New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-07-19
Tho Burial Of Reno Gabriel,

Mr.. Jh. Lombard addresses courteous
letter to the Picayune with the avowed in
tention of correcting the REPUBLICAN,
which has claimed that the power of order.
ing an autopsy was within the discretion Of
! the coroner or by the request of the major
| ity of the coroner's Jury. It is pleasant to
see Mr.. Lombard has looked at the sections
of the Revised Statutes referred to BY the
REPUBLICAN,, even section 653, which was
only quoted as leading on to the duties of
the coroner as set forth in section &C., Mr..
Lombard seems to agree with the REPUB
L1cAN in part. The object of the article
was to show that the power to cut man
up after death is limited to the coroner and
the jury; that the discretion was properly
given by statute and to suggest that post
mortem examinations were rather too fire.
quent. Mr.. Lombard says:
We contend that the discretion given to
| the coroner by the section of the law, is q
discretion which is not arbitrary, but legal,
and which must, therefore, be exercised
with intelligence and sound Judgment.
This agrees with the sentiment of the
article in the REPUBLICAN,, but does not
coincide with the tone of Mr.. Lombsrd's
letter to Judge Braughn.
But in his letter to the Picayane Mr..
Lombard quotes the certificate of the ply
sicians who examined the body. as follows:
The undersigned declare that they have
examined the body of certain Gabriel
Rene, said to have been wounded, and that
We have found Q wound of one inch in
length, between the fifth and seventh ribs,
at the iuncture of the - and sternum.
That wound may have been made with q
knife or with some other sharp instrument,
and it has probably caused death, bot the
coroner having positively refused to allow
us to make the autopsy, We can not give
positive opinion in regard to the nature of
the wound.
JAMES w. RENSHAW, NJ. D.
He also says:
That had the coroner been man of in
tellect and Judgment he would certainly
have understood the Importance of an
autopsy in the present case, and would
have either made it himself, or if incapable,
allowed it to be made.
Mr.. Lombard would have made better
case at first if he had filed the physician's
certificate with his letter to Judge Braughn,
instead of sending it to newspaper office.
saw it. Perhaps if they did there was some
good reason for not acting on it. On the
face of the paper it does seem reasonable
that some means should be found to ascer
tain "the juncture of the - and sturnum"
If an autopsy would have done this, it is to
be regretted that Coroner Green did not
order one. Seriously, he should have some
good reason for disregarding their implied
request, in which censure is the more ap-
parent.
The REPUBLICAN could have offered
many other reasons for considering Mr..
Lombard's letter inappropriate. But then
it only wished to make the point of the
legality of cutting up man who never did
any one any harm except perishing by the
murderOus acts of another. Mr.. Green
may be incompetent, incapable of exercis-
ing the proper discretion, and in this case,
with such q certificate. he would have
gained credit by ordering an autopsy, but
he was the coroner, and it was within his
discretion. If he did not exercise it with
sound Judgment it is to be regretted, but
the way to remedy the evil is by inducing
him to rescind decision he should regret;
not, however, by the means Mr.. Lombard
proposes.
Mr.. Lombard further says:
That an error and omission has been
committed, and that, if still possible, it is
the duty of the officer of the law to have it
corrected without delay. We have accord.
ingly notified the proper officer, the assist
ant attorney general of the State, of what
we consider q great wrong, calling his Sc
rious attention to the matter. 1t is for him
to see that the laws be complied with.
A further study of the statutes is re-
quested, By examining act No. IS of
March 3, 1874, section two, page seventy
three, it will be seen such course forms
no part of the Assistant Attorney Cen
erals duties. If, as there provided, he ap-
pear in court during the disability of the
Attorney General, he could do no more
than that officer, and a case must be be-
fore the court before it can hear q motion.
The duties of that officer are defined in Re-
vised Statutes, l3l, 1888; and unless the
refusal of the coroner to order an autopsy
be considered crime or misdemeanor, and
our statutes define no such crime, he can
not even inquire (section l34) into his con-
duct. In no case can he "order' any act to
be done. In 1871 Attorney General Belden
suggested to the Legislature that his office
should have some control over district at
torneys, and cited several abuses in sup
port of the measure. But nothing was
done. The Attorney General remains as he
was-a law officer to appear in court and
give advice for the benefit of the State.
The Picayune compositor plays havoc
with many parts of Mr.. Lombard's letter,
especially his classical quotations, and here
the REPUBLICAN, wishes to express its
regrets at the liberty taken in spelling Mr.
Lombard's name erroneously at first, even
though it has only the authority of the
Picayune for the correction. The quota
tions, however, do not appear to be happy.
Appelles' reproof may refer to Mr.. Green or
to Dogberry, but whether or not Mr.. Lom-
bard means Mr.. Green was shoemaker be-
fore he was elected coroner, or is now i'm
mortalized by Shakespeare, it may be taken
with the laugh he suggests. And though
Terrence does say obsequiousness gains
friends, the REPUBLICAN has no desire to
beget the hatred of Mr.. Lombard land
others" by simply giving truthful exposi-
ton Of the law.