Evening journal., 1891-12-05
IGNORANCE na mAAr2

In the light Of those interviews pub.
lished in yesterdays EvENINa JOURNAL,
with the prominent lawyers here, what
a spectacle the editor Of the News has
made Of himself by the personal attaok
on Judge Cullen
There Is not lawyer at the bar who
agrees with the News In Its structures on
Judge Cullen for not admitting evidence
in trial Of the inspectors at the polls
when Captain Mitchell and bis negroes
were under Indictment and on trial
The editors opinions concerning eyi-
dence and his ideas concerning the man
sgemont Of case are worse than worth.
less; they are ignorant Ii not that,
then they are, as Frank D. Carpenter sug
gested, not becoming repu-
table paper and "could only have
been written for the purpose Of
upholding the jurors who violated
their oaths."
Can II be true that the editor Of the
News has deliberately engaged in the
base effort Of writing himself, and his
paper, into the favor Of jurors, who not
only disregard their osths, but bring 10
verdiets against the facts and the in.
structions Of the cour. for partisan pur
poses and apparently at the dictates Of
party bosses9 Is that what the editor has
brought himself tog There seems to be no
other explanation, for, according to Ben-
iamin Nields, a Republican and an able
lawyer.
1t makes no difference IL an
inspector 10 running around with a
pistol Ia his hand, no one has the
right to impede an elestion. He Is
a police officer and has the right TO order
the arrest Of any person who walks up to
the window aud, because his vote Is re-
fused, puts on { his arms and says that
no one shall vote until his vote is taken.
What the Carpenters did has nothing TO
do with the case. The whole question
is. were the men guilty according to the
indictment.
The plea Of the News was, that be.
cause Inspector Carpenter held negro
repeaters Illegal receipt FIVE minutes,
Captain Mitchell and his negro mob wai
justihable and that they are not only guilt.
less but were engaged in some higher
duty than the law, peace aud order, ant
good morals recognize
No man who has any pretense 10 lega
knowledge would advance such Ede
fence. There Is no warrant for such al
opinion, and there Is no lawyer at this
bar who comedies with the editor. who
like quRck doctor. knows Just enough
law to be dangerous In addition to ths
above statement Of Colonel Nlelds, sena-
tor Gray, referring 20 the course Of the
News, says;
I read the editorial to which you refer.
| was amazed and saddened BY its tone
The position of Judge Cullen in his
charge in the Mitchell case was abso,
lutely correct, and no lawyer could have
any other opinion in regard to it.
Senator Gray does not talk at random.
His character Is above the suspicion Of
pettifogging politics. His condemnation
is sweeping, and. 1t carries with it the
weight Of ability and integrity Of man
Of national reputation.
What then, is the inevitable conclu
sion to which fair man must come il
respect to the attack on Judge Cullen
That the editor is ignorant, or, far saddel
still, that he has resolved to put himself
into the position Of congratulatlng thos,
four partisan and perjured jurymen, ant
Of excusing Captain Mitchell and negr,
mobs at the polls.