Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-06-21
TIE DISBARMENT CASE.
Close Of the Argument IN the supreme
Court ON Saturday MOrning. Dy Mr..
Rey nOlds and Col. Mcclure

Close Of tho Argument IN the supreme
Court on Saturday MOruing. Dy Mr..
Rey nolds and Col. Mcclure.
MIR. Reynolds introduced his argument
with pretty exordium OF five or six min
utes duration before he got down to the law
of his paper book. He said that he argued
the case without any personal feeling he
had a high regard for the young gentlemen
who suffered from the action OF the court
below. The person whom he represented
and who Was privately concerned in the
case meaning Judge Patterson had in
structcd him to avoid all personal criticism.
The conduct of the appellants had been
resented out of the belief that this was due
to the court, which they had sought to bring
into contempt and whose usefulness was
thereby seriously affected. Mr.. Reynolds
proceeded to take up in detail the points
made by the appellants counsel and to an
swcr them with argument and citations of
authorities which were only applicable upon
the basis upon which lie proceeded, which
was that the article published in the INTEL
HGENCER was a libel and was so admitted
by its editors to be, because they did not
disavow it when summoned by the
court to explain it. Two cases
from North Carolina were cited as on
call fours' with this case. There was
no need of conviction for libel to base
the action of the court upon, when the
II.nI IL IL,
ing his argument, made statement of the
facts of the Snyder case, in which he de-
clarcd that Mr.. Brown had made careful
examination of the commonwealth wit
ncsses before he reported to the district
attorney that there was no case against
Snyder; and said that on his second trial
all the facts had been laid before the jury
and he had been aquittcd upon his plea of
not guilty and former acquittal. But he
did not mention that the court had ir-
structcd the jury that as no evidence had
been introduced except as to the acts COM
planned of in the first trial the plea of
former acquittaI entitled the defendant to
be found not guilty. Mr.. Reynolds spoke
of the RIGHTEOUSNESS of the press which
required curbing, and of the great harm
that would come to the country if the
Judiciary was not protected from it's un-
justiiiable assaults. He did not claim that
the decisions of Il court could not be
freely criticised for their unsoundness, but
he insisted that its integrity should be free
from assaults at the hands of the
attorneys. MIR. Reynolds closed with
peroration in well chosen language after
talking an hour and a-half. The members
of the court appeared very restless
towards the conclusion, and the chief
justice interrupted the speaker in his last
words to tell him that his time was up.
During Mr.. Reynolds argument the
court room filled up with members of the
bar and ladies of the city attracted to hear
Col. Mcclure, who began, as is his GUS
tom, in a low tone of voice which gave
promise OF a severe disappointment to the
audience in tie rear, but he shortly warm
ed up into a strain of earnest OratOry
which was well sustained throughout and,
with the interesting nature of his argu-
ment and the beautiful language in which
it was couched, secured the breathless at
tention of his audience during the fifty
minutes in which he was permitted to
speak He dismissed the law and the facts
of the judges case as presented by their
and in their paper book in the very
brieiest but most effective way. For the |
facts he simply referred to the answer of
The appellants, in which they stated under
oath that their qualification was made in |
good faith. without malice and for the pub
ic good" and which was therefore not |
l libel upon the court. Under the
we'll recognized law the appellants sworn
answer must be taken as true, unless dis
proved by testimony, of which there not
only is none in this case to controvert it but
Nowhere in the decision of Judge Patter
son was it held, as maintained now by
that this was confessed libel
lpon him. AS to the deep personal inter-
'st i'll this case, which Mr.. Reynolds thought
hat he had in this case as n lawyer and an
'ditOr, it seemed to him that he was main
aiming Mr.. Reynolds interest rather than
lis own. If he was elected from one pro-
ession he had the other to fall back upon
or livelihood, but if Mr.. Reynolds should
utler disbarment from the arbitrary act of
judge he would be without occupation.
f the license was given Judge Patterson
Which he claimed, he would in a few years
re candidate for denomination, and with
he use of the peculiar practices prevalent
Lancaster county primaries, he might
ucceed upon a set of locked up returns.
The time might we'll be foretold to come
4 which Mr.. Reynolds himself would have {
ause to cry out for protection against the
power of a judge SO chosen.
He maintained that it was as much the
lterest of the press to protect the judi ,,
iary as it was that of the Judiciary to pro-
ect the press. The one should conserve
ne other. In the ranks of both there !.
ere unworthy members, and not more he
lOught in the press than in the judiciary.
,or had there been more license used by
,e press in denunciatiOn of members of d
1e judiciary than had been practiced by :,
ldgeS in condemnation of their brother
ldges And Mr.. Mcclure proceeded to V
lustrate this statement with long list of y
cases in which judges had Sc
L II III