The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-10-05
DUTIES OF ATTORNEYS.
Sharp Criticism Of a Recent Utterance
by the Governor of Indiana.

To the Editor of the Indianapolis Journal:
1 take the following from Wednesdays
EJournal. being a report of part of the tes-
timony of Governor Matthews, given on
Tuesday:
Mr.. Harris-Did / not. Governor. in 1892,
say specifically what the Union railway
and station cost?
Governor Matthews-Yes. sir, 1 think you
Mr.. Harris-Did you believe, when I
came before the board and stated what it
Governor Matthew'S had the impression
that you were not making a full report,
perhaps.
you. ] will have the question read.
Governor Matthew s-Tha is a very pc
culia- question.
Mr.. Harris-Well you put il in that atti-
tude- Do you want to be understood. Gov
ernor. that you thought l was misleading
the board?
Governor Matthews-No, / would not like
to think that, but the attorneys in making
their arguments
Mr.. Harris-I don't want to speak about
others: 1 am the one in question. / am
known pretty well in this community,
whether for good or bad shall not say
here. l know how / have tried to live,
and s
Mr.. Ketcham Gnterrupting)-When Mr..
Harris insists on throwing his personality
into this case / submit that the witness
should be allowed to go On.
Governor Matthews-I do not want Mr..
Harris to understand me as rejecting upon
his personal integrity. He was before the
board as an attorney for a railroad COM
Dany. | would Dia oef implicit confidence in
him, but in forming the judgments / was
compelled TO form / could not take his
statement
The reported colloquy reveals a condition
of Governor Matthews's mind that fills me
with amazement and establishment. That
the chief executive of this State should
entertain such notions of the conduct df
| not the duty Of honorable gentlemen who
follow the profession of practicing law is
almost beyond belief. 1 am not defending
Mr.. Harris-he does not need it-but am
using him and this incident in the court
room as an illustration of the view taken
by many of the conduct, duty and methods
of an attorney who, in all his affairs, deal
| ings and private conduct outside of the
| court room, or outside of his professional
| career, is in every way honorable and up
right. 1t is time that this gentleman learns
| the error of his views, and that there are
not only some gentlemen practicing law
who are as conscientious in stating the
truth exactly as they see and understand
il. but that a very large majority of the
| members of the bar-nine out of ten-do so,
apd that the remainder bear such carr
marks of die .onesty and untrutnfuiness
| that they do not need the title of lawyer
TO discredit their veraclty.
Few men are tempted as lawyers TO be
dishonest and Cntruthful. 1t is often urged
upon them by their clients. and it is every
| honorable lawyers experience that he has
lost clients because he would not do their
| bidding-to use perjured or untruthful
statements or resort to tactics his sense
of honor and right prompted him not to
s sion TO c Caution his clients and their wit
nesseS to be careful in their statements,
and to check their desires and inclinations
to be untruthful; and for all this he Is
met by the charge that he not only con-
hives at false assertions and perlured tes-
timony. but that he himself is guilty of de-
L ant+ nAI y .th frr1n0CC
There is no double standard among men,
bers of the bar, any more than there is
among chief executives OF States or minis
ters of the church. Every minister Of a
church can walk into the average lawyers
office with just as sreat assurance that he
will find as high a sense of honor and truth
as he will find in his own pulpit or in his
own ecclesiastical councils-indeed, 1 may
even say higher. if the proceedings in the
trial at Saratoga of Prof. Smith. of Gin
cinnati. for heresy during this year NAV
be taken as an example of the sense of
fairness and JUSTICE OF an ecclesiastical
not bought for any amount OF money. much
less by a few paltry dollars in the way of
fees.
In Governor Matthew's notion of the du-
ties of ATTORNEYS. or Of their ways and
methods. if he desires so to put it. we have
ruling of the State Board OF Tax Com
missioners. The members OF that board
nave evidently discredited every statement
of LAWYERS made before it. for there has
been almost universal complaint by high
minded lawyers who have been before 1t
that il was imbued not only with n sense
of injustice and unfairness, but that II re-
sorted to every pretext. 10 every supposed
technicalitv, in order to defeat meritorious
claims and meritorious appeals. The ig-
norance of law, OF form, of justice. of
right displayed and the prejudice shown bv
the members of that board have astonished
lawyer after LAWYER who have appeared
before il in the interests of their clients.
In this language of Governor Matthews
the members OF this and all bars may well
roa6 n laceon for themselves rf fhpv will
not rid Themselves of disreputable mem
bers Of the bar they must expect to he
charged bv ignorant (but not by intelli-
GENT people with deceit. untruthfulness
and dishonesty. They owe ii to themselves
and TO the citizens OF this State to disbar
all lawyers guilty Of improper conduct.
and the man who will institute proceed
ings to disbar an unworthy member of the
profession should meet with encourage
ment from. rather than the frown of. the
remainder of the bar. He is 4 public bene-
factor and z public-spirited citizen. worthy
Of emulation. W. W. THORNTON.
indianapolis. Oct. f.