The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-10-23
JUDGE LUDELING's VIDALIA SPEECH
NO. IT.

| In our issue of Sunday last some comments
| were made on Judge Ludelings recent
speech at Vidalia, which consisted mainly OF
an attempt on his part to repel the charges Of
fraud made against him by the Supreme
Court of the United States in rendering judg-
ment in the case OF Jackson ct al. versus the
vicksburg, Shreveport and Texas Railroad
Company, John r. Ludelng and others,
which suit, in one Of it's branches, yet re-
mains to be decided by that court.
Judge Ludeling in that speech complains of
the court (the majority Of the judges Of which
are members of the Republican partly for
having decided the case against him, prom
inent and influential member of the same
party. He seems to have expected and relied
upon the decision being In his favor simply
| because he was @ member OF the Republican
party like themselves. Out Of this silly dream
| he was rudely awakened by O judgment Of q
very different character from that which, in
his egotism, vanity and oyerweening con-
| fidenee In his own inuenCe-we will
not say in his own judgment-he anti
cipated Or professed to anticipate In
the sequel he found that his anticipatlons
result of his speculation In the railroad above
referred to was only dream of his foolish
imagination. He learned when too late that
he had made more than one miscalculaton
with reference to this railroad adventure, if
indeed he was not totally ignorant of the doc
trines Of equity which were applicable, and
which were applied to the case without the
slightest respect to his personal official or
political status, q respect to which he thought
himself entitled by way Of reward for efficient
and important party services. The majority
Of the Judges of the Supreme Court Of the
United States, as we have said, were
then. as now, members Of the Republican
party but they did not permit their political
opinions or bias to affect their judicial action
nor do they know or care what are the poit~
ical predictions of parties to suits before
them, whether plaintiffs or defendants. Mr.
Ludeling learned when too late, that political
considerations and preferences had not q
feathers weight with that high tribunal OF
| with any of its members, as will presently be
shown, but that, in deciding the case. they
were influenced and controlled by rules and
principles Of which Mr.. Ludeling was utterly
ignorant and regardless, even to the extent of
positively denying their existence and of
sneering at the determination Of the court to
apply them to the adjustment Of o suit in
which heIudeling) was the principal defend
ant and defeated party. Judge Ludeling. in his
late speech at Vidalia, has actually the cool
impudenco to tell the nine learned and up
right Justices of the Supreme Court Of the
United States that they hnOr nothing Of Lou-
ieinnd tau and enormously decided the case
referred to. This legal trickster this specu-
lating attorney, this judicial perverter of laws
he was sworn to administer truly has had
the audacity to say publicly in presence of
the voters in his district and in the face Of
the whole country, that the "blunders of law
and fact made by the Supreme Court of the
United States in the decision referred to were
so fragrant and patent that it is matter of
wonder how the court could have fallen into
them" This judge in his own cause. deeply
Interested in the suit peCuniarily, his fortune
at stake as well as his professional reputa-
ton and personal integrity, was to have
been expected to say and do anything to pro-
tect them. But the fiat has gone forth and the
Judgment has been rendered; it is one of heavy
condemnation, and the main question involved
is res ddjMIiCdtG. The opinion Of the public
has long ago been formed Also and it Is I'M
changeabe. That opinion is in entire accord
anco with the ono delivered by the Supreme
Court Of the United States, and has found an
echo in every honest mans heart throughout
America.
A more scathing judicial sentence, we say,
never WAS pronounced upon a litigant mem
Der Of the bar or any other litgant The
books have been searched in vain for it's paral-
lei. 1t would almost call for the pity, If not
the sympathy, Of the personal enemies Of the
individual upon whom this sentence was
pronounced That a man of clear intellect
and considerable learning, cultivation and
knowledge Of the world which Mr.. Ludeling
undoubtedly possesses-a man who aspired
to fill high judicial position, to take the
chair of justice once honored by Martin
and O. Eustis, should have bartered for SOrdid
lucre his name and repute as member of the
bar, should have risked the loss of the respect
of the wise and good for the sake Of vile lucre,
Is to las one Of those inexplcabe problems
which we are unable to solve. Grant talent,
intellect, requirements and cultivation to O.
lawyer, what are these without personal in
tegrity, without moral principle, and without
hearth How can lawyer, devoid Of these,
gain and keep the confidence Of clients, of the
public and Of the courts? Does Mr. Ludeng
flatter himself that he can throw dust in
the eyes of the sensible people Of Louis-
ana, that he can induce them to believe
that black is white, that wrong is right and
that his personal asseverations, deeply inter-
ested, pecuniarily and otherwise as he is is to
outweigh the deliberate and solemn and
unanimous Judgment of nine learned and ven
cradle judges of the highest appellate court
in the United States? Who is more contempt
ible in the legal profession than keen, sharp,
eager, mercenary and quibbling attorney, al
ways on the outlook, not for the promotion of
justice and the benefit of his fellow citizens,
but for profitable speculations in the lands
and other property of his neghbors and fell
low-citizens? And then to aspire, in extraor-
binary and unprecedented circumstances, to
the chief on hiDhnct i1dioio bnnoh