Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1878-08-01
Advise him to Fabricate False state
ment with which he Decei we'd
the LOeweustines and the
Governor of the state.

EDITORS APPEAL-In the card of Colonel
Turner, to which you gave a conspicuous place
in your columns of yesterdays issue, he at
tempts to explain away the disclosures he
made, as witness, concerning his own pro-
fessional conduct, by misstating the attitude
in which he placed himself on record In a
public trial. Colonel Turner says; Gordon
reproduceS my testimony in the case of g.
B. Hackett against the Loewenstines, and by
a species of idiotic reasoning attempts to
leave the impression that had advised Hack
EFT to fabricate and swear to a lie. " If Tur-
ner had advised Hackett to fabricate and
swear to a lie, he would have committed an
offense highly penal, and for which he could
have been indicted. As a criminal LAWYER, he
knows this and, therefore, puts himself be-
yond the reach of public prosecution by de-
nying that he advised Hackett to swear to
lie. He did this when he testified,
by giving his deposition, and does so now.
Colonel! Turner, however, admits that n his
deposition is correctly reproduced. The
statements of that deposition do not show
that the deponent advised Hackett to fabri-
cate and swear to a lie. The statements of
that deposition do, however, plainly and uI-
mistakably show that the deponent advised
Hackett to inpr0oise false statement. Was
this done for mere innocent recreation or idle
pastime? Certainly not. 1t was done to de-
celve the Messrs. L)ewenstlne. This state
ment, which Turner knew to be false, was by
him put into the pos session of these gentle
men as statement of facts, with the i'm
piled, if not direct assurance from him to
them that such facts were true, when
he (Turner) knew them to be false.
The thing IN this light seems 10
us to be monstrous and uDJushfable. The
ethics of the profession in which Colonel
Turner claims to hold a high place do not
countenance such practice as this. Again,
this improvised, false statement, falsely
charged a fellow citizen with grave wrong.
That citizen rested under cloud OF lnfamy.
Turner knew the statement to be untrue and
did not expose its falsity, although he knew
irretrevable damage was being done to the
man against whom it was atrociously direct
ed Turner went to Nashville to invoke ex-
ecutive clemency for Hackett. Hackett's I'M
provised statement was in his presence and
with his knowledge represented to the gov
ernor to be the truth. Did Turner then
turn round and say to the governor, 81
can't permit you to act on the
faith of this statement; it is a lie, a fable, a
falsehood?" No; Turner didn't turn at all.
He stood silent and looked as unperturbed as
if the statement then interposed to secure the
release of a convict was the truth. Is it cor
rect In a lawyer or citizen to attempt to pro-
cure favors from the governor by use OF
statements known to be falseP The ques-
ton answers itself Colonel Turner Is now a
candidate for the office of attorney general of
this county. This office should be filed by
a lawyer whose record is untarnished. The
unenviable attitude in which Coloael Turner
has put himself on the record by his own
sworn evidence shows him to be utterly I'M
fitted for this high and responsible
office. 1t would be public
calamity to elect a man to office who has, by
his own conduct, shown himself to be I'M
worthy. 1t would be idiotic to put such a
man in the place. This is not merely ques-
ton of party preference. 1t is a question of
public propriety The people will not con-
sent to make a man the public prosecutor
who has done what Colonel Turner says he
did when he admits that his deposition was
correctly reproduced. A CITIZEN.