An Open Letter To Prof. T. M. Cooley

DeauSiR: - Kor over liur vr.irs the ïocallod Roso-Douglas controversy ha been bltterlj cMJtestcu, You have been n Doug las partizsn from the (toginning. Bofore :mv evideBce had beeu taken - relying entirelyupon Douglas's statements - you pronounced Dr. Rose guilty. Through oertain UnlTersity otticials, and ander the pretense iliat the best interests of tho Inivorsity must be protected, your advlce bas, nom the fint, dlrected what course Bhould be pursued by thoe authoritles wbo souglit to, nul who did, whltewash Douglas. You ere opposed to an Investlgation of the matter by the Lcgislature. In the stniKglc - in whicli Invcgiigaciop 01 do InVSStlgatlon was tot issue - you and your friends Btippbrted the Democratie candiilali', onc of l'iiulas's leadlng lawvers. Instead of supportingyourown party ticket. After the Logi&lature bad prononnced Douglas gxillty, and requefted the Kegent to relngtate Elote, a paper aaklng thatBoM ihonld nut be róinstated was itacted in Iiay City, tho home of yourSOD and.ludgc Marston. It was sincd by mnny of the huvyrrs of l!av City, and presented to Uegeni Cutcbeon, just as the Regenta went fntosesslon. wébelleye you caused this. lp to ihis Cutcheon had acted, In the niain, on our sido. Since thaï time lie has actedagainal ita. Beeaoae of that paper the Regenta refused to relngtate Rose. Alter khc Regenta refused to pay any attent Ion to the request t the Leglslatlvc Commlttee, Dr. Rose and his friendl aaked fora trial ín the coarta, before a Jury of liis peen, and that the oase be tried beforc some other Judge than Huntington. Vuu advised Huntington to try the case liitnsilt. and some of your brother professors wnite letters to prevent Judge ( loolldge, of Niii-. (rom coming to try the case. The resalí was a trial in ehancery, liy Huntinjrton, herefnaingto oall another Judge or to give a jury, trying It hlmself, agaiïist tlie protest of Kosc and his (rienda. And all through the trial, which lasted over one inonth, . and Douglas's altorucys made partlea, at which Dooglas and htelawyen and frieiids were present ; but not a single lawyer or friend of Rom was permltted to present. You and your wffe, Douglas. and his wii'e, the Judge and his wite, and Douglas'e attorneys and their wlves, oonBtltuted the company. And Huntini;ton, ilii i 1 1 jt trial, was a frequent vlsltorat viHir house. The resull of l hese iilluences appearcd in the ruliniís of the Court, which dectded every point in favor of Douglas, and, aa an excuse for ruling against (Cote, kepl constantly saying, durlng the trial, tbat In the end the Supreme Court would pass upon (. These rulings and this decfsion were bltterly denounced by Dr. lioso and his Iricnds, and is earnestïy dcfended by Douglas and hls alllesj andsuch coufidence had they in their relativos on the Bench, that tiiey offered to pay the expense, il' Kose woold appeal. This Btrange offer, and their anxiety to have 08 appcal, alanned and continiied us in uur opinlons that they had knowledire oí whal the Conrt would do, and we peremptorily refused toappeal. Findingth&t they ooald not badger us into au appeal, they appealed themselves. A majorltyof the Board of Regenta erfden tiyahared these feellngs with us, and rofosed to employ oounsel and go there. And this case is now before you, with this feeling i u 11 y and plainly ezpressed, not only by Dr. Iiose and myselt, but by a majority of the Regents." In the fall of 1878, you and the Douglas faction asaln bitterly opposed the election (.1 the 1 i n . A. .1. Sawyer to the Legislature, and woiked and voted tor his pemocratlc opponent, becauae you feared fhrther legislative action. Vhen the last Legislativo Committec came to visit the liiivcrsity, and it was believed they intendcd to ask for the reinstating of Rose, you held a private interview with theni at one of the hotels in this city, and emleavored to convince theni that Rose OUght not to be reinstatcd, and made it a matter personal to ynneir tnat he slmuld not l.vt the printing of the fint l'niversity Calendar and .Medical Announcement after Dr. Rok was reinstated, his name was not pcrmittcd to appear therein. It was reported (and we bclieve truthfully) that this was done at your suggestion, because the case was in the Supreme Court, and if lliey should decide against Rose, the Univenity would not be disgraoed by his name appearinji In the Calendar. Again, In the' bitter contest for the noniination of Regents In 1S7S, you traveled the streets of Ann Arbor alniost constantly for a week before the Repúblicas priniary meetings, to aid In elccting anti-Rose and ftWtóilégatéa il'onïTo'nrowii w'ard. Wc believe you obtained the services and paid the expenses of your nearest neighbor - a partizan of Douglas - to travel over the State and attend the Republican State Convention, in the interest of Douglas. Y on have written and published articles in newspapers, maligntnff me and the attorneys opposed to Douglas. When tlie Regents passed a resolution that they would not employ counsel to argua the case, you, a professor in the wr.