The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-11-03
JUDGE LUDELING'5 VIDALIA SPEECH
NO. ~

Judge Ludeling, we heir, has withdrawn
from the canvass for the Fifth Congressional
District, and is no longer candidate for it's
representation. What brought him to this
resolve is unknown to us, although we might
not be very far out of the way il, to some
extent, we imputed his withdrawal to the
assaults recently made by the DEMOCRAT
upon him in connection with his railroad
fraud and our exposure Of the insufficiency.
nay, the utter falsity, of the assertions he
made in his late speech at V1dala on that
subject. II we have been instrumental In
driving him from the field, we have GER
tainly no reason to regret the fact, for
his appearance in the House Of Representa-
tives at Washington would have reflected no
credit on this commonwealth. 1t is possible
enough that he may have been Influenced to
take this course simply by the conviction that
he could not secure the election he was solic
| iting, and that he considered it expedient to
retire before his defeat at the polls became
fact. Whether bis withdrawal was based
upon one or the other reason we have sug-
gested matters not. His remaining in private
life will become the man and the unenviable
reputation he has acquired in this State and
throughout the entire country. It would have
been very scandalous If man upon whom
such q terrible stigma was lately put by the
| Supreme Court of the United States had been
sent by Louisiana to represent her in the
| National Congress. even through the votes of
| the lately enfranchised population. His influ-
ence and votes in that body could hardly have
been other than injurious to Southern inter-
ests.
We cannot, however, leave the subject of
his railroad fraud without bringing forward
some extracts from the testimony filed in the
case, which shows the serene and charming
confidence Of the Ludeling combination in the
validity of their title to this railroad, not
| withstanding Its judicial and final annument
and cancellation, just as if 1t had never had
an existence
Being interrogated, long after the decision
of the Supreme Court, by their own counsel
rs to their "belief" in the validity of their
title, we find this admirably confident answer,
which we give uerbatim ct iueratim:
h'eo,oing % that the charges of fraud and i'm
proper practices preferred by the plaintiffs
against them (Ludeling and aesociatesl ara uu-
true and unsupported BY the 'estimouy ( y, but
rather disproved., and that in every particular
th"1r action nus been supported by the plain
provisions Of the law Of Louisiana. they YET be-
lleva themselv the bona tide owners OF the
property. and have no other reason to doubt it
but the decision of the court 10 this cause which
decision is. in their Judgment 3D. unsupported
by either the facts or the law u
This was signed by one or more of the
Ludeling combination, and they all pretended
to believe it to be true.
After this may we not. like Dominic Samp-
son. exclaim with wonderment at such cheek.
"Prodgious" y!
Any highwayman or pickpocket who steals
your purse or your watch and reduces it into
his own possession and is caught by the police
and forced to dsgorge his plumber, will turn
round and, with all the nonchalance Of his
profession, say II yet believe myself the
bona fde owner OF your pocket-book and its
contents by the best of all titles-that of pos
session by force, and have no other reason
to doubt it but the fact that am In custody
Of this policeman, with or without warrant
and whose violent action is, in my Judgment.
unsupported by either the facts or the law,
and this notwithstanding / was caught In the
very act of putting my hands in your pocket
/ shall continue to think SO even after am
convicted, sentenced and punished! Your po-
licemen, my dear sirs, don't understand the
laws OF Louisiana, and your police magistrate
(Woods) don't know them either, nor how to
cOnstrue them, much less administer them.
The laws are in my favor. Those laws were
made to enable enterprising gentlemen like
ourselves to get rich rapidly without bother
ing ourselves as to the manner and methods
we employ to get rich. We are Com munists,
we are Nobody has any right to keep pos
session OF his property and enjoy it, IL we
want itand can get hold of it by perverting the
practice laws Of the State and by exerting
our influence over the officers OF the courts
such men as Crawford and Hardy and Milling,
Of the Ouachita district Bless your souls,
in what school were you taught
business? You cannot have graduated In the
institution where we served our apprentice
ship and received our training. Bless your
heart, we don't believe In the equity
doctrines OF Mansfield, Of Sugden, or Eldon,
or Marshall, or Kent, or Parsons, or Story or
any other of them old buffers who had no
with gentlemen Of our profession. |
We have been graduated in very different |
school. Our tutors and professors were such |
and honorable persons as Dick
Turpin Robin Hood, Rob Roy and others in |
that line of business, whose simple and |
easily understood rule sufficed them and was
Just this:
That they should take who have the power,
And they should Keep who can"
Will these Ludeling people never learn that
questions OF good faith and Of fraud are
questions of law for the conscience of the
court, upon the facts as found by the court,
and not mere questions of fact, to be solved
oy the affidavit of an interested party? The
reasoning Of Ludeling and his associates re-
minds US Of what Sir Hudibras, in that cele-
)rated com position Of Butler, says:
He'd undertake to prove by force
or mere assertions. a mans no horse.
He'll prove a buzzard is no fowl
And that lord may be an OWL"
And we think Mr.. LudeIing and his friends
re entitled to certificate Of capacity in bus