Birmingham age-herald., 1895-04-12
ABSOLUTELY PURE

bill of complaint against the Cnciunati, Hamilton and Dayton Railroad company and their agents and representatives, were fully sustained by the facts, and even ad- mtted by the defendants answer.
 It is not my purpose or desire, ho wever, to discuss the merits of the case.
 1 deny that either MT. Henry Crawford or Judge Sommerviile, with whom 1 am as- socated in the case in the supreme court, ever made any such statement as Mir Lon don ascribes to them. Mir. Crawford has stoutly and vigorously y maintained, in puo- lie and In private, 1n the court room and in privacy of consultation, that the com plainants, Greenough ct als. who are ap- pellants in the case now pending in the supreme court, were entitled to maintain that suit; and Judge Sommerville, both in his argument in the supreme court, and privately in my hearing, has expressed himself of the same opinion.
 The case was argued in the supreme court by MT. Crawford and Judge Som- merville, aud, with such force and sim cerity apperantly as to cause that court to ponder and reflect for two months upon the case, to the utter dismem mberment of Mir. London's nervous system, and driv- ing him to commit the indiscretion of re- f1ectiug on the supreme court and it's emil nent and distinguished chief justice. 'tCounsel have stated that they have no case, and yet the supreme court holds it up for two months, after full argument, without deciding itib gays MT. London. NHut U ottty CONTt! UT 6lbc3 WUut N6yIt- gent court!''
 Mir. London commits the further indis- erection eff he will pardon my boldness). of venting his views about the case just brought in newspaper, and almost before the ink from the learned chancellor's pen which wrote the order granting the injunc- tion had become dry. Does he mean to chide the distinguished chancellor for granting this injunction? Or does he mean to inform the chancellor's mind and con- eoianCA in advQnca nf tha rapular haarinU court? Else why this outburst of profess sional emotion, to-wit: "rhe outcome of the present litigation is not uncertain in the end Ohe chancellor will please take note) but the effect of this inj unctiou is to postpone the decision Gin MT. London's favor) until after the meeting of the supreme court next November.
 The effect is practically that upon the same case nolU before the supreme court for detern,ination, to tie up thiS property until after neat October, a1hen the dfnudt election tS held. In other words, MT. London says in effect: "This case has already been passed on by Judge Pardee and Judge Wilkinson adversely to the interests repre- sented by the com plainants in the suit just brought, and is being ow wrongfully held up by the supreme court, contrary to the express promise of the chief justice, and in the face of admission of counsel that they had no case. But, 10 and beholdi here comes the chancellor and on the same case, grants another injunc- tion, the only effect of which will be to give delay until the next an nual elec- ton of directors Does MT. London mean to insinuate that the chancellor has acted improvidehtly in granting tbis last injunc- tion? Or does he mean to inform the chan cellor in advance of the game which this dreadful complainant, the Central Trust company, is trying to play on him? l have no doubt MT. London will deny having any intention to reflect on the supreme court or it's chief justice, or of committing contempt on the chancery court by writing in the newspapers concerning the merits of the case in that court; and the public, includ- ing myself, will acquit him of any such de- liberate intent. But can MT. London, who is very diligent attorney, be acquitted of having written this interview for the pur- pose of creating pressure from that great engine of our social life, public opinion, and of bringing 1t to bear upon cases act- ually pending in court wherein he is inter- ested as attorney?
 h conclusion present. this question: Is it proper for an attorney to discuss in the newspapers the merits of his case while il is being considered hy the court, or to excite public attention to the merits of his case, or to arouse public prejudice against his opponent in such a way as to tend to em- barrass the action of the court?
 JAMES WEATHERLY.