FRACAS BETWEEN A JUDGE AND COUNSEL.

Press, Volume XII, Issue 1558, 4 November 1867, Page 3

FRACAS BETWEEN A JUDGE AND COUNSEL.

The special correspondent of the v Panama Star and Herald," writing from New York on August 20, describes an altercation that took place in the Supreme Court between the Judge and one of the; counsel, which ended in a challenge from the latter:— Late in the afternoon of the 10th instant the Surratt trial came to an end by the jury disagreeing. They Were out seventy-two hours, and then declared it was impossible for them to agree, and asked to be discharged. Their request was granted, and they joyfully dispersed to their homes, from which th«y had been absent eight Weeks. They stood, eight for acquittal and four for conviction. Quite a scene arose in the Courtroom after the jurors had been discharged. Judge Fisher arose and said *—" I have now a very unpleasant duty to discharge, but one which I cannot forego. On 2nd July last, during the progress of the trial of John H. Surratt for the murder of Abraham Lincoln, immediately after the Court had taken a recess until the following morning, as the presiding Justice was descending from the bench Joseph. H. Bradley accosted him in a rude and insulting manner, charging the Judge

with having offered him (Mr. Bradley) a series of insults from ti.e bench from the commencement of the trial. The Judge disclaimed any intention whatever of passing any insult, and assured Mr Bradley that he entertained for him no other feelings than those of respect. Mr Bradley, so far from accepting this explanation or disclaimer, thereupon threatened the Judge with personal chastisement, as he understood him. No court can administer justice, or live if its judges are to be threatened with personal violence on all occasions whenever the irascibility of counsel may be excited by an imaginary insult. The offence of Mr Bradley is one which even his years will not palliate. It cannot be overlooked or go unpunished as a contempt of court. It is therefore ordered that his name be stricken from the roll o£ attorneys practising in this Court." Mr Bradley rose to his feet as if a thunderbolt had struck him, and pronounced the statement made by the Judge as utterly false in every particular, and told the Judge that he could not dismiss him from the Court—that to do so must be the act of three Judges of the Supreme Court.,. The Court-room was crowded with people at this time, and the excitement became intense. Judge Fisher proceeded to take his departure from the room, when he was followed by Mr Bradley, who was in a high state of excitement. The people now began to take sides —one party ranged themselves on the side of the Judge, and the other on the side of the veteran iatvyer, and a general fight seemed imminent, which however was prevented by the dexterous movements and activity of the police. The lawyer and Judge had now got into the street. The latter hailed a street car and got into it, followed by the police and a number of his friends. The former immediately got into the same car, and pushed his way to where the Judge was standing, and handed him the following note : —" In the altercation which occurred between us when you returned to the Court-room after the adjournment on the 2nd of July observed that you were then sick, and were pleased to add, " You know where to fiud mc, and I hold myself responsible in every form for whatever I say or do," or words to that effect, after which you applied to mc the most opprobrious epithets. There is but one interpretation of such an intimation received among gentlemen. I told you I could wait. lam gratified to find you have recovered, and that the trial of the pending being now closed we are both at liberty. That no time be unnecessarily lost, I beg you will let mc know as soon as you conveniently can when it will suit you to meet mc out of this district, that we may arrange to our mutual satisfaction the points of difference between us. without the risk and odium which might accompany any controversy here or in public." The Judge refused to pay any heed to this note, and there it was supposed tririt) the matter would drop, but a lew days after a meeting of the members of the Bar of Washington was called to take into consideration what action was necessary in regard to the order of Judge Fisher in summarily dismissing Mr Bradley from practice at the Court, and resolutions were adopted looking to an amicable settlement of the difficulty between them. Since then Mr Bradley has been arrested for sending a challenge to fight a duel, and has had to give five thousand dollars to keep»the peace and appear for trial when called upon to do so. The penalty in the district of Columbia lor sending a challenge is five years' imprisonment.