The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-08-08
A SURPRISING VERDICT.

Readers of The Advertiser doubtless re- member the case of Judge Campbell, of Amherst, Va, who publicly horsewhip- red an aged ministec named Crawford for some comments in a temperance pa per about a decision rendered by the Judge. Campbell was Judge of the Coun- ty Court, and was also member of the Constitutional Convention. holding both offices at the time of the occurrence. The Judge was tried on the charge of felon- ous assault and has just been acquitted.
 There was no question of guilt or inno- cence involved. The whipping occurred in public and the minister, who was old and feeble. offered no resistance. yet the jury brought in a verdict of acquittal and the Virginia papers are not at ali pleased at the result The Norfolk Pilot speaks of the verdict as "a miscarriage of justice" and Tke Landmark, after intimating that threats on the part of the Judges friends may have had some thing to do with the verdict, makes this comment:
 It is shame. of course however much MT. Crawford may have been to blame for the original trouble. Nevertheless, Judge Campbell will find that the people of the State as a whole will not give him so easy an acquittal as he got from the Amherst jury, and he will for many a year feel the weight of their condemna- ton of his offense.
 The Richmond Dispatch argues that it is not a question of punishing Judge Campbell. but of removing a stain from the ermine and vindicating that for which 1t stands" and adds:
 If the Legislature falls to take serious cognizance of the Amherst proceeding and verdict and permits them to go unre- buked precedent will have been set which will weaken the influence of the judiciary and lower 1t in the eyes of the people throughout the State, while at the same time it will be regarded as justify ing any man in taking the law into his own hands.
 The conservative Richmond Times has strong editorial on the subject. in the course of which it says:
 His attack on Dr. Crawford was such as to have warranted the venerable preacher in shooting him down, yet the jury said that the assault was not vio- lation of the law, but was entirely tust- fable! If that be Virginia law and Vir- ginia justice, If that be the way the law is to be administered in this State, we might as well wipe the law out and abol- ish the courts and let anarchy reign.
 These are fair samples of the comments indulged In by Virginia papers. though The Times goes further and predicts that the last of the affair has not been heard, and that the people of the State will not be satisfied until justice has been done in the premises. That the trial and the verdict is a travesty on justice Is not to be doubted. The original offence of MT. Crawford consisted in making some crti- cism on the act of the Judge. For this the minister was publicly horsewhipped, vet the jury say by their verdict that no offence was committed. That may be Virginia law, but 1t is not any kind of justice.
 Suppose Mir Crawford had been armed with a cane and had struck Judge Camp bell after the whipping began, and the latter had died from the effects of the blow; would a Virginia jury have pun ished the minister for defending himself? We hardly think it possible. though that Amherst verdict has made us doubtful. 1p ,Xtrgipiaa as elssYhere. an assault with