-iiy, acting 8 a Supreme Court Judge, denounced the Board oL Hegents, from the Bench, saying that it was an unlieard of thing not to employ counsel - whieh you know is not truc. When tlif new llegcnts came into power they cudorsed tlie action of thcir predecessors, and in the conscientious discharge of their duty tliey refused to cniploy counsel. And beeause they dared to walk in the light of their own judgment, you chose to considcr yourself insuitcd, and at the next niccting of the ltoard of IJegents you sent in your resignation as a Professor in the Law Department The Board naturally desired to know why you resigncd. A Regent arosé and stated that you resigned k the Regentt uould nol employ counsel to proaecute the lioite-Douglas case before ra on the Supremt Btnch. Aud this same Kegent oil'eml a reaolutloo, to the eflect that the Ui ree oft'ending new Iiegents - Shearer, Grosvenor and van Hiper - walt upou you and a.sk you to withdraw your resignation. They dfd so, and you withdn ¦ il. Xow you are more fainiliar with such matters than wc are. We never lieard of a case lieforo where a Judge resigned beeause Bomebody didnt want togo to the expense of oontinulng litigation before kim. Did you? Had auy of Boee's friends so condueted, you and othen would have said that we rere trying to buUdoze somebody. Why sliould we t hink ditlerently of you 'i Wc have rcason to bellere you sent telegrami to Bay City on election day, containlng talse statements whicb could not bul aaye b tendency to prejudice Hegent Bhearer agalnst Or. Etose and hls Mende; and we bclieve you sent tliem for that purpose. And you took pains to be in Bay City when Regent Shearer Btarted for hu ürst official meeting with the Board of UcL'i'iit-. Vdii aceompanied bün to Ann Krbar, and aaked blm to be your gueat We think your object in this wai to adyUe an4 influenoe han for the Douglas Interest, if he should ask you any (juestions that would open the door. We know. of courge, that your influence does not stop with cnntrollng your own actions and opiniong. Judge Marston was a student onder you. He was a law partner of your son. Through your influente he was placed apon ilic Supreme Uench. And when Kegent Cntcheon appeared In yonr court last Jannary as counsel in oppösltl on to the protest of Regents Duffleld, dimie and Maltz, he ghowed his devotion to you by writlng an official letter to Cutcheon, Indorsing for the court bis action in apbcaiing in the caae, ¦(iii know, too, that the aephew of Judge H. K. (iravt'.s is the law partner of Jadge Donglad Of conree wc remember that Judge Campbell is ¦ brother-in-law of Judge Douglas. and we have beheld with deep interest the struggle between family influence and social ties on the one hand, and judicial duty and ilcsire tor justice on the oiber, to wiiic-ii heappearstohave beensubjc cii d in this case. At onc time the con.iild scini tn drift towardsthe baser influences, and for tlie moment he would seem to forget who and what he was, and in that mood permlt the case to come before hini. At another, all the better instiocti would Boem to eommand hlm, and hc would ïcl'usc tu take any part in the case. The last time an effort was made to inveigle hlm into tlie case lic poremptorily refused. W rejoice ia the belief that the final triomph bas been won by justiee and right. In short, we fcel tliat you have done all you could tosave Donglai and croata Bote, We hare ever considerad you our most formidable adversary. We have nerer fttiled to trace tu yoor eneralship those schemes which feil with most Poree apon tlie defenoeleM crlpple. Before this terrible conlest lii'tran, you were upen tcriiis ot intlmacv with the friendsof Dr. Hose. Since tfaat (une you have entirely OM racised theni. Bul wo do Dot complain if ill this, for you only acted in youi cápacity as ciuzen and professor; and ín thatcapaclty Heavlng out the moral question) you have the saine rijjht to espouae and defend the cause oí Donólas tbat wehnveto defend Kose. Auii with your reaton for to dotug m .,.. toneem at thi ; bnl all cai see that after you bad thus acted in tin oanaclty tbr four long years, i was lu natural that DouglU should feel tliat h could iclv uMn von wlicn you thouli come ii act JpdteUlly, and equally as nat ural for Dr. hom añil niyscll' to teel tb we stood no chame lor ji'istieeat the hand of two Professors oí the University win liad slded with DonglM froni the begin iiiiii. 