The Savannah morning news., 1904-11-16
WROTE To ENLIST
COURTS SYMPATHY
REGARDLESS OF JUSTICE
WOMAN ASKED JUDGE M'ALPIN TO
DECIDE IN HER FAVOR.

Judge McAIpin Read Portion of Let
ter and, OWNING Its Object, Laid
IL Asfde-Head 1t Yesterday to All
Parties in Open COurt-Ordered
Woman Brought Before Him and
Severely Lectured Her-Sustained
Logan Homestead Application.
Because she had attempted. through
secure the sympathies of the court in
a pending litigation, Judge Henry Nc
Alpin in open court yesterday severely
lectured Lavinia seigling. colored. and
scored her actions in no uncertain
words.
The matter was the outcome of a let
ter written to Judge McAlpin several
days ago, at the instance of the Seig-
ling woman, setting forth the facts
surrounding the application of Ruth v.
Logan, colored. for a homestead
Against the homestead property the
woman held mortgage and the letter
was an attempt on her part to gain
her the sympathies of the court, in the
hope that ruling would be made in
her favor.
Judge McAlpin read only the first
few lines of the letter and then divin-
ing its purpose, folded it up again and
laid it away. He mentioned the mat
ter to no one until during the trial of
the case. When all parties to the liti-
cation has assembled Judge McAlpin
took up the letter. opened it, and said:
Several days ago the court receiv-
ed this letter. Only the first few lines
were read and then it was evident the
writer intended to enlist the sympathy
of the court for one of the litigants. |
read the letter no further at that time
but now, in the presence of all the
parties concerned.I shall read il aloud. {"
He then read the letter.
Lectured the Woman.
When he had finished reading Judge
McAlpip ordered the Seigling woman,
who was in the court, to come before
him and he lectured her severely. In
no uncertain terms he scored the at
tempt to secure a miscarriage of JUS
tice, and to prejudice the court, which
was to make the ruling, against the
interests of any of the parties.
Your crime is a most serious one, :"
y
guilty of tampering with the courts in
an attempt to infringe upon one of
the most sacred rights of parties to
litigation. You have attempted to
sway this court from what is right
under the law, to what might be die
tated by sympathy You have pracu-
cally asked that your desires be sub
stituted for law and equity, and that
justice be set aside on your account,
regardless of the rights of others.
Was Caused by Ignorance.
81 am satisfied your offense is due
only to your Ignorance and to utter
lack of appreciation of what justice
demands Did I think otherwise you
should be heavily punished. If such
an occurrence happens again / wish
you, and all others, to understand a
heavy jail sentence will be imposed
upon the offenders. This case / will
drop now, unless the attorneys for the
other parties to the litigation have OBJ
jections to offer"
The other attorneys were asked If
they wished the woman punished, but
they assured the court they thought
the severe lecture was sufficient.
Sustained the Homestead.
The circumstances of the case are
familiar to the readers of the Morn
ing News. When William Logan, coli
ored, hastily left the city to avoid ar
rest. it was found he had sold his
property to Mr.. P. A. Waring and CIV
EN- him a bill of sale. He had previous
ly mortgaged the same property to
Lavinia Seigling. A few days later
Ruth V. Logan, his wife, petitioned
the Court of Ordinary to set aside the
entire property of her husband as
homestead exemption.
The holder of the mortgage and the
holder of the bill of sale at once filed
objections to the granting of the home
stead. Roberts, third party, also
filed objections, claiming that certain
live stock held by Logan was in re-
ality his (RobertsD property and there
fore he asked that II be held as ex-
empt from homestead.
When the objections came on to be
heard the attorney who represented
the interests of the party holding the
bill of sale withdrew his objections
The claim of the holder OF the mort
gage was not sustained. Roberts
claim was not sustained, the court rul-
ing If the property was his the suit
now pending in the Superior Court
in equity would determine that, and
protect his interests. If they were not
his, they properly belong to the home