The Nevada journal., 1859-08-05

to be the means of fairly representing
oil opinions. and SO give it place, re-
serving the right to comment as we
think best.
Latham's Defence.
Mr.. Editor IL was one Of the SIX
hundred that listened to the speech OF
the Lecompton candidate for Governor
on Monday night, and gave such atten-
ton to the painful efforts of that indlvid-
ual to rescue himself from the dilemma
in which he was placed as the gravity
of the charges demanded. l was not
satisfied with the showing made. and
will give you my reasons. To begin
with the charge connected with the
Senatorial election. Mr.. Latham's wit
ness, Tilford, contradicts Latham and
himself Tilford says he placed no store
upon the letter from Latham pledglng
his support of Tilford for the Collector
ship. That he deemed it of no impor-
tance. Yet Latham declares that III
ford solicited the document from him,
and when he found it was lost came in
a state of great excitement to his Isl
room, and accused him of employing
Prindle to steal it. He had before tha;
made the accusation to Broderick and
others. That he then went back with
Prindle, and made another search, and
found the letter, when his wrath cooled.
Tiltord admits that he made several
searches for document for which he
cared nothing, and mentioned its loss to
several. But he says nothing of the
character of his interview with Latham,
or of his search with Prindle. These
loosely hanging stories are the vindlca-
ton from the charge of theft. Latham
confesses that he afterwards solicited
an exculpatory letter from Tilford, thus
showing that the circumstances, or the
opinions of those cognizant OF them'
were so much against him, that he must
stand on the defensive. We have thus
the storie, of Latham and his friend,
and can Judge how they hang together
let us wait for further developments,
But Latham carried the war against
Broderck. He painted fancy picture
of what Senator was and should be,
and then charges Brodcrick with the
manners of the fish market because he
demanded remuneration Of the Federal
patronage for his friends. Yet Latham,
in his detailed conversation with Brod-
erick reports himself as telling Broder-
ick that he was right in this, and only
objected to signing a document contain
ing the renuHciation because Broderick
could shake it" at him. Nay more, all
though he says he at first indignantly
refused" to sign the document, lie did
afterwards consent to sign similar one,
only reservins three places which were
then already promised, and two of them
to Broderick's friends, Thus it seems
that the man who so loftily refused to
put his name at first to the paper, after
wards desired to do so-and he who
thinks it so mean in Broderick to make
the offer to bug his fellow Senator, meek
ly consents to be sold If it is base to
bribe judge, how much baser to be
bribed There is all the difference be-
tween Latham and Broderick as illus~
trated by Latham's own story, that
there is between slave and master-the
ass and his rider.
Let us see if Latham is more success
full in the matter of the charge of brb-
ing Supreme Judge lie admits that
Murray believed, through some represen-
tations of J. Il. Beard, that Latham had
tried to improperly influence him. La
than could not stop short of that for
Heydenfeldt's letter forbade it. Nc
Connell's letter did not reach the point,
or answer the questions propounded,
and if the conferences of the afternoon
previous between Latham and McCon-
nell had any significance, probably was
not desigued to. Mcconnell says he
knows nothing of the matter except
from hearsay and rumor-Did Murray
tell him of itl That is the point! He
don't answer. He says the Supreme
Court never directed him to prosecute
Mr. Latham We know that, but did
not Judge Murray do so : There is no
answer. Heydenfeldt's letter argues
the case. 1t is very fine and metaphys,
ical. 1t is full of .'salient points" to
which the author admiringly calls at
tention. The mo st salient of all is that
the thing is all hearsay. True, but the
principal witness is dead. Very many
of the people of this State upon knowing
that Murray said that base attempt
was made to influence him by NJ. 5.
Latham through j, r. Beard in the I'm
derwriter case, would believe that Muir
ray told the truth. and if an issue of We
racity between him and Latham arose
in the matter, aside from their regard
for Murray, would be apt to reason that
Supreme Judge could have no motive
in ma king such story out Of whole
cloth, especially when it was painful
and degrading reflection that any mem
Der of his bar should deem him accessi-
BILE to pecuniary influences. They
would be apt to reason, too, that Murray
was man of too much acumen not to
know when he was improperly ap-
proached-though he might deem the
means of getting legal evidence out of
b;s ,,uor and therefore not push a le-