Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-01-06
as the lawyer Of the bondholders may be

as the lawyer OF the bondholders may De
reassuring to the officers he now menaces.
In the large number of cases growing
out of levies under Coupon-killer NO: 1,
MIR. Royan claimed damages aggregatIng
upwards of 500, 600. In each OF these,
except the first (of Ford's) and two
Others OF 100000 damages each, he
claimed $4,000. But the iuries gave
yerdicts for only the snount OF YAK
levied in each case. In one, for ,nstance,
$40 900 was claimed as damages ior
levying on COW for tax OF ~: But
the jury gave the plaintiff only, the
actnal damages--that is, she got back the
money which the treasurer retained out
Of the sale OF her COW and not one cent
more. the State having the right to the
commons rendered for the tax. In the
case of a man named Jones, arrested
here in Richmond for selling goods
without a license, as IN the MA,
dlesex cases, MIR. Royal instituted
a suit for 100000 damages against Gil
parties in the remotest degree connected
with the arrest, even TO the policeman
who served the process. But he promptly
dismissed it at the next ensuing term oil
the court.
In all these cases Mr.. Royal had pub
licly predicted to his clients that they
would recover heavy damages and had
said that if the people OF the state
would use coupons in payment OF their
taxes it would he mere question of time
whom the bondholders would compel tho
State to make terms with them. But III
three years all his efforts, backed by
Judge Bonds illegal rulings, had only
enabled him to force into the treasury
about one-hundredth part OF what he
tried to get in and at last Judge Bond
WAS forced to declare that If the jurles
saw fit to bring in their verdicts in direct
conflict with the decision OF the Supreme
Court of the United States he could not
help it.
The next most prominent step that
Mr.. Royal took was, IN order TO break
down the more recent law known rs the
coupon-crusher, to advise taxpayers to
buy coupons from one Cooper, foreign
er, who agreed to indemnify all who pur-
chased from him againstloss andin which
agreement the said Cooper was endorsed
to the public by Mr.. Royal though 1t
appeared upon inspection that no lawyer
could frame n declaration upon the
guarantee of indemnity, and further,
upon inquiry, that no one could tell the
value OF the guarantee, even supposlng
it to have been intelligibly drawn.
And then when the persons who had
bought coupons under this advice and
endorsement were brought into court
under the coupon-crusher, Mr.. Royal,
with a great flourish, got his man Bond
TO imprisOn the officers OF the State
With what result is known to all.
His last move is this threat 70 sue
other officers of the State, and to apply
to his man for another habcas corpus :
a process which he seems to esteem as
highly as Mr.. Weller did an aG6i.
/ think those who consult his record,
and remember the readiness of the Le-
gislature 70 stand by her officers, will
feel but little uneaslness at this new
threat Of Mr. Royal TO get Every sub
stantial damages" against the sheriff OF
Middesox for executing the law under
lawful process upon a man who, it APP
pears. resisted TO the point OF making 1t
necessary for the sheriff to draw pistol
on him.
In all previous cases the juries have
done their duty against Judge Bonds
effort to get control of their minds; and
if the same sort Of juries are chosen as
heretofore under the United States jury
law or by the summons of Marshal Scott,
who is believed to call to the book only
such men as he would select TO try a
case of his own, why then the sheriff Of
Middlesex is as much safer than the pre-
vious defendants as his case is stronger
than theirs. Tf@