The Hartford herald., 1879-06-25
The Case of Judge Hargis.

We publish this morning from n
source the thorough responsibility of
which we guarantee, plain and COM
plete narrative of the case of Judge
Hargis.
We also publish card from Mr..
Green, who having gone into the courts,
proposes tn retire from further newspa-
per controversy. 1t is our opinion that,
in bringing libel suit, he has not pur-
sued the best, or even the right, method.
To join the issue fully and fairly, he
should have indicted Judge Hargis up
on the charges he has brought against
him, and brought him To trial ON their
merits.
Perhaps, however, il will not prove "A
great matter, because il seems to us that
if ever n man established his innocence
Judge Hargis has done so, and what he
has-left unsaid is given in the eXhaus-
tive communication which appears ON
our third page.
The whole question depends upon
whether Hargis was eligible for Circuit
Judge in 1874. Ifhe was eligible, then
nc had no motive 10 commit the mutt
lation charged against him. The con-
stitutiun of Kentucky required him To
have been II ''practicing lawyer" eight
wears prior To the election which WAS Ia
occur in August, 1874. He has his Ii
cense in proper form, dated February
26, 1856, signed by Judge Andrews first
and then by Judge Appcrson. An in
spection under the glass has demonstra-
ted that the date of the license has not
been altered. Nor could il have been
ante-dated by the Judges, for no one be-
lieves they would have signed in Au-
gust license dated in February. Nor
is the suggestion that il might have
been signed in blank, and the blank
filled after the issue was raised, any
more available to his accuseTs. The is
sue was raised i'm 1874, eight years after
the body of the license was written.
IL the blank had then been filled there
would have been eight years difference
between the time the two inks had been
exposed 10 the light, and the difference
could have been easily detected i'm 1874.
Even to the naked eye, the distinction
between an ink exposed eight years and
that exposed only few months AT most
ought readily To appear. But no one
can doubt that the magnifying glass
would have at once disclosed il, and YET
Mr.. Green, who so examined il on May
s, 1874, detected nothing of the kind.
But the whole argument upon the
other side is built upon the assertion
that the license was signed on dugusf
70, 1866, and that the records of the
Rowan Circuit Court show that both
Judges We're present in Morehead on
that day. And yet it appears, upon an
examination of the calendar, that Au-
gust 26, 1866, was Sunday, and, of
course, the court records of that date
show nothing. The good name Of one
Of our Supreme Judges is thus reckless
ly attacked by those who do not even
read their almanacs.
Judge Hargis has always claimed that
Judge Andrews signed his license on
February 20, 1866, which was not Sun
day, and that Judge AppersOn compile
ted il by affixing his signature i'm April,
1866; that the two Judges were not to-
yether when they signed il; and he has
not only furnished living witness to
this fact, but the face of the license it.
self demonstrates it.
Immediately after receiving his license
he commenced the practice of law in the
spring of 1866, of which he has abun-
tiant proof The constitution only re-
qllires that he should have been "prac-
ticing lawyer" eight years. He has fur
nished abundant proof that he did prac-
tice during the spring and summer of
1866, during which time he was also
his first canvass for County
Judge. The law did not require that he
should have been sU0y1l into court for
eight years, for a lawyer can practice in
other ways than by appearing in court.
And if he had simply gotten his license,
opened his Office and given advice to his
Clients prroT -rus;,r-t, rr-rr1, rrr wyrriyt
still have been eligible.
But he has proof that leaves no doubt
he was sworn in the County Court at
the MAY term, 1866. He has an official
copy order, reciting he was sworn in
He has the statement of the clerk who
recorded the order and of the clerk who
gave him the copy, both of whom certi-
fy il is genuine. 1t was freely charged
recently that these gentlemen had re-
tracted their statements, but it will he
found that within the last few days they
have Indignantly denied that they ever,
i'm any manner, authorized the charge
How can this order be attacked SO long
rs Judge Hargis has the official copy in
his possession with the two clerks living
TO swear that ii il genuine? Both of
them have given their written state
ments, dated respectively June 6 and II,
1879, for publication, and one of them
took the trouble, and incurred the ex-
pense, of coming To Frankfort to make
his statement to the other members ofl
the Appellate Court. At least this wit
ness has been ncross-examined.
We shall emulate Mr. Green, and,
with the publications we have noted, re-
tire from the list of disputants and rele-
gate the case to the courts. Satisfied i'm
our own mind of the innocence of Judge |
Hargis-believing him as pure a man as
ever sat-upon the bench in Kentucky
we close the book SO far as our columns
are concerned. Those may wrangle
who delight i'm wrangling. Courier