Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-09-18
lanrdstcr EmtrlllQenret
MONDAY EVENING. SEPT. 1e, 1852.
The Bench and the Bar.


The members Of the committee of
Philadelphia lawyers opposed to Judge
Briggs reelection, express themselves
with a freedom and frankness tEat could
hardly have been ventured upon if the
supreme court of this state had affirmed
the doctrine laid down in the opinion de
livered by Judge Patterson and approved
by Judge Livingston in the disbarment
case of Steinman and Hensel. That
opinion expressed by our local court, to
which some members Of the local bar
gave their adhesion ard which was sup.
ported in a written and printed argu-
ment Of the attorney general, would
have disbarred Charles S. Pancoast, r.
Hum Hanson, George Tucker Bispham,
William G.. UaEnis, Joseph NJ. Pile,
Walter +. Rex, Charles Gibbons, jr.,
and numerous other scarcely less .prOmi-
nent members of the Philadelphia bar
who head movement to defeat the re-
election of Briggs.
In a published card these gentlemen
proclaim, as the sentiment of large
number of the Republican lawyers of
Philadelphia, that Judge Briggs has
lost tho confidence Of very many mem.
bers of the Philadelphia bar. In the
opinion of some of these, he is not Il
well-trained lawyer in that Of others,
he does not possess that StrengthO of mind
and integrity of character which rises
superior to political or personal influence;
while all are convinced that his egOtism,
ecccntricities and infirmities of temper
are such that any attempt to penetrate
these barriers to his sense of judicial
fairness is in many cases futile. lie is
rude and Overbearing to the weak, and
deferential and subservient tDpAitici:Ms
and others who are supposed to be fn-
fluential and powerful i'm The community.
Ills behavior on the bench is undignifietl
and unjudicial, and his habit Of address
ing juries at great length (Often inter
rupting the course of Il trial on subjects
in no way connected with that before
them, seemingly for no other object than
to cxtOl his own Importance, subjects
the administration of court business to
ridicule, and wastefully consumes the
time and money of parties, witnesses
and the, public. Ills conduct Oh the
bench has created feeling among mem
bers of the bar and i'm the community
that in causes where the interests OF
well known politicians have been i'll
vOlved he has not displayed that Impair
tiality which the upright Judge should
always exhib it." a..,
These are We ry serious accusations, and
if justifiable, are not only sufficient rea-
sons why Briggs should be defeated, but
why the lawyers should labor to secure
that resultant to make the public &C
uuainted with his shortcomings rs they
reveal themselves to the profession.
But under the rulings Of Judges Patter
son and Livingston all of the gentlemen
who hold these opinions or who knew
these facts could have been silencet
under penalty of being stricken from the
roll of practitioners in the courts OF
Philadelphia. The case of Judge Briggs
i, only one of Il class that is likely to Oc
cur at any time in Pennsylvania wherein
it is the privilege and duty OF the bar to
expose Judicial iniirmities, but it comes
very close upon the heels OF the decision
in the Steinman and IIensel case to
illustrate the Importance of that deliver
cncp