Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-01-26
JUDGE PATTERSON.
Tho Drift Of Public OpiniOM-Exppessed
Within and Without His Claimed Juris-
dictiOn.

Extraordinary Development of judicial
Functions.
Philadelphia Sunday Mercury.
Judge Patterson, of the Lancaster bench.
has developed judicial functions of very
extraordinary nature.
No Bench Warrant.
Sunday Mercury's Tin Ear" Man.
OF course everybody knows that the
least solved problem of this OF, or any other
age, has been, Who struck Billy Patter-
son?' but the question now is whether
Judge Patterson has struck lie or anything
else in his rule to disbar the LANCASTER
lNTELLIGENCER editors. because they
chanced to be lawyers. The T. E. listened
attentively, and is under the impression
that there was no bench warrant for the
decidedly bar sinister proceeding.
Up to Boiling Heat.
Altoona Tribune.
Judge Patterson, of Lancaster, has his
judicial temper pitched away up to boil
ing heat. because Messrs. Steinman and
Hensel two lawers practicing in his court,
and who are editors of the INTELIIGENCER
said something in their editorial capacity
that grated harshly on the judicial ear,
which appears to be of enormous size. He
has served !, rule on than to show cause
why they should not be stricken from the
roll of attorneys. Ii Judge Patterson had
passed the matter over, he would have be-
trayed more good sense. When lie gets
| through with this tilt against the liberty of
| the prsSs he will be wiser.
Prosecutor and Judge.
| EastOn Argus.
Judge Patterson, of Lancaster county.
Il few days ago had Messrs. Steinman and
Hensel, editors of the Lancaster INTEIII-
| GESCER, brought before him to- answer Us
attorneys for al article published in their
journal calling attention to the fact that Il
criminal had been acquitted. for a corrupt
consideration, in his court. In his effort to
maintain his dignity Judge Patterson lost
his head, and his bluIder in holding editors
re sponsible as attorneys proved either his
incompetency or weakness, or both, or more.
If he had brought suit against the editors
for libel he would have only manifested
his even now apparent lack of common
sense, but when he essays to act both as
prosecutor and judge the people are inclin-
ed to think that the 1NTELLIGENCEE did
not strike wide of the mark ifit had express
ed contempt for him.
Does Not Look Discreet.
New Era.
The sworn testimony of Hay Brown and
|
libel suits, showed that they-one as dis
trict attorney and the other As his assistant.
and both as lawyers and officers of the court
abused the confidence OF the court by Il
misrepresentation of the facts. and if this
was not contempt of court, We would like
to know what constitutes contempt. The
public expectation was that as soon as
these facts were presented to the court.
upon the admission of the parties them
selves. testifying under oath in their own
behalf. a rule would be taken upon them
to show cause why they should not DE dis
barred, or at least debarred from such
confidential relat ions with the persOnne
of the court The maintenance of sucl
relations, as the INTELLIGENCER so posi-
lively asserts, with parties who themselve'
ought to be i'll contempt. certainly does
, not lOol. discreet.