Council Bluffs bugle. [volume] (Council Bluffs, Iowa) 1860-1868, 1860-09-19

@ " Ts&y 0@@ss &ws &&ASS$ =
EDs. BcaLz lin your last issue 1 OBJ
served . eo:nmunieation signsd sObserv-
eF,' whiah think sho'd NOT DO psrmi4sed
to pass sznnosieed. The article rsferreds 10
10 In reply 90 q Communication pablisasd
in the Bssgls Of the 5sh inss.. under tbs
signature of Spectator and Ia rsaasssa
70 the kseaaoht County Court Hoass ease.
Observer should not Sorget that there
are other Observers besides himself whoss
observation enables them 10 see the un-
fairness sna injustice of the saasesnaass
he makes, % well - his Dbject Ia making
them. What if certain Of shs eeuasel for
the plaintiff did arrogasss 70 skszasaasss
the whole epnducs Of the aaass whas If
Spectator did say Judgs Ssass approved
the rulings Of MIR. Clinton, whsn III faes
other legal gsaslsznsa reesixsa Esas fram
MIR. Bassett, and wisen In fast Jaaxe Sears
expressed Misrepresentation Of sAs rulings
Of Ar. c., - Observer alleges III any
good lie to come freEa thrnsting theset
things bsfcfe tbs people, In sewspapar,
as If they were matters Of pabais interest n
If the reputation Of these legal genaaasn
was likely 10 suffer because they had hssa
siighted in tia former notice, dsuisa tAsir
share in . supposed triumph, md denied
the honorable assertion Of their own, with
the great aaaaes naationed By Spectators,
Is plaintiffs counsel, thea Il wss we'll
enough to set the public right b the mat
ter. But why speak Of Judgs Sears hay-
ing expressed disappEobasioa - she sul
ings Of Mr.. Glinrsa7 And why asks sAeI
unwarrantable assertion that this diaap-
probation Of Judge Seass might segY raa-
sonably be taken a evidence II thsir sar-
RICHNESS. In the first plass, 90 has besn
stated before, Mr. oiinsoa was sAosen b.
she parties 70 preside al the trial, and not
By Judge Scars. Il rE szF .u u
As citizen Of the county, Judge Sears
felt an interest IN the case, Us lawyer,
he had formed his opinions upon shs le-
gal qaessioas Involved, ana who was an
der no obligation to change those spin-
ions becaase MIR. Clinton thoaghs differ
emily. AS citizen or lawyer of the hssseA
he had the same right 10 criticize the
opinion OF Ar. G. On the benah, ~ MIR. q.
would have to criticize his owu, wsrs
their positions reversed.
AS to the other assertion that the dis
OF Judge Sears Is Of itself
eEidenoe thaa Mr. Jlinaon wss right. ii ia
simply malicious, aad deserves aos 70 be
especially when 10 ID known
thai his upaaion is backed BIZ svary sna
Of tbs dsfsadaataa counsel, sf whom il i
not TOO aacA 60 say, withoas mentioning
names, thsy pzessas - good an array Of
legal talent as can be found Ia The State
of Iowa. And We are satisfied sse. sAas
this Ia the real opinion of every one of the
plaintiffs counsel, with tie exception
perhaps Of The Nsbgaska psssifogger. III.
Mason.
No one denies thas Jnsixs Sears bald
opinions, ard axprasssd shs1s, al variance
with The ralings % DIR. Clinkon. bat did
be not hare tina same right u his opinions
and the same right 10 express them. m
any othaT astornsy not engaged ia tha
easea Is ~ snoagh for Jaige Sears ID b
for ths deessians at III. Gin
los, when sAs casa goes "a the Saprsna
Coart, without hsving his tongue sisd.
and his Lips sealed h prisAss eaaEarsa~
ioG.
Why thsn this sstemps Ia sxoita o prsir
adiee IN sha public mind, BIZ prosecuting |
N array Of names In oppositian Ia 81
atheS, and BIZ misrspressntinx he faessy
L Judge Sears, IN his judieial posifisn.
lad exsxeised On asssmptad Ia exsrusse
my infusnee for either party, az sdpue
aaytAiug, directly or indirae&ly. - fsyor
'itAer, fhsrs might be sems axuass tn Ia |
made BY 0hserysrs but noshinr |
II ths kind - svsn pretendsa- - -
ARuxKgx Dxgxxwxn.