The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1880-02-18
The Bedford Judgesnip and L.. ID
Raymond. Esq.
LIBERTY, February TO, ISS0.

Editors Dispatch: communication
from l.. ID. Raymond, Esq, published IN
your paper OF the 18th, is singuarly urlust
in its tone and incorrect in Its statements
II is offensive TO Judge DAVIS ana MS
friends, and unfair in every respect. Inc
Bedford-cOunty case in no respect diners
from he case Of other judges elected since
January, where both the new Judge ana
the old incumbent claim 10 lie the rightful
Judge. What necessity exists for angry
icclin" anC personal reflections upon gen.
tlemen equally entitled to the respect and
esteem of the community is not apparent TO
co0l-hcaded and law-abding peoIle. Mr..
Uavmond's letter is the more offensive be-
cause if is notorious in our community that
he has for some reason chosen 10 treat
sinple law question which van only be SET
tied bv our highest court rs II II were
matter personai to himself, and by his BIT
ter partisan denunciatiOgs and personal AZ
lacks upon the new Judge in words, 81
coursel show that he is untitled eithcr 10
advise or TO testify imDartially in regard to
facts about which there ought TO be no oc-
caSion TO dispute. No good can come TO
the Conservative PARTY nor 10 the cOininu-
nily by the superseryiceable zeal and al.
surd vapcrings OF disappointed partisan
whose judgment and memory SCI IN 10 De
obscured by his chagrin.
As matter ii simple fustice 20 4 most
estimable citizen, who has always enloyeu
in an unusual degree TIE good opinion OF
his fel,ow.cnrntymen. desire 20 point out
some of the errors into whicl Mr.. Hay
mond has fahcn. Macy facts are omitteH,
some nlisStated and distorted, and ln>lnSa-
tons TOO vile to be openly written are inse-
niouSly mace, with &n air ard pretehcc OF
indignant candOr very amusing TO tnoSe
who know thst this distinguished mem
Der OF the BEDFORD bar RIVED Ike M an
cry schoOl-bOy on the day whose occur.
rences he processes to relate. Ills ideas OF
prOpriety and party zeal may ne iuo2ed
from The fact that as hecnlered the court
house he paused upon the steps ara pro-
claimed in loud voice that "Old Davis !"
had dared to put himself in the 5udgc'S
chair. and the boast that he made in the
presence Of the treasurer OF the county That
if Mr. Davis "were not worthless Old
bankrupt he would force him 10 commit
him 10 iajl and recover rousing fine which
would teach him Il lesson" This, think,
will satisfy fair people that the testimony Of
l.. ID. Haymond, Esq, Is not thut OF gen.
| tleman whose state OF mind is very calm
and S1ell balanced.
Who the writer in the Wing is whose Re-
adjuster zeal has reused This gentleman :
WRATH and excited his Imagination do not
| know. II his statements are |"giarpgly IN
correct" and his " misstatemeats wild,
surely this is no reason why member oil
| the Bedford bar should, over his own sigma
ture, mlsrepresent and seek to damage
Judge Davis 1t does not lie in Mr.. Hay
monds mouth to complain OF his election
| BY Readiuster caucus. Nor does the fact
| that be is and was the choice OF aiorlty
OF Bedford ReEdiusters Justly subject him
| to ll.Iatured comment. He was also the
choice OF hundreds OF eIVatives-hlS
| friends assert a large maiority OF them. we
| have senator and two delegates in the
| Legislature, none OF them Readl In
the House both our delegates and majority
OF Debt-Payers present yotedf for Mr.. DAVIS,
and in the Senate Mr.. Thurman spoke Of
| him in terms OF high aud deserved cOmpli-
ment. Mr.. Raymond, the sei-appoinled
guardian OF the Law and the party, was
himself in Richmond urging Readi usters TO
support Judge Wharton, aud his friends
| left no effort untried to induce that caucus
to nominate him. The caucus was not i'm.
pressed by Mr.. Haymond's views, AID did
not nominate his choice. and kSRc Hlp
ldChrymG
proceed 10 notice Mr.. HaymOnds mis-
statements, insinuatiOns. &C., briefly. He
seeks to create prejudice against Judge
Davis by charging In roundabout FASH
ion, through bunglng recital OF facts, that
| to the detriment OF the public Interests, In
| the midst OF a term, without courteous ill.,
formation to 9udge Wharton, he dared to
qualify as judge aud seek to displace the Old
incumbent. He SURPRISES the fact that
j Judge Davis, after taking the oath Of Of
+. ,e, left his commission in the clerks Office
70 be examined. and did not have his quail
fics ton recorded for two days. Was not
thai notice enOugh3 Why ives no PROPOSE
lion made to Judge Davis? lie did nothing
.urre ptitiOusly. Had DO orders entered In
the ., srk's Office, and did not attempt to
carry the court aroGnd in his breeches-
noctc.. He did not have court opened
until IN, 'ormed by The deputy elerk that the
did incul nbent had been informed Of his
snbscrihi ~ the oath al office, and had
told the Jerk that he intended to Ignore
Iudca ia, ISIS qualification aud bis rights
entirely. \ hen he ordered The sherii1 to
onen court nd be Obeyed. The order OF
49, the nc> Judge. The statement that
Indoe Davis n. reatened TO imprisOn Judge
Wharton is a n 'istake. Al the people OF
Radford know Ia. 1t he is a man OF TOO much
d;onitv n make foe 'llsh boasts and threaten
like bully.
The accurate mem. Der OF the Bedford bar
is mistaken again in >serting that Judge
sat down IN the Judge S chair" before the
hour arrived Tor court. 1t wa. in fact,
a few minutes after l6' when court was
opened. The clerk was reading the order
OF the Judges qualification when Judge
Wharton entered, accompanied by the ac-
curate member OF the Bedford bar and sew
eral others. Judge Wharton certainly was
not nsOlent nor violent in language or
manner. Nobody who knows him would
believe that he would forget his own self
respect and the dignity OF grave occasion.
Judge Davis was not excited nor angry, nor
forgetful OF the respect due to himself aud
his predecessor. No member OF the bar
exhibited any anger, nor was uny one guilty
OF diseourtesy and rudeness, with the sole
exception OF the accurate me,uber OF the Bed
ford bar, the seli-constitutea add otficlous
adviser OF the old incumbent, aud the Sc
we're critic u the new Judge in the Dispatch. !
He, furious with zeal and excileo by his
preterDaturai fOreknowledge OF the deci- !
sion OF the Court Of Appeals, arrogall'y !
Ieciured the new Judge aud exhibited SAL /
want OF dignity and propriety. Judge
Davis very property treated bis TRADE with
indifference ana declined 10 be inundated
BY tho whitening frown OF tie clustering
member OF the -Bfdford bar In il n nity