The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1911-02-16


" Respectfully submitted.
n. y. Glenn. A. e. ZoIlleoner. A.
NJ Scales. J. r. Gordon. II. b.
Cofheld. Walter Murphy, Com
mittee.
We concur in the above.
J. Bryan Grimes. B. r. Dixon. ]. Y.
Joyner. X. Il. Lacy. Council OF
State
The Facts Suppressed and Ne. Sian
ders Started.
When these bald. pregnant and
uuanswerable facts were brought out
and made public through the suit be-
fore the Supreme Court OF the Unit
cd States. did the editor OF the Ra-
leigh News and Observer publish the
same and retract It's false and base
LEGS charges? No. IL takes a man
with an ordinary amount of honesty
and courage and decency 10 make an
honest retraction, and the editor Of
that paper is wanting IN these ordi-
nary qualities OF manhood and decen-
cy. Instead Of giving It's readers the
benefit of the facts and making an
honorable retraction of false and
slanderous charges, that paper at
once invented further means for
abusing, misrepresenting and SLAM
dering me-"
The line of attack may be classed
under two heads:
% Chargin z that Mr.. Butler
when bringing this suit before the
Supreme Court was guilty OF working
a fraud upon the Jurisdiction OF the
Supreme Court OF the United States.
CD Charging that Mr.. Butler was
guilty of moral treason against his
State for agreeing to accept employ
ment to act as counsel TO test the val
idity of these bonds a few weeks be-
fore the end of his term as United
States Senator.
Fraud on the Jurisdiction OF the
Supreme Court.
AS to the first charge, what are
the facts? When the case was
brought to trial before the Supreme
Court of the United States, the great
array of counsel employed by the
State did not go before the Court
contending that the bonds were
fraudulent or illegal, or that it was
not an honest debt, because they
dared not do so in the face of the
evidence produced before the Court
but they appeared before that grea
tribunal fighting the case on techni
calities. Their chief technically wa
in that they contended that the Cour
should not take jurisdiction of thi
case on the ground that an attemp
to bring such a suit was working ;
fraud upon the jurisdiction of tina
Court. Thus We see that that ques
ton of fraud on the jurisdiction o
the Court was not only before the Su
preme Court of the United States, blu
was the leading defense.
Now let us see what view the Su
preme Court took of that charge o
OF that defense. The Supreme Cour
considered that question carefully, a
shown by it's opinion, and held tina
the bringing of such a suit was en-
PIOpS1, anu lAoI IL " as Ih'
duty of that Court to hear that cas-,
and render judgment according t.
the law and the facts. What is tn
situation to-day? The opinion of tn
highest court in the land, which i
to-day the law Of the land, is tina
the bringing of that suit was not al
attempt to work a fraud upon it
Jurisdiction.
Therefore, when the editor of tn
Raleigh News and Observer, in tn
face of that decision, in order to at
tempt to injure and SANDER me, con
tinues to charge that I was guilty o
a crime in working fraud upon tn
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
he is not only attacking the decision
OF that august tribunal, but he il
wilfully and maliciously using hi
contemplate sheet to SANDER me an
10 fool the good people who ar
forced to read it for the Associate
Press dispatches. No honest ma
would make such a charge in the fac
of the final decision of that grea
Court.
As to Moral Treason.
Gas to the other charge that I wa
guilty of moral treason in agreein
20 bring this suit in the Suprem
Court of the United States FEY
weeks before the end Of my term i
the Senate, have to say that that
question that I am willing to sub
NIT, and do now submit, to the fai
and candid judgment of great, fai
and honest people. I take it that
the editor Of the Raleigh News an
Observer had been serving in tn
Senate, as l was, within few week
OF his term, his successor having beel
elected, and that if the holders o
these honest bonds had approache