OCR Text |
Show A co:kespoxdesx aaks lome very knotty and pertinent questions in thi morning's Herald in connection with the fining of Justice Candland for the unlawful assumption and exercise ex-ercise of judicial power. Mr. Caud. land was unquestionably guilty, and his ignorance of tho law cannot be pleaded as an excuse, or a relieving him from the conesquences of hiaact. Perhaps the court could not have done otherwise than impose tho fine. But did it not occur to bis honor, the chief juutico, when pronouncing the sonteujeupoD the petty official, that on a certain occasion he (the C.J.) was guilty of a grosB excess of judicial power aud authority? We refer to the time when Judge Schaffer adjudged ad-judged Probate Judge Smith, of this county, guilty of contempt, and fined him $o00, the maximum liue allowed by the law for tho offense being only $200. There was an assumption of authority that brought his honor into greater contempt than his intended victim. We do not attempt to excuse ex-cuse Magistrate Gandland's act of judicial assumption; nor id it asked that the chief justice be arraigned, convicted and punished for his similar simi-lar unlawful act; but merely reter to the case for the purpose of refreshing the memories of some people and 'giving others the opportunity for re-I re-I marking upon the ridiculous light in I which some judges can appear and j still expect respect from the masses. |