The daily gazette., 1877-01-12
Chief Justice Ludeling.
THE MODEL JURIST OF THE
PACKARD-CASEY CROWD.

TAChAhD-CA6E1 ChOWD.
To the Edilor of the evening Telegraph.
The names of Brother-in-law Casey
Judge Durell, and other Louisiana wol-
thies, are tolerably well known through
out the country, but that of Chief JUS
tice Ludeling has been less Conspicuous.
In order that your readers may know
what kind of person the Republican
State government of Louisiana chooses
to appoint to the Office of Chief Justice
OF the Supreme Court of that State, per-
nit me to furnish you with few extracts
from the opinion of the Supreme Court
Of the United States, delivered b,' Mr..
Justice Strong in the recent case Oh Jack
son Us. Ludeling, In 81 Wallace, page GIG:
The case was one in which the mana
gers OF an insolvent railroad obtained an
order for the sale of the property, and
bought tin for themselves for much less
than its value. The sale was cohduGtedi
~ secret manner In; a small Village in
the interior of the State, and m such q
way as to enable the conspifatersJ TO Sc
price. ''a 'T''
This sale was carried out by an ar.
rangement to which Ludeling was par
y and of the agreement made by him
Judge Strong says:
1T Is impossible to characterize this
agreement as anything else than fraudu-
lent. Its obvious purpose was to remove
competition at the sale. Itwas a fragrant
breach of trust ON the part of Horne; and
1t was fraud in Ludeling, with KNOW
iedge OF the trust Horne had undertaken,
TO persuade him to violate his instruc--
tlons and sacrifice the interests of his
constituents, himself becoming a PARTY
to the violation. II i =
Thus directors of the company, owing
duties to its stockholders and creditors,
not only combined to obtain the com
pany's property at a sacrifice through
the formahty of judicial sale, but were
acave participants In successful efforts to
they might become the purchasers for.
SO, 900. % ~. U.f =. t. ~
"lt Is impossible to maintain. such. a.
transaction. Throughout it was grossly
inequitable. That the property was sacri-
feed by means ofan unlawful and wide
spread combinationis is abundantly proved
and that the directors who were parties
to It and who became thepurchaseTs were
guilty OF an inexcusable violation of com
hdence reposed in them, admits of no
doubt. Llldeling, It'll true, was not a
director, but he, was p leading member
of the mbination and its, chief agent to
carry, out its plans. He knew its lille.
ga!lty.ls He had negotiated the surrender
Of Horne with full knowledge of Horne's
breachio iof trust, He assumed the control
OF Gordons exeeutory process, and as-wes
have noticed when told that Gordon ha2
consented to stay the sale, he declared
that Gordon had no power to doit. In
deed Ludeing appears to have had COM
plete possession of the Sheriff. He drew
up the Sheriffs return, carefully stating
in it that all the requirements and form
ahties of the law had been complied with
In the second offering, as they had been
In the first; and he was, as the evidence
shows, most active in defeating an adill-
dication to Brauner & Co., ON their large
bill 4 4
"The defendants can take nothing
from such sale thus made. Were we to
sustain it, we should sanction a great
moral and legal wrong, give encourage
mont to faithlessness to. trusts and conf
dence reposed and countenance combina-
tions to wrest by the forms of law from
the uninformed and contiding their Just
rights"
Thisis the record which secures judicial
from the Republican party,
in the State of Louisiana, and it is the
government of such men that Senator
Sherman has the effrontery to defend
upon the floor of tae United States Sen.
ate. SD. -