New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-09-26

the brief given to Mr. Conking His argument was
strong two Others Of the first rank are quoted az
saying that the brief was fine, and that the portion
Gus aud gaseous The second People ag Dennson
wos celebrated against certain canal contractors
IN when Mr. Conklng was retained by the Attorney
General of WORK, whose political relations with
nm have caused the retainer TO be construed
preston Of the Attorney Generals political gratitude.
Mr. Conkilngs argument in that case only be de-
lawyer except laughing stock reputo who
heari " said TO the writer that if il had been anybody
the first fifteen minutes" The following extracts from
published stenographic report Of this argument are
commenced 10 the attention of who may doubt the
Par,tiaty OF these judgments. They the opening
ana closing sentences with two others:
This case II please your Ronors seems to belong
as his By
the s Of %1
"'' b SSsSy % IF s snas
fe age In hs In the o pS S %sn
voice Of many tongues sounded an The state il
sy 20 @ S cos asSc sa
lax ns and nd vena had thieves
on eScy side With pEnder and spoa,ion
This far the bright beginning and the bitter end of
among the ySissifIdss of this somewhat public
aneted win Of disregard both Of
But he the present law orhcer the STATED has been
bo% % get the a caps many who have Blended their
mh1 e ss% ys5y 3aa m IT. must his
essiona breren %ho s NOT o Se s Sos OF ne pro-
inc small modicum of responsibility might be- hut
ruthless nsinuaton that in
sympathy with or in eny with the interests somebody
IN the presumpuous hope heng materially to assist
your honors In understanding this
my side had Se svg M az rg,heT s
ppIc condemnation in order that IL might fulfil oil
should be spoken by somebody the prophet that there
offence ia these times that it should not bs dragged through
the hurricane
ton
Two incidents of Mr. Conklings legal career remain to
be considered in dispensing Of the claims of his friends
That he Is great lawyer great The first, In
his connection with the Phelps Dodge affair in 1872.
In reply to speech of Senator Bayards last autumn
Mr. Couklng made partial denial of participation
In the division of tie plumber in this case with which
Is To be duly credited II is, however the fact
COnkling in close communication those
whom the plumber divided, the time the division
was hclue made, that they his intimate political
fenus and that nc supposed to have procured their
oSeS Tor some them has been positively stated and
widely believed also that after the division OF he under
was made, Mr.. Conkling received $4,000 as
counsel ice for ms services to these gcntemcn and
no TO tns 'ie, none OF his denias have been broad
cLougu 10 cover the receipt NJ AS
fee. this would have been cxorbtant sum- 1t was
moreover unnecessary because If these gentlemen who
were public officers needed counsel the regular law Of
ncerS of the Government hand ~ H.
The second instance which is sometimes mentioned
TO show that MIR. COnkng great lawyer a
great Is the fact that President Grant is rcporte
have offered him the Chief ustceship Ills refusal of this
offer highly credtable hut far being trb-
ute 10 Mr COnkngs legal ability the offer avowedly
made reward for the campaign speech 1872, ut
Cooper linton; and its reception by the legal pro-
related OF very distinguished lawyer who was
asked at the time OF the proposed appointment
he supposed that Senator Conkliug would accept the
misunderstanding He answered, Mo-; and when
son that would not accept mission China be-
cause do not understand the Chinese language"