New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-05-03

| Ioubat had left. From what now know OF Henry
Mr. Cartcr-The circumstance IS not in proof 49,,
Mr. Choaie-l accept the criticism. stand coIrcc'l
am puitng my fngcr lu-t rs your Honor dd on lno
t very wee o. 1e rtseecn5 II was I ~ te charge
against him; that evidence which was the 9undl-
port That tie Governing Committee acic,l we" , iS
voted the plaintiffs expulsion. In l evidence lhcto
si.cnt WITH IT, Yoar iiohor bno~s enough rs judo
and lawyer % know that # might vel, be- II he hld ncen
turned ont just as Lolhat had stated and that The other
Now, what do you say to tho doctrines Lave cited
In D,'soa rs G-or-s Logl Deuman says that nGre u
sificcat rLiect.H when there is only n I0S'i9uy
nam. 0biHtrs mi m bcy hire tc'a rs n. .,.,
there was something more than mere posHtb',tyi
crnng Committee J4sed ~ evidence taken Ia the
So also in Tarp. rs B'etlyte Dor's Rep 100, Lord
Eldon SAP that ala aW ard c1nn't stand "hclt uEE
and that oven q tho arbitrator "dee'id o0hpg he hd
Tie decision Of Julgc Lawrence IN the stock FHchanco
case Is basel upon the same principles aud the rihc4'
In nv view OF thl5 case a charge was made on which
the Governing Committee might con~id'r wa. h,t 10
OF Gdsrbo,d against brother member of the cln9 I1ni
your Honor please IS the c!arSe upon "nien nc i
! he W.. expelled a crime n which no iu'na'on was
| gwen him no not one. They pr, It IN their report ami
fhcn VIII oid they have done witlthc report That
Wa The time TO nave slor I9 clR Nee plir ,otr
that hc Doe expelled, and The cousin ~ lunul Nho nln
m De there al all seconded the luOtlOu ana tAcy
! PIT it through.
WHY THE PLAINTIFF WAS NOT CALLED.
Now if your Honor please want 10 reply 70 iltue
clap trap INDUCED IN by my learned friends oh the other
side. such eminent aud distinguished counsel can he
supposed TO resort to that Bat your Honor knows the
! They say: why didn't you mt Loubat on the stand;
why didn't yon deny somcthins That question w"7 or
body better than my learned friends That your
retry this It Is held in oil the cases
|
merits. meaning Of course by the iacr1s' INC
personal guilt or Innocence Of the plaintiff Ihc power
me Court docs not eEGna GsySn9 Fey;T o. , tc pE
been done ~ me 1aftod ~ t,al TO Ia'e PM me pau
stand could therefore have been 70 no possible
purpose Ny friends on the 9tner slc Know hs ~, %
rs Your Honor knows II. and they asked the QUESTION
merely 20 tickle the ears Of the gronndlnsS nom Inc
Well do / make my case Where the principles
of natural Justice ~ laid down by Lord Edon! non
consult that the committee would have expelled me
rn ~" T5r'Tftc m I,ol 1nin on siich Il story ~
that. Ma body of gentlemen any club IN this cry couu
the traoie reports report based ii yolr Honor please,
uppu the evidence OF Willing and IUnbuil ana hlmiAl
tah~a bchbd he piaigs bac: and o1so'"tey concealed
! Jrool MIN. wi,
We VIII take any Of the alternatives you please pa
they cXpcl hin for the remlrl VINO can gay So Wh'i
! ire remark alone was not submitted 10 iheiI lInl,I
This other Migrant charge was coupled win ~ NOne9
can say no nan tan 1ay that II ne on mn reniih "a
! ANYTHING 10 do win IT, It constituted inc pih..l.t
whole offence In the largest possible view OF ne t-tl
nony the making of the inal remark was all that wa'
disclosed by his own testimony lhey n,u TO- ~
ana did act upon he rioe evidence Ny claim NAV II
]
and Knhall which the plaintiff was not allowed 10 hear
and upon vi ch TINS ali 'urin rh1rss ol crime Vas Dbl
would have been no expulsion. and no ground Tor eA-
What do these great judges eayl They sly that
JUDGE or arbitrator, having dismissed cltHer parry
takes my evidence behind his back no matter what no
| matter how little. Il is a5So'Hieiy GtgL .
