Year: 1868

The proceedings for the impeachment
of Judge w. l. HINDMAN of the sth Ju-
dicial District, were commenced in the
Legislature on yesterday, and SO far as
the House is concerned, concluded.
We do not exaggerate when
We lay that the commence
ment of this trial, under the cir
cumstances of which the House was ap-
priced on yesterday, was disgrace
to humanity and an outrage upon the
plainest principles of justice.


Without considering the very uncer-
tain nature of the case sought to be
made against him, let us recur to the
facts in the face of which these pro-
ceedings were begun. Judge HINDMAN,
the accused party, charged with follow
ing the example of the United States
Courts and admitting rebel attorneys
to practice without taking a certain
Test Oath, is prevented by a severe
and dangerous illness from appear
ing upon the day appointed for his
trial. His physician, under whose
charge he has been from the
commencement of his illness, and
against whose credibility nothing ap-
pears, makes affidavit that his patient
cannot without great hazard leave his
sick chamber and undergo the hardships
incident to journey to this city.
Judge HINDMAN being unable to petit
tion the Legislature himself, the same
physician writes on his behalf and asks
a continuance of his case, that he may
have an opportunity to make that per-
sonal appearance and defence to which
under the laws of his country he is en-
titled.


The justice of this request and the
propriety of granting it, are at once re-
cognized by many of the parties to
whom the appeal is made. Mr.. HEER-
MANS, one of the Radical majority, but
who is not dead to decency and human
ity, moves a postponoment. Mr.. BLAIR
from the same side supports it in an
earnest appeal to the honesty and justice
of the House. Other gentlemen of like
political views concur as to the pro-
priety Of such course. Nevertheless,
passion is too strong, prejudice too un-
yielding, vengeance too determined,
and the House, by Il vote of 30 to "a,
resolves TO enter upon the trial of a man
who is two hundred miles away, pros
trate and broken down by illness, and
prevented by Providential dispensa-
tion from appearing to answer tho
charges preferred against him.


One fact is especially noticeable.
Every argument urged for an immedi
ate trial presupposed his guilt and the
impossibility of justification. Mr..
STEWART took this view in his manly
argument, and showed clearly that the
House, the jury in the case, was not
about TO try the party to ascertain his
guilt, but TO assume his guilt and go
through the forms of law merely
to prOnOuuCe his sentence. If the
HouSe was morally competent to
examine the case, it must have
been by reason of the absence
of prejudice either tor or against the ac-
cused. But this distinguished majority
derived its motives for immediate ac-
tion from the fact that its thirty-two
members had already made up their
minds as to Judge HINDMAN's guilt, and
in advance OF the opening of the case,
were determined to impeach.


The final action of the House will be
hereafter considered. In this place we
speak merely of the disgraceful manner
under which the trial was commenced.
We repeat the views of all impartial
minds when we say that the commence
ment of the proceedings on yesterday
was a stain upon Legislative character
as foul as brutality could make it, and
as unseemly as any offence against civil
ization and decency ever perpetrated by
the Legislature of West Virginia.