The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-08-20
TIE PETITION OF COMMON
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. EVANS.

IN yesterday S Issue OF The Times we
4 printed statement from Mr.. G. T.
i1vans, Commonweal;h,s Attorney for tho
81 county OF Amherst, IN which he lays
bare all the facts concerning tbs recen,
assault upon Rev. c.. II. Crawford by
Judge c. j. Campbell, and the trial OF
Judge Campbell for his offensc. This
information is laid before the Governor
OF the State in a petition from the Com
monwealth's Attorney for an extraordi-
nary session OF the General Assembly to
iinpeach Judge Campbell for his conduct
Mr. Evans statement is lengthy, but
1t should be read closely by all the peo-
pie of this State who are interested in
good government and in maintaining the
dignity OF our courts
Judge Campbell claims that he was pro-
voked beyond endurance. that he could
not control his anger and indignation,
and tnat under the severe provocation
which Mr. Crawford gave him in extend
ing his hand in greeting and in refusing
to apologize he struck him several times
over the face and neck with a whip which
9 he carried.
1t is claimed by Judge Campbcll's sup
porters that under these peculiar cir
cumstances any Virginia gentleman would
have acted as he acted. We admit no
such thing. There are hundreds and
! thousands OF Virginia gentlemen in this
State who are just as jealous as Judge
Campbell or any man OF their honor and
! r,1r vet r,rl,o Al,
called upon under these circumstances
TO cowhide an old minister of the Gospel.
They would have thought it sufficient
to decline to take the proffered hand
and 10 administer q proper rcbuke by
word of mouth to the preacher.
Bat we are not discussing this phase
Of the subject. 1t is for every man to
decide according to his own ideas of pro-
pfiety and according to his conscience
how he Will resent an insult The Times
has dealt with Judge Campbell not as
a private citizen, but as judge of a Nir-
Einia court OF justice If he had been
a citizen in the private walks of life The
9 Times would not have undertaken to
criticise his conduct in this affair, what
cve1. our private view might have been.
But as Judge of the County Court of
Amherst, as q, representative of law and
order in Virginia and of the court sys-
TEN in this State. his conduct was prop
erIs- and necessarily a subject of ciiti-
cisra by the press. We insist that it was
not a personal question, and the person
atty of Judge Campbell has nothing
whatever to do with the discussion He
s was a judge; he had just LEFT the bench
after having disposed OF the legal pro-
ceedings which he had Instituted against
a man who had criticised him not as
an individual, but Judge. This fact
also should be borne in mind. Some con-
tend that Judge Campbell was not then
acting Judge but he was none the
less a judge and il was his duty to pre-
serve the peace. If he had seen another
in his stead about to make an assault
upon Mr. Crawford it would have been
his duty to command the assailant to
desist and TO order his arrest. II was all
the more incumbent upon him to control
himself and to prevent himself from
Violating the law.
But he did not control himself, he did
not prevent himself from violating the
law, he did make an unlawful assault
upon this old preacher, and so subjected
himself TO the penalty of the law
N Having done this, what was then his
duty as a peace officer and as a pre-
siding judge? Clearly it was to acknowl-
edge MS wrong, to accept the punish
ment which the law provides in such
cases. and to take his punishment like q
man. Instead of that, he took the posi-
ton that he had done no wrong that he
was entirely justifable in assaul,lng this
preacher. and that he should be ac-
quilted. He made a stubborn fight in
court, he refused to comply with the re-
quest of the Commemorative Attorney
for a change of venue he insisted upon
being tried by an Amherst jury, eleven
of whom, according 10 The Commons
wealths Attorney, Were his personal and
political friends. and he asked at the
hands OF such a jury not only an ac-
Guittal, but complete vindication. And
he got It, SO far as the verdict of the
jury could give it
AS for the proceedings in this case, we
cite our readers to the statement made
by the Commemorative Attorney. The
conclusion from reading his statement is
Irresistible that the one purpose of this
trial was TO acatiit Judge Campbell, and
he WAS acquitted IN defiance OF the law
and the evidence lie was acquitted in
the face of his own confession that he
had violated the law, and he received
no punishment whatever for his lawless
act Judge Campbell has taken the posi-
lion that it is perfectly right ana justi-
fable in law for a man to redress dis
own wrones-nay, for 5udge to cow
hide the man who offends him, and that
B II is right that the citizen or Judge who
does this thing should be acquitted and
sindicated when arraignes1 in court. IL