Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1883-05-10
Tho Law M Dfsbarment.

THURSDAY EVENING, MAY w. Aoo'
The Law or Disbarment.
Iustice Field, of the United States
,unreme court, whose dissenting opinions
are always read by the profession with
mnch interest and very often held in
preater respect than the different judg'
ment of a majority Of his brethren on
that bench, takes issue with them IN
their affirmation Of the disbarment OF
Lawyer Wall by the circuit court OF
Florida. 1t seems that the district ]udge
proceeded on information brought 10
him. he states not how, that Wall had
participated in the lynching OF negro
who had been guilty of ravishment. Upon
this outside, er parte and unsworn saying
of some one who would not face the
accused and whose words are not even
given in the summons to Wall to answer
he was arraigned in a disbarment pro-
ceeding, and when the respondent ex'
cepted to the jurisdiction of the COURT
on the curbstone and street-cornet
information it had received, and
denied the accusation against him,
the court proceeded to try him
and upon the scanty evidence OF one
witness, that the respondent was in the
crowd which hung the Iavisher, the
Judge, who was the accuser also, dis
barred him and the United States
supreme court sustained the act. Judge
Field very naturally excepts to such a
subversion of the well established prin-
ciples of law in disbarment cases, that
persons shall not be held to answer in
this way for crimes committed outside
the presence of the court, and not in
contempt of its authority. He cites a
long series of English and American de
cisions, the latest that of Judge Shars-
wood in the case taken up from this city,
to prove that where such turpitude, as
is involved in an offense against the
statute law, is to be made the basis fol
disbarment it must be established by
the record of conviction or the confession
of the respondent, and cannot be deter
mined in an erparte proceeding, II
which the Judge makes himself prosecu
tor, district attorney, judge and jury.
Upon this point Judge Field makes
this deliverence, which is unquest!on
ably the well-settied law governing thl
class of cases:
When the proceeding to disbar AL attor'
,,,;,oonHr,ot OnfcIAa nf hi
profession the inquiry should be confined
TO such matters, not constituting indict
able offences, as may show him unit Il
be a member of the bar, that is, as no
possessing the integrity and trustworthi
ness which will ensure fidelity to the inter
ests entrusted to him professionally and t.
the inspection of any record of conviction
against him for felony or nlsdemean
or involving moral turpitude. IL is no
for every moral offence which may leave
a stain upon character that courts cal
summon an attorney to account. Man!
persons, eminent at the bar, have beer
chargeable with moral delinquencies whic'
we're Justly q cause of reproach 20 them
some have been frequenteIs of the gaming
table some have been dissolut
in their habits some have bee,
Indifferent to their pecuniary obi
cations some have wasted estates il
riotous living some have been engage
in broils and quarrels disturbing the pub
lie peace but for none of these thing
could the court interfere and summon th
attorney to answer, and if bis condue
should not be satisfactorily explained
proceed to disbar him. 1t is only for tha
moral delinquency which consists in
want of integrity and trustworthines', an
renders him an unsafe person to manag
the legal business of others that the court
can interfere and summon him befoi
them. He is disbarred in such case ft
tho protection both Of the court and I
tho public.