloud as this hanging over free PEG
pie. More than that this decision was warmly dis
|
was brought up in the true faith, but the Supreme
Conr: overruled him in the person of Clifford.
Clifford is an ingram, hungry Democrat, double-dyed
and twisted, dyed in the WOOL and coarse wool at
that. Much laughter-I And, in my Judgment he
has carried that case for eight years and never offer
ed that decision until he in his ignorance believed in
| a Democratic triumph. If there should be Demo
cratic dreamer here, will not that gentleman tell me
why any solitary battalion division of the army in
the South cannot be sued tor every article OF tress
| pass: Laughter.
Let me read to you Of the nature OF the case. Ex-
! f.nt inf IMAM nt nta raptar
rs lived writes over his name, 81 have known Mr..
! Iilden for twenty years have debated this Gues
| ton with him personally, and know that lie holds
| the opinion that the war was unconstitutional
| heard him declare, in conversation with myself
| United States Army that marched across southern
soil trespasser and liable to suit for damages
i'll action for trespass.' l think that Clifford
read that opinion of ilden the day before he made
| his decision in regard to BOWS sugar. And the
Democrats tell you the Constitution forbds the pay
mpnt OF these claims. Never was anything more
menacing and alarming shan that.
Great injustice has been done to our father
| Judge Ciitlora-by these statements, and We
| believe them to be founded upon misappre-
| hen>ion Of the facts.
As we understand the matter the facts were
| these:
Dow was sued in the Sixth District Court Of
| Louisiana, by one johnson, claiming to be a
loyal citizen of New York, and having been
duly served with process failed to appear, and
suffered Judgment to go against him by default
| The action in the Circuit Court in this circuit,
| was an action of debt on that Judgment. Dow
was duly served with process from the Circuit
Court here, and appeared and pleaded several
pleas;
First That there Was no Such record. that
is. no such judgment against him.
| Second. lie also set up three special pleas.
DENYING the jurisdiction Of the Sixth District
Court of Louisiana.
The plaintiff replied to his first plea that
there was such record. and produced a duly
certified copy OF the same The court here
both u>tces concurring-iound thar there was
such Il record of the judgment. In response to
The special pleas the plaintiff replied that the
| Sixth District Court OF Louisiana had iuriSdic
ton OF the parties and the cause TO render .iudg
ment 70 this the defendant. Dow. demurrcd.
and there was joinder in the demurrer
The questions arising on the dumllrrer were
argued before Clifford, j., June 4th, ISL sit
ting alone the other justices not being qualified
to sit. Judge Fox had formerly been of coun-
sci in the case, and could not sit. Judge Shop
ley having been Governor Of Louisiana at the
time the acts were done by Dow, thought him
self also disqualified to act in the ease. Judge
Clifford he d the case under advisemeht for
some time. and finding that the questions on
the pleadngS and that OF Jurisdiction, were
both involved i'll difficulty, was unwilling to
render a judgment on the case which could not
be reviewed by the Supreme Court at Washing
ton. He could nave 50 entered judgment, how
ever, and that decision would have been final
and conclusive between the parties, because the
amount in dispute was not sufficient to give the
Supreme Court jurisdct0n and to entite the
case to 90 further by law. 1t could only go UP
in case Of a division of opinion.
The hearing was had before these two judges
at Portland, and they were both of opinion that
| the case was Il proper one for a certificate of d.
vi>on in order that the case might be heard
before the full court at Washington. The laws
of the Congress Of the United States do not per-
nit such certificate OF division of opinion UNI
Il, at}ef II tinal esWeptt an, he ,aGt at Gnnl
the case.
The judge of the Supreme Court in this case
being of the opinion that it was proper that the
ease should be carried forward BY the party
against whom one judgment had already been
rendered III the case, and that too, in the court
Of original jurisdiction, directed the Judgment
III the circuit, which WAS the only way the case
could ever get TO the Supreme Court of the
| United States.
The purpose of Judge Clifford was to have a
Judgment of the highest national tribunal at the
| earliest possible moment. The case was i'm
| portant III some of its aspects, but was not
large enough to get to Washington without it
| went in the manner described.
Al the time the Judgment was rendered.
Judge Clifford stated 10 the counsel that he
| would allow the writ o. error to tho Supreme
| Court al any time in order 70 the decision of the
questions in the certificate Of division. Since
that the writ Of error and other documents
| have all been duly executed
We were not of counsel in the ease, and of
course cannot have the same iuIl and accurate
know ledge of the facts as you possess. Under
| The circumstances we appeal to you to know
whether the foregoing statement is correct
and if il contains any error we request YOU TO
rertify the same. Very respectfully,
CHARLES L. CLIFFORD.
WILLIAM HENRY CLIFFORD.
GEORGE +. CLIFFORD.
Having argued the cause for the plaintiff on both
occasions, and being familiar with all the facts and
proceedings, consider the foregoing statement cor
rect; and think it my duty to add, that while Judge
Clifford had the power to make his own opinion
final and conclusive, his extreme anxiety that no in
Justice should possibly be done, prompted him to call
in Judge Clark in order that important question
might be re-examned at Washington.
October 3, 1876. JOHN RAND
PORTLAND, Me, Oct 3, 1876.
Messrs Charles +. Clifford, VIM Ii. Clifford. and
| George i. Clifford.
Dear Sirs-I have examined the statement of the
case OF BradIsh johnson vs. Neal Dow, contained in
your letter to the several counsel engaged in the ar
| gument before Justices Clifford and Clark at the
Circuit Court on the 18th of September and find it
correct according to my recollection of the facts
| cry respectfully, NATHAN WEBB.
PORTLAND Oct. 3, 1876
Messrs. Charles +. Clifford VIM Henry Clifford and
George F. Clifford.
| Gentlenen-I have received your note containing
| a statement of the of johnson against Dow as
presented at the hearing before the Judges of the
Circuit Court, and find it accurate
Judge Clifford, if he had been guided by the spirit
most wronctully imputed to him by Mr.. Blaine
could have decided the cause without calling uDon
Judge clark to sit with him. but deeming the cues
| tons involved delicate and important, he preferred
that they should be determined by highest judi
cial tribunal and adopted the only course by which
/ that object could be obtained.
Very cordially, DIoN BRADBURY
| have examined the foregoing and find that if
contains correct statement of the facts The only
questions presented to the Court whether the
Louisiana Court had jurisdiction of the defendant
and OF the subject matter Of the suit and could rem
der valid judgment therein.
JOSIAH II. DRrMMoND.
PORTLAND, Oct. 4, 1876.
was counsel for Gen. Dow in the case of Bradsh
johnson against him, up to the time of my appoint
ment as District Judge of Maine. l have since |
watched the progress of the and have care
fully examined the statement referred to in your let
the to be correct.
After the cause submitted to Judge Clifford |
he very frequently stated to me that he found it was
attended with serious difficulties, and he
1t should be taken to the Supreme Court, so that his
ruling would not be final and conclusive.
Very truly yours, EDWARD Fox