What happened here! They took behind his back the
t,e of evidence going to constitute At Least me
eav: wocxpeed MIN FOR his ORIGINAL remark or minds
not affected by his eyin' the he nliresS"nahy
can they hc heard 10 sa- thar How eau they he
heard to that, when Lod Lidon SAYS View" ny ty'r
an arli aor OF llSr com "rNl'd anu 9@' ', ~
did allow his mind Ice affected by any evidence that
Ire tooH Human nature cant stand that no iudgr no
such q test n to put of these fourteen mem
tire original remark lie could not that Pc dd, for
tnev Md before tnen another accusation supported hl
evidence taken behind the plantih's back ANA by no
other evidence whatever.
DID Mr.. LoUBAT HAVE FAIR trial.
That is the plaiuuh's case. leave 1t not only 10
yorr Honor. hut - every m'uIhcr ~ the Union
Clu| 10 , whether le had fair TRIAL II needs only
clear exposition OF the eise to provo 10 auybody-I
would leave the counsel on the other Sidch"thcr
the ainh had ir r9 %II@ tne % o ; "t
You oucnj 10 have heard friends argument there.
he expelled fpr obvious fraud -; be went hc.ore iG
fr.,'' ni r,7 1iitv Of "oiciou. fr,ud hy tie
score and 10y the hundred; and now yon vnnt
10 -et the expulsion ".dr' hr,"',' a.lhn"ssA
itic uilng uuiWpot'ni WI'llt t14t dd hot
81 Pc stated T.. 'a' dd judge i1WIc geo
say th4tl jude Lawrence sll l'.t H' i"fl i"'h
said tins Governing Commute" for some reason DIP
toreu % necessary. hc ore they cot aI me iac, "Dch
tiny 0cr, instructed % investigate not t' rely upon
sion aHd 20 the' took other evidence" niu ra'i'l now
com .utlcr the >lsc-ou tat It, WI net necessary 10
IT. ,,, Honor f.r We don't urr1 - make o'y s'cl
si-rucut, nr'e lou vu read Lounats testimony me-
,ycr, M -.,,.,.et To- r,' mon What edI
I
- "a 5'ct ,are altlol-l very rurco-onoblv expelled
I'M tncv ,l: 49, We are mot content with Mr. L''1a-'
story. don't evprl h'n nn mt we cN'cl hn or th'
combined stories Of 10 i't ruruaii WILING ant Kin
,irtcd on his own admission deny ~. Sr
o-t,idc OF Booniuqdalc A-vlm, can reI' tl',
evidence aud saw that hc would convict the pruil on
li5 own admission And my learned friends VIII mo-. sN
so Tie 1a, ',"I ou the report ma1c up rom ~
| erilsuc. oI f.. Wi, bi- own statement. The
ofher firss ,r,,e shw oH j. on hearing or
CrSrc'i"N - r.,,l,. o,, ,. ., .r
/ uot II fhr rif. n.t1ril jdrtc" are to govern.
IoW would YOU n-. GO administer justice In that way
and Tie supreme Court 70 which have called yonr at
enjion, refer 30 sworn nd-e rs t. whom the lcopsat
,r5l crlcd an per 0riuauce o. their uutN by tiei
5t f t,.t , tT1al tO rhc bench VIII Won ticu
p,rrnn slch am Governing Committee 10 de-
rNc n1u Of such valuable rights and put such Stigma
mon Kim br purely cI Ia-'c trial
vnur Honor woud never have another nights sound
sleep IT, after RECEIVING tie same commission ana @i'
'ority Which The Governing Committee received under
H. charter ~ tae Union ClGb TO c-g'te TINS case,
You lad done as this Go'crnns Committee did ,..
wonder tbuj they ally" % rine.nh'rit wonder
cation and shame AM yet ne secretary o'l ga ro,j-i
ANA plump and CON, ncl ana SCH comp icehi' rs II n-
NIat woul You n your defence, II You were 'nl.
pcacucd, 1908 you Nouil NV, 10 Dr t,' ''s we Oh
Albany i. son hll c1uII ct.d trll i,c this! WHAT aa
I .Ucr coId you makcl Nuu could not answer yon
Em hi. '3y.r'ut Commute draw their answer and
send hcr lawyers ~ here 90 sav: r. H. 4'I r. D. We
WA 'ol r o,cou 'n 20" I'- ,f y 1' o come
4 UsIrr N r 20