The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-10-15
F ANGUS TRIALS
Stories of Eloquent Law.
yersin Ye 0Iden Time.
Col. R. 3. CreecY Gives ln.erestin!
"reminiscences Covering Period
of Three Score Years. ~
(Col. r. b. Creecy in Economist.)

| (Col. r. r. Creecy in Economist)
Josiah Qulncey a distinguished ole
Icitizen and ma or Of Boston, one,
Isaid in a public speech in Boston, il
Iapology for it's reminiscent character
that an old man was nothing but g
bundle of "reminiscences.
| Whether the remark CT Mr.. Ounce.
was intended as a compliment or >
reflection and reproach. we Will pot
decide, but will proceed to our pur
pose OF recalling some old forensi
contests in North Carolina. which
came under our close personal obser-
| Vation.
say what they may about the deca
dence of the Law profession in thes
latter days, derde, if they Will III
lhair-splitting guilds and quads. de.
nounce its trickeries and dishones,
Iattempts to make the worse appear
the better reason. call them bob-tail
land other harsher names If you dare
those who occupy the upper storie!
have always been and always VIII bt
the arc lights of history, the leader!
of public sentiment. the defenders OF
public liberty, and their efforts viii
ever be the measure Of intellectual:
ab.l.tt. and the pyre at which younG
ambition lights it's torch.
| The first time we were ever in {
court house TO hear a jury trial war
| in 1923 when a boy Of ten years a
school at oxford North Carolina. II
was to hear the murder case of State
VS.. Warner Taylor for the murder By
tortur0 Of one OF his own slaves. The
case vas one OF unusual barbarity ane
attracted the attention of the who'll
State. In Oxford the schools were
dismissed TO give the school boys "a
opportunity Of hearing the speeche.
of the eminent counsel engaged in this
case. Judge Henry SeaWell, a distin-
! gui~ he'd lawyer OF Raleigh, was the
| leading attorney for the defense. Hi,
assistants were two young lawyers,
who did not speak. but watched thu
case as it proceeded, with close inter.
est, one was George T.. Badger, o
| Raleigh whose nervous agitation We
! still recall and the other was Francis
I l.. Hawks, of Raleigh, afterward the
great orator Of the Episcopal pulpit.
Badger sat with the unsteady, quick
movement that was characteristic O:
| his distinguished career.
! We saw q letter written by his faith
er to Charles r. Johnson, then a fell
low school boy with us at-Oxford with
us from ChOwan county, telling him
to attend the trial of Warner TAYLOR
! that he would hear a young lawye,
i of great promise speak is the case.
whose name was Badger
! The court house was crowded We
lrecall Seawells appearance and speech
Taylor. the accused. sat just behind
/ him. Sewell showed ages His man.
'ner was slow, unirnpassion ed and de-
/ liberate. His face was repulsive and
when he showed his teeth it was
Gendish.
! Taylor was convicted of tmanslaugh-
ter and was branded IN the Drawn Of
I his right hand, with a hot iron. with
the letters IN. s." in the presence OF
! the court. The odor of the frying
, flesh still fingers in our nostrils.
| Another famous case was in 1888
when we had reached manhood and
We're 4 law student the case OF
/ Moore VS.. Wilson i'll Chowan county
in which William CASTOR. of New
| Berne, and George f. Badger. of Raj
eigh. were leading counsel. 1t was
a suit for damages, in which Wilson
/ was defendant for libel
| Tt arose from an angry condition
/ of the Edenton bar in which nearly
all the members were involved and in
which many leading citizens of the
Albemarle section took part. There
We're street fights, challenges and pub
'lications. newspaper and others. ga
lore. Charles r. Kinney, of Elizabeth
City. challenged Jesse Wilson. of
Hartford, and the challenee was borne
by Augustus Moore OF Edenton as
second Of Kinney. Wilson turned
from Kinney to Moore as a less dan
gerous antagonist and opened an ag-
gressive pamphlet fight against
Moore. assailing mis- private charac-
ter, which was blameless. in the most
Scandalous manner.
Moore replied to his charges, and
brought suit for damages, against the
advice Of Gavin Hogg, an eminent law
yer of Raleigh, whose counsel he
sought, advising him that it was un-
wise to trust the vindication of his
character to jury of twelve men
The case was ably argued on both
sides, CASTOR and Badger being In the
prime of their active professional life
CASTOR won a verdict but the amount
o. damages was unsatisfactory. VIII
son regarded it as a triumph for the
defendant and Moore ascrbed the in
adequate award of the Jury to the
corrupt charge of Judge Seawell who
presided
The next famous forensic contest
was in the county of Pasquotank. in
the celebrated case Of Love VS. Bax-
t n, for SANDER. in which w. D. Pru-
den. Of Edenton. was the attorney for
the plaintiff. 1t occurred in the eign-
ties, when W. had retired from ac-
times a close observer of trials in
court We regret our inability to re-
call the nome Of the counsel for the
I defendant. We gave our estimate of
Mr.. Pruden's speech at the time and
subsequent reflection has not changed
our opinion of its extraordinary pow
err 1t was a masterpiece in the an
nails of forensic oratory. 1t was ir-
resistable in argument, touching in
pathos, opposite in illustration, scorch
ing in invectiye. and yet, it violated no
canon of forensic propriety, and yet
strange to say the presiding judge
IN his charge to the jury arraigned
the speech of Mr. Pruden as an at
tempt to array classes against each
other The charge of the judge met
with the universal condemnation of all
who heard it. 1@
Butter and Russell, of Course. In
/ lns,c