stroyed, and in behalf of a liberty which would have been exercised for the destruc tion of our government. He complains of a restraint which was in the public interests of public peace. Listen to him, then, give your full accord tp all he may say of the right of the citizen to be secured in person and prop erty, but remember—those guarantees are to the loyal-hearted and law-abiding. ... It was a common thing for the rebels to clothe themselves in the garb of our soldiers, the better to destroy them with perfidious fire; just so this man wraps the provisions of the Constitution around him, that he may steal forth in due time in his work of death. We never can be proud enough of the security we enjoy, but let us never forget that it was not made to be for the protection of traitors." In 1878 General Harrison was again pitted against Mr. Hendricks in a celebrated case of a conspiracy against the United States election laws in Jennings County. He ap peared for the Government, while Mr. Hen dricks appeared for the defendant. The case was tried before Judge Walter Q. Gresham, afterwards Mr. Cleveland's Secretary of State, in the Federal Court. The accused was a prominent and wealthy citizen of the State, who spent a fortune in his defense, the court costs alone adjudged against him amounting to over thirty thousand dollars. The case was in a great measure won by the close and excellent cross-examination of the defendant by Mr. Harrison. Counsel for the defense placed the defendant on the wit ness stand and permitted him to testify that he had not committed the crime charged against him. This opened up a field for al most unlimited cross-examination. Bit by bit Mr. Harrison drew out evidence of his guilt, until he stood an unwilling witness against himself, and practically admitted the charge in the indictment. fn this case from Jennings County, exGovernor Hendricks asked the court to dis charge the jury panel, and to call a jury composed of six Republicans and six Demo
crats to try the case. In an unguarded mo ment General Harrison opposed the motion, saying to the Court it had no power to dis charge the present panel and call a new one thus composed. Judge Gresham answered him by saying: "Whether or not the Court has the power, it is going to do it. I do not propose, if the defendant be convicted, that it can be said it was done by a partisan jury." The motion for a new jury-panel prevailed. In 1887 Mr. Harrison's term as Senator expired. He was a candidate for re-election. In 1885 the Lieutenant-Governor had re signed. Both the leading parties in 1886 nominated candidates to fill the vacancy thus occasioned. The Republicans were success ful at the polls; but when the State Senate met the following January, the Democrats raised the question that the vacancy could not be filled until 1888, and that in the mean time the president pro tempore of the Senate would act as Lieutenant-Governor. A con test arose that shook the State to its founda tions; for on a decision in favor of the newly elected Lieutenant-Governor, the question of the election of a United States Senator largely depended. The question found its way into the courts on a quo warranto proceeding; and General Harrison appeared in the Supreme Court as counsel in chief for the newly-elected official. Judge David Turpie, afterwards United States Senator for twelve years, appeared for the other side, a very forcible man in a legal argument. Harrison's argument is a model of legal reasoning. Up to that time it was, perhaps, his greatest judicial argument. One of the judges before whom he appeared once said to the writer that it was the greatest legal argument he ever heard. Again and again was he plied with questions by the judges of the Court, and not once did he evade a question, nor was he at any time put hors de combat. He won the case, the Court holding it had no jurisdiction. In the Senate Mr. Harrison's oratory did not attract the attention it did in after years;
