The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-04-03

Richard III. Dana.
In another part of this paper will be found
full and exact statement Of the points that
arose in the case of Lawrence VS.. Dana and
of the substance of Judge Clifford's decis-
ion, which we have caused to be prepared
from the record. We have taken this pains
in order that the readers of the HERALD may
understand what degree of fitness and pro-
priety there is in making the merits of this
private lawsuit test of the confirmation of
Mr.. Dana as Minister to England. There
can be but one plausible ground on which
the opposition to his appointment can be
placed, so far as this lawsuit is concerned.
That ground must be that in defending him.
self against the charge of literary piracy he
did something that affects his moral charac-
ter. or that in preparing the edition of
Wheaton which he undertook to prepare he
made such use of matter belonging in law
or equity to the former editor, MI. Lawrence,
that he (Mr Dana) ought to be accounted as
no better than thief The two charges Of
literary piracy and perjury have been made
against Mr.. Dana The first is an offence
which man may have committed, and
which many men have committed, without
any such intention to do q wrong as leaves a
stain upon the reputation or the moral char
acter. It is an offence of a somewhat tech
nical character, to be adjudged by the APP
plication Of rules of law that by no means
imply any intention to commit theft. The
other charge, that of false swearing, necessa-
rily implies, If it be true, that which in
wolves conscious and deliberate sin. If Mr..
Dana, in defending himself against the
charge of literary piracy, swore to what was
not and to what he knew was not true in
point of fact, the blacklist of stains rests
upon his moral character. It is our judg-
ment, upon careful examination of the
whole case, that there is no ground what
ever for this imputation.
There is but one conceivable mode in
which Mr. Dana could have given wilfully
and consciously false testimony in this case.
and that would have been by swearing that
he made no use whatever of Mr.. Lawrences
notes, did not consult them, in preparing
his own. General Butler is reported to have
said, ''The gravamen of Mr.. Dana's offence
was not SO much that of pirating the book,
but that he swore he didn't" This is sheer
quibbling, worthy of the source from which it
proceeds. A defendant may very we'll swear
that he has not pirated the compliments
book, although the judgment of the law may
be that he has pirated it; for in such
case the defendant swears to his belief in
conclusion of law upon the facts on which
he means to rely, and if his belief in the
conclusion of law is ever SO wrong his moral
character as o man of truth is in no way in
volved, unless he swears falsely to some
matter Of fact In order to show that Mr..
Dana made O false oath it would be neces-
sary to show that he denied under oath his
having made any use whatever of Mr.. Law
rence's notes in preparing his own If he
meant to make this issue of fact an issue in
the case, and on this issue swore to what
was not true, he committed perjury. But
he never rested his defence upon the fact
that he had not seen or consulted or made
any use of Mr.. Lawrence's notes. By his
answer and in his testimony he admitted
that he consulted and used Lawrence's
not s, as he did the works of others, but not
more or otherwise. He thus put his de-
fence, so far rs his own oath was involved,
upon the issue of law that such use as he
made of Lawrence's notes was not unlawful
or improper. The decision of the Court
that in this respect he was wrong leaves no
imputation upon him that he had sworn to
that which was not true as a matter of fact.
Nor is there any such imputation contained
or limited at in the opinion Of the Court or
reasonably to be deduced from it.
The judgment of the Court undoubtedly
does show that the condolences of citation
from other authors between Lawrence's notes
and Dana's were such and SO numerous and
were accompanied by such internal proofs as
to lead irresistibly to the conclusion that in
compiling his own notes Mr. Dana did not
resort to the original sources open equally to
him and to Lawrence, but that he borrowed
the citations from Lawrence, who had
previously collected and embodied them.
This, upon the principles of law which
govern such cases. was an infringement
which justified the Court in sending the
case to master to inquire and report upon
the extent of the infringement.
The case derives its principal character
and its sole importance from the legal
principles that govern a technical right and
determine q technical wrong.
The CAPTURE OF MATAMonos by Porfrio
Diaz, the leader of the present revolution
against the Mexican President, Lerdo de
Tejada, is the most telling blow the govern