Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1900-10-24


needs only to repeat what his associate
then added,-speaking for all the coun.
sci for the defence, including Mr.. Root:
Eve take no course with reference to
the Judge presiding In this case that
we would not take if saint from
heaven were on the bench, under the
same circumstances"
After the trial was over and Tweed
was convicted, Judge Davis proceeded
to deal with the people,--one of whom
comes all the way to Ohio to teach her
citizens the measure Of respect due to
the courts, who had preferred the re-
quest for his abdication. In doing
this he said: 'It struck me at the mo-
ment, as it strikes me now, as an effort
to induce the Judge before whom that
case had been moved to leave the
bench and surrender the position in
which he was sitting; in short, by the
combined effect of the names of a
large number Of eminent counsel to in
tlmidate the court from the perform
ance Of the duty the law and the Con-
stitutioD devolved upon him. -
cannot but remain in the belief that,
in the extraordinary case depending
before this tribunal, counsel thought it
possibly their duty, thought it part
of their professional tactics, which a
great exigency justified, to drive, IL
possible, from the performance Of his
duty, Judge who they feared might
be sitting to hold the court"
Judge Davis then fined the three
senior attorneys in the case up to the
laws limit,-$250 each, and ordered
them committed until the fine should
be paid.
Descending to the smaller fry of
Tweeds defenders, the Judge paid his
respects to them thus: "In regard to
the younger gentlemen of the bar
whose names appear In this paper
Elihu Root, Willard Bartlett and VIII
liam Edelsten--I have this to say: l
know how apt young counsel, when
associated with more experienced and
| distinguished gentlemen, are to follow
their lead rather than to act upon their
own Judgment. - I have conclud-
ed this, In respect to these three gen
tIemen: that l will impose upon them
no penalty except what they may deem
such in these few words of advice. ]
ask you, young gentlemen, to remem.
ber that good faith to your client never
can justly require bad faith to your
own consciences; and that however
good a thing 1t may be to be known
as successful and great lawyers, II
is even better thing to be known as
honest lawyers"
We might we'll pause here, and rest
ing our case ON this plain statement OF
facts, leave Mr.. Elihu Root pilloried
upon his own record as the paid de-
fender of the great scoundrel whose
very name has become the synonym
Of all scoundrelism, and as one who
insulted just Judge upon his owl
tribunal, and yet assumes to exhort
men who have no such record to lives
of honesty, and to lecture other men as
to their duty to respect the courts.
Another look, however, into the case
In which all this occurred will show
that it is altogether meet and fitting
that Mr.. Elihu Root should now be Q
part Of the present national admins
tration, and should be on the stuml
advocating its policy and asking fol
its retention in power.
In his charge to the jury in the
Tweed case, Judge Davis used thi.
language: '1There Is in this country
no law for the rich that differs from
the law for the poor. All men are en-
titled to a just and even-handed ad
ministration of the law regardless o.
their position in life or society, theil
wealth or their poverty, their stan,
ing, whether high or low; and If, un