The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-05-04
Smith Case WAS ARGUED
Attorney ). b. Price Made the Clos
inq Address for the Prosecution.
JUDGES DECISION RESERVED
MIR. smith, Assisted by Attorney James
MahOn. Argued ON Behalf Of the DC.
fcnse-The Former Made Ono Of
His Characteristic Addresses.

Dy the attorneys IN the argument was
| by order of Judge Archibald made
part of the record and will be consid.
| cred in shaping the decision that will
be made. Attorney $. Il. Price argued
| that the action of Mr.. Smith in writing
to Judge Gunster was highly improper
and disrespectful. Attorney James
Mahon spoke for the defense and Mr..
Smith made long argument and was
very eloquent. The outcome of the
case will not be made known for some
time.
Mr.. Price began at 1890. He said 1t
| was with reluctance that he had under
| taken the matter at issue, as he has
sympathy for the respondent. who has
grown gray at the bar, but there is
responsibility and duty in the case
that requires that It be met manfully.
disagreeable though it may be. He
| said he would endeavor to use plain
language and to say nothing In exag-
| geration of the facts In the case.
The speaker said that the duties OF
! counsel are peculiar. Their life Is one
of criticisms of the acts of the court.
because the court always must decide
| against somebody, and when the court
decides a case adversely to the coun-
sells idea, counsel has no right to i'm
pugn to the court a motive rof personal
desire to interfere with him.
DUTY OF ATTORNEYS. -
| Every attorney knows it is his duty
| to present to the court. or to a judge in
chambers. In the presence of a third
| party. anything he has 20 say with
reference to the conduct of IA judge in
a certain particular case; and If he
does not do that he does not do his duty.
| to i'm, f,,. hir,, 10, I'D lot
| ter to one of the judges to influence the
judge as to what decision to make. II
there was anything in the law upon
which the respondent desired to correct
| an opinion of the bench. that was one
| thing; but to state that he and the
| judge had been friends. and that he
expected fair treatment was another
thing. uncalled for and improper.
Mr.. Price asked: What Is the duty
of lawyer toward the court? Is he
not sworn to fidelity by the court? Is
it fidelity to the court when he says
that he has been wrongfully used by
the court not to use the remedy pro-
Nided by the law? Is it fidelity to the
court to adopt means to injure the
court, to bring the court into disrepute?
l Is not right. 1t is highly reprehensible.
1t Is cowardly for a counsel to impuEn
motives to the court and do 1t in such
a way that the court itself has no de-
fense except In the manner in which
| this matter is now brought before this
court. When counsel steps outside of
his duty and outside Of the usual rules
and puts in that printed paper book
something that scandalizes the court
and all its officers, Is that conduct un-
becoming an officer of the court; that's
| the question.
TIL, ppJNTLn NJ TrEp
The speaker then referred to the
printed matter in which Mr.. Smith
| charged that fraudulent testimony
sainst John q. Jennings was procured
and the jury packed. In conclusion he
| said ii was the duty of the court to
guard itself for protection, and to pro-
| tect society and the bar.
Mr.. MahOn's argument was along the
| line that when Mr.. Smith wrote the let
ters to Judge Gunster. it was done be-
| lieving that an opinion had been hand
ed down and taken back in the Burns
Smith case and there was no intention
on the part of the respondent to i'm
pugn the integrity of the Judge. nor to
show any disrespect for the court what
ever. ...t
Mr.. Smith made an exhaustive and
eloquent argument He said it might
be the last time he would have the oD-
although speaking i'm his own defense
| portunty of addressing the court. but
although speaking in his own defense
he would do so with candor and fear
less manhood, such as always charac-
terized his actions as a lawyer and as a
! man. He was conscious of no wrong.
and what he believed to be true he
would assert now, and at all times,
| though the heavens should fall IL ii
were to ehd all his troubles, he would
| not make an untruthful assertion.
Let no man think. he said. That he en-
tered the contest unadvisedly. But he
| wished to say that the contest was not
of his making or choice; it was forced
upon him through duty toward his
client, and he was fully aware of that
lamentable fact that bristles all over
| in history: that in contest between
powers and right, might Is right"
and the law must go to the wall.
AWARE OF CONSEQUENCES.
Fully aware of that. fully aware of
the consequences, he made his choice
Upon the one hand was presented ruin.
financially and professionally; on the
other, honor and manhood. The choice
| that was presented fairly and squarely
was either surrender the rights of client
or accept the consequences of con-
tiHSeNCy dSdHisl poWtF. w nat was the
| contest? Upon the one side was the
combined powers of corporation, the
| combined power of the press; upon the
other side was an individual with a
poor and penniless client; and let no
| man think for moment that he did
| not fully know the consequences of q
| contest so unequal: that he did not
know at the moment he entered upon
| that contest that in the end he must
| fall, but yet that did not take him
| from his duty to his client.
AS he viewed the law of the land.
the principle of natural justice and the
inherent instinct that Is implanted in
the mind of every man for fair play, 1t
seemed to him that it was against all
these for the court to appoint attorneys
to prosecute him and insist upon sit
| ting in Judgment upon the case.
Mr.. Smith spoke at length on the
Jennings case. of three attempts hay-
| ing been made to try the issue, and all
| that he ever asked or sought was q
simple and fair opportunity to get for
his client fair and impatient trial.
He, went on to reiterate that means
| were adopted to thwart him at every
step, and that, the courts and juries
were set up against him. ''
MIR. SMITH INTERRUPTED.
Judge Archibald interrupted Mr..
Smith and reminded him that what he
was saying was direct and repeated
attack upon the court as now consti-
| tuted and sitting in the case. He re-
piled that there was nothing that would
| check him from making a full and free
defense; It was.one right left to him,