The Nevada journal., 1858-11-26

quainted with the fact, that papers could
| be purloined from the Clerks office of
the Supreme Court, as well as from the
Clerks office of Court of Sessions.
This fact, that such things could be done,
was impressed upon my mind by gen
tleman of Marysville-a lawy er-who
had been to Sacramento city. attending
to some business pending in the Su-
preme Court, and who had, whilst there,
| taken some pains to inform himself con
cerning the Barbour case. Upon his re-
turn TO Marysville. he informed me that
the papers in the case had been stolen
from the Clerks office-that they were
non est-that the Clerk and his deputies
had made diligent search, throughout
his office, and everywhere else, within
the purlieus Ct the court, for them, with.
out avail. He assured me that the then
clerk was entirel innocent of any com
plicity in their abstraction from his office,
and expressed it as his opinion that their
loss must be laid upon the shoulders of
other parties, and not upon the clerk or
his assistants.
1t will be rem embered that all these
things occurred prior to the elections of
1855 About the time received the in
formation, detailed above, | was busily
engaged in the election canvass, and
diligently at work. endeayoring to de-
feat some men who were then before
the people of YuIa County for office.
said nothing concerning the loss Of the
papers, prefering to wait until we sue
cceded in changing the entire A dmins-
tration of the State Government, which
we did iii Sept. 1855 | say tce, because
rendered my mite in effecting that go-
rious result.
Soon after the election. and after
Judge Terry had taken his seat as asso-
ciate justice and had assumed the duties
of his office, and after Judge c II. Bryan
had left the bench, | addressed letters
to Judge Murray & Judge Terry, know
nothings' and Clerk Beard asking them
what had become Of tie barbour case,
and why no decision had been rendered
upon it, &c. To these letters | did not
receive any reply perhaps because
they had no reasons to give, or. perhaps,
because they did not wish me to know
that the papers were missing, or. per-
haps, because they were anxious to con-
ceal from the public the manner of doing
business in their court and the careless
ness which prevailed in their Clerk
office Whatever may have been the
cause, they made no reply to my letters;
and, up to this day, but for the ieaky
ressels, that surrounded that judicial
body, | probably would have remained
the loss Of the papers.
That the papers were purloined from
the Clerks Office Of the Supreme Court
there can be no earthly doubt for, even
down to the commencement of the year,
1858, they were still missing. This fact
learned from c. S. Fairfax, Esq, our
present efficient end gentlemanly Clerk
of that court. He informed me in Marys
vile, about the first Of January last,
that he had searched his Office diligently
for the papers, without avail.
Now the question is, who took them
1t is not at all in the range of probabili-
ties that either Of the Honorable Judges,
that occupied seats in that immaculate
court, would have distracted them will
that Jo. Beard, that old honest Wing,
could have so far forgotten himself, as to
| be guilty of so heinous an offense nor
is it probable that the Hon. G. II. Bryan
in his hasty departure, could have ac
cidently put them il his breeches pocket
and carried them off. | say, these things
are not probable and, therefore. we
must look elsewhere for a solution of the
query. Upon the first glance suspicion
might point to Barbour himself, as the
person who purloined the papers. Who
| felt more interest in their loss than he
Who was to gain more than he by their
abstraction Yet there are clrcum-
stances which satisfy me that Barbour
did not steal the papers fron the office of
the Supreme Court Clerk. These cir
cumstances are first, if he had stolen
them, he would have destroyed them
secondly, if he had stolen them, they
never would have been returned to the
Clerks office. Barbour. therefore, could
not have stolen them; that's certain.
Who did it 1t was either a friend or
an enemy. If a friend, why did he not
deliver the papers to Barbour, that he
might destroy them If an enemy,
what motive bad he for his act These
are questions hard to solve; and /,
therefore, leave them to those who are
better acquainted in the art of solving
mysterious problems than am. Per
haps, some day, some spirit either from
the vasty deep or elsewhere, may in
form us, through one of the Marysville
mediums, all about it, and thus solve
the mystery hanging over the loss of
those papers.
have theory, connected with this
matter, which may be true or it may
or it may not. For want Of better So
luton of the affair, | will give 1t |
presume, that the papers were distracted
from the files of the court by some per-
son who, at the time, had access to all
the papers in the Court house and in the
Clerks office that the person, who took
them, was, at the time of taking,
| warm nerSonaI frie nd nf Rarhnur th nj