'When Donglas ftppealed, lic did 30 with a full knowledgc tliat he went to a Mendly Conrt You are fully aware of all these fuctx and know that wc also are fully poste upon tlicni; and heneo the ama.eiiicMt tlia you will continue to sit in the case. Now don" t you think it' such a thing were possiblu as itesUna nndoi the protection the Court, tlmt this case comea niighty near it? Wliilc wcjoin withothersin the biighei regard for the honesty and integrity in( great ability of all of you, still we insist that neitherof you would permit any niiui no matter how high or how honcst, to sita ¦ jiuor in my case in which you were in terested, whose leanings, surroundmgsand prejtidiees. were half as strong and pïOnounced as tliose of any onc of the gcntlcmeo 1 have named. Now in view of these well knowu facts, and in the interest of justice, wc dcniain that you refuse to try this case. The Ba prame Court, constituted as it is known to lic, can ly no possibility shift theciirne o: tho great defaulter to the shouldersof Dr Hose. Nor do we linancially fear the re Milt, for the Kegents have long sinco re leased and discharged both Dr. Hose uk ourselves from all pecuniary liability. Bu your oicn self-rcspect, a decent respect for jiublic opinión, oud a desire for open-handei junliee, all join our request that you retir from tlic case. Now, while the action of the Board o: Kegents in refusiiig to employ counsel, o have any further litigation, hasdisposedo this question fully and finally and rlght fully, as nineteentwentieths of the people believe, still if Douglas does not wish to consider it as finally disposed of by ti e Hegents, we will surf?c8t a way which wil be :i linalty, and carry weijfht and convic tion with lt : Let all statuten of limitation be waived Rose and Dougla? to appear before fou good men,fairly selected outside of the State who sliull be neither Congregatioiialists Episcopalians, nor Methodists. Let the case go to them on its merits, leaving it to you whose life has been a study of such things to sec that each side is as fully and legally bound as in a court to abide the rcsult Or if this be impracticable, you may sug gest any other way that gives promise o any slww tbr justice, and we will abide by it. This course, in consideration of all the circumstances which surround the OOM and the family and business relations of one of the partios to a niajority of the Judges who compose the Suprenic Court, should liavc tlicir sanction and approval so f ar as it may be };iveii, and thus relieve ihem of a matter which in equity and justice ought not to come before them. Your relations to the case have been snch tliat you are compelled to act in one ilirec turn if you sit upon it, under all the cir cumstaiices, with only Douglas before you (for take notice that we shall not appear). Is it not better that either you retire from the case, or recoinmend such reference of i as suggested above, and thereby reoognlze that oíd and salutary niaxiin, that " justice sliould BOt only be pure, bul above sus picion"? It is exceedlngly rare that a luunble citi zen has ever in any country, over liis owu siguature, spoken so plainly to the custoilians of the fortunes, reputationt and per sonal liberty of the citizens, as ve now do to yon ; but we are contcnding for the In nocent and are fifrlitinfr the battles oí' simple justice, and we have dared to cali your iittiiition to the tact that yon are human, and are to a greater or less degree subjec to the passions aiul iiilluences that swaj the balance ol mankind. And it is becaust of this fact that ve are eniboldcned to remitid yon tliat no position. liowvvur Iiigh, no inñuenr, however mighty, can with salEly crush tlie innocent that the guilty may escape. Yours for the risht, Aun Arbor, Oct. lst, 1880.