The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1899-01-30

Give Him Another Chance.
Cornelius smith is not 20 be read
mitted to the Dackawanna bar. In |
lengthy opinion, filed Saturday, Presi- I
dent Judge George NJ. Purdy. of Wayne |
county, refuses Mr.. Smiths petition for !
reinstatement. holding that the petl-
tioner has not complied with the stipu-
lations of the Supreme court, which
conditionally limited his dsbarment.
The condition was that at the end of
two years from June IL, 1S96-the date
! of disbarment--lf the petitioner on
! proper application asks for reinstate-
ment the court below should grant 1t;
! providing, in the meantime. nothing
| further appeared against his private
| or professional character than was ap-
| parent from the record before the SUI
| preme court
At the expiration of the two years,
Mr.. Smith made formal application for
| reinstatement and q rule was granted
| to show cause why the petition should
not be allowed. Mr. Smith asked that
| the hearing might be had before some
! judge of an adjoining county and his
request was granted, the local court
certifying the case to President Judge
| Stanley J. Woodward, of Luzerne.
Judge Woodward declined to take the
matter in hand, saying that, to his
mind, it was a case which only the
Lackawanna judges, themselves, could
! properly dispose of.
JUDGE PURDY SUGGESTED.
The local judges might have had a
leaning towards that same opinion, but
| ho iyb have pDl1Gp
for complaint, they adopted his sug-
gestion thaa Judge Purdy be sought to
dispose of the case. Judge Purdy
agreed, and the matter was heard be-
fore him in December last.
! Mr.. Smith was charged at this hear
ing, by a committee representing the
LaclSawanna bar with having con-
tinued in the very misconduct which
brought about his disbarment. In sup
port of their charge the committee pre-
aented articles, abusive of the court,
contained in Il Sunday paper which
Mr.. Smith was accused of writing, and
the authorship of which he would
neither admit nor deny; the files in the
suit against the Lehigh Valley COM
pany and others, in which the charges
of corruption and dishonesty against
the judges were reiterated in most
, virulent manner; his paper book be-
fore the Supreme court, which was
even more scurrilous, and a paper
= labeled Argument" signed by John G..
Jennings, which was showed through
the door of Judge Gunster's chambers
in August last.
This paner was quite as abusive as
any of the others. 1t was written, as
| Judge Purdy says, by someone possess
) ing a knowledge of ancient and myth
= illogical history. and familiarity with
: legal forms, which would scarcely be
expected in a layman. Mr.. Smith, who
is Jennings attorney, was held to be
the author Of the paper. If he wasn't
he was at least cOgnizant of its prep
aration, it is only reasonable to assume,
and did nothing to estop it's presen-
tatiOn.
REFUSED TO ANSWER.
l He was charged with it's authorship
and although he could have cleared
himself of the charge by one word he
refused to make answer one way or the
other and advised Jennings also to re-
, fuse to disclose the identity of the au-
thor. OF this Judge Purdy says:
Were this ii criminal prosecution he
could not be compelled to give evil
dence against himself, nor would his
failure or refusal so to do, create any
legal presumption against him. But
the rule cannot be invoked in his case 4;
1t is not a prosecution, but an investi-
! cation to ascertain whether his con-
duct since disbarment has been such
as to enttle him to reinstatement"
}. After discussing conditions under
: which the misconduct of an attorney
!, may be excused Judge Purdy conclud-
p ed:
e When an attorney cooly and deliber-
g | ately frames and pens or aids and assists
d. in the preparation of, or without his pro-
s test, permits his client TO present to the
,, court such u paper as the one in ques'
o tion, charging the judges with wholesale
i crime in the administration of their OF.
q flee, and this, coupled with II TRADE OF
Z virulent invective and abuse, he for
e feits the rights and privileges incident
i to his office and this without regard &c
! the truth or falsity Of his charges. With
n this latter question we have nothing tC
r do, but may remark in passing that II
/. these judges, two of whom are filling tho
= Office for a second time, are the villain:
s that this scurrilous paper charges, II is
l. q most wonderful anomaly that 1t shoult
z. have been discovered by only one of thu
e one hundred and fifty or more practi
t TONERS before the courts over which they
30 preside
n NO FURTHER CLEMENCY.
y One of the committee of the Lacka'
wanna bar in moving for the dlsmissa
of Mr.. Smiths petition, suggested, il
II charity that the petitioner should b'
I permitted to renew his application af.
y; ter another reasonable term of proba
- tion. This suggestion Judge Purdy de
e clines TO adopt, saying that the ful
% limit of clemency justified by the cir
IT cumstances was reached when the pc
N tition was given by the supreme cour
e an opportunity to reinstate himself.
70 The opinion In the case conclude,
\ with q formal order refusing the ap
:, plicatiOn for reinstatement and dis
Y. missing the petition.
i
Hk,XJTJmEDS re rrDnu