Year: 1872




The trial of Mayor Hall of New York
is another example of special pleading
and legal quibbling. Viewed from both
the standpoint of the prosecution and
that of the defense it is failure. On
the one side the charges were so indef-
nitely drawn up, that practically they
amounted to nothing; on the other side
the refutations were so ambiguously
worded that they appeared more like a
humble appeal for mercy than the hon
est refutation of innocence. The So
called reformers, after accusing Mr. Hall
of most of the prison crimes known to
humanity after directly asserting that
he was the recipient of stolen money,
and intimatipg that he was an accom-
plished forger, were content to try him
on the comparatively simple count of
neglect of official duties. For over a
year, Mr.. Hall has been daily stigma
tized as villain, and. as is customary
i'll New York, his family has been sub
jected to the most wanton attacks. As
the companion of Tweed he was sneered
at, as the friend of Garvey he shared the
latter's unpopularity. If it be true, as
the prosecuting officers now assert, that
no suspicious were ever directed against
either the honesty or the integrity of the
present mayor, then Mr.. Hall should be
| publicly condoled with for the cruel
prosecutions showered upon him. and for
the unmerited reproaches which have
greeted him at every turning.


In this connection, however it might
be asked why, SINCE Mr.. Hall is such a
spotless individual, no attempt up to the
present time has been made to convince
the public mind of his purity? Some of
the very men who now acknowledge his
innocence were the first to charge him
with fraud. If there were positive proofs


that the charges were instigated by pri-


vate spite and political malice, why we're


not these proofs produced in open court


Of the mere leading quibbles of the trial


but little need be said. The defense ad-


mits that Mr. Hall signed bills for fraud


4


doing so he had no idea that he was CIV


ing countenance to cheats. 1t seems that


Mr.. Hall trusted implicitly in the honor


and veracity of the notorious Tweed, and


that Tweed's signature was sufficient


guarantee that the city finances we're be-


ing carefully husbanded Admitting


this, the prosecution urge that this very


fact is proof of neglect; that had the


bills authorizing the payments of money


been faithfully scrutinized, no frauds


could have been perpetrated. This is
, the gist of the wordy eight days trial,


from which we learn that Mr. Hall, not.
| withstanding his long public career, not


withstanding his thorough acquaintance
with law and with human nature, was
| such simpleton that he believed in the
goodness of the entire world, and never


for moment imagined that any oficia,
) could be false to his trust or a traitor t.


his conscience.


e 1t is refreshing in these days of rogue
ry to know that such guileless men still
$ exist and can hold the responsible posi-
e tion of mayor in large city. Perhap
: Mr.. Tweed will urge the same defense
perhaps he is similarly meek minded
a and relied entirely on the well know
: probity Of Mr.. Conolly If an educated
!, gentleman, who at the same time is edit
s or of comic paper and author of icon


temporaneous society plays can be S
d easily imposed upon, why may not a
n uneducated man received his knowledg
n of life in an engile-house be equally i'd


lotto? As just stated. on this one coun


both prosecution and defense rest. /


summing up for the accused Mr.. Buck
: ley requested the judge to charge tha
l. his client could not be convicted of an
N offense, because he was innocent of an
h offense, or rather because there was n
v competent evidence to prove perversio
W of duty. That Mr.. Hall being innocen


none of his acts are offenses against con
1T mon law, and that as he can be charge
Of with no ofense against common law h
ID is innocent! Mr. Peckham, in summin
ne up for the city, requested the judge
of charge, that if the defendant neglecte
as his duty he is at least guilty of neglec
I'd Both parties enter into some subtletie
a which no one but lawyer can unde
I'd stand, but all of us can appreciate tt
w courtesy of Mr.. Peckham in praising Il
IS, legal skill of the gentlemen of the d
or fense, and the extreme politeness of Nj
st Stoughton in complimenting Ibis learne
En friend of the prosecution 1t is not G
It, ten that such a spectacle is presented
ne the New York courts of law, and we a
ut delighted to record the fact, merely a
er ding that Mr.. Stoughton, for the defen
K ant, out of excessive politeness to the 0
be position, almost admitted that his Gle
of was guilty. while Mr.. Peckham, in b
ed profound regard for his talented confre
lr- confessed that he believed Mr.. Hall W
is innocent in thought and deed


Mt. A stranger would have imagined tn