Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1864-07-23
SAUCE FOR THE GOOSE" ETC.


SAUCE FOR THE GOOSE" ETC.
In carrying out our little programme of
overhauing the past acts and history OF
our Territorial Judiciary, il will be oeca-
sionally necessary to revive certain mat
tiers which are not entirely new 10 the
public and some of which have been al
ready pretty well ventilated before the
people. As they, however, form links in
the circumstantial evidence against the
probity of our judges, they cannot well be
at this time omitted. To revive one of
these old matters, we will at this time re-
fer TO the decisions of Judge North in
cases involving the so-called "one Ledge
Theory" It is well known that there
are two distinct and contradictory theo-
rieS concerning the formation and condi-
ton of the mineral deposits on the east
en slope Of Mount Davidson. Accord
ing to one of these, it is claimed by GER
tain Of the oldest locators that several
metaIliferous strata thereon found consti-
tute but one lode. This is the Zone
Ledge Theory" The other Theory is,
that these different strata are separate and
distinct lodges. Which of these theories
is the correct one, it is no part OF our pre-
sent purpose to inquire. We have a
right, however, to expect that decisions,
upon point so vitality affecting the title
to mines of such value, made by the same
judge, shall be consistent with each other.
Il has been said and with truth, BY the
Herald, which seems to be the champion
OF Judge North, that at the time of that
gentleman's acce ssion to the bench, "the
jurisprudence Of the country had yet to
be created; the principles to be establish
ed in that jurisprudence were new, not TO
be found in the law books" This being
true, how imperarvely necessary was it,
that upon the establishment of prin-
ciple." that principle should be adhered
to consistently; that the decision of such
principle might be regarded as the law
of the land. and that it might become the
''rule ofacGon" by which future operations
involving the same principle, should be
governed. The application for an injunc-
ton in the case of the Burning Moscow
rs. Ophir, involved the one ledge theory.
That application was made before Judge
North, and based upon some two hun
dred afidavits, and BY him, after due de-
liberation, decided against the one ledge
and in favor of the many ledge theory.
In the several applications made BY the
Gould and Curry against the FL Dorado,
North Potosi and Sinaloa, involving pre-
eisely the same principle, Judge North's
decisions were uniformly in taror of the
one ledge theory. Is there any reason why
that theory should be declared in taror of
the Gould and Curry, and denied when
invoked by the Ophir: Persons who
have sought for such reason, have cried
Eureka :" when they found Judge
North crushing Gould and Curry rock
=" on shares and the Ophir rock ground
elsewhere The suspicion that this profit
able employment of his mill influenced
Judge North in favor of the Gould and
Curry, so far that he has never denied
motion made in his Court by that Com
pany, may be unjust and do him bitter
wrong, is possible, but it is combination
of circumstances, that to sum up In two
WORKSHOPS bad. In addition TO this
pregnant fact, there are other circum-
stances connected with this famous Mos
cow injunction, which, although they have
been publicly discussed, do not seem to
have struck the public mind with the
force that their importance demands. We
refer to the Hardy and Stewart imbrogEo,
of which the printed discussion is before
us as we write. To our mind, there is
something decidedly unsatisfactory in the
position in which the matter was left by
the respective parties. 4 prominent
lawyer, of high standing in the profess
sion, accuses a judge of bribery. He
gives time, place and circumstance. He
reiterates this statement in the most solemn
manner at subsequent time. His state
ment is made to attorneys having
large amount of business, when
the charge was calculated to inAict
upon the judge the fullest and most terri
bic injury. Afterwards, Judge Hardy,
in the presence Of Judge North, admits
making charge in the most direct terms,
but says that abe had no sufficient au-
thority for stating It." Upon this, Judge
North at a public meeting endorses Judge
Hardy as a gentleman, in the most eulo-
CYSTIC terms. Is such conduct to be look
ed for In an honest man toward the man
who had thus foully wronged him. In
order that the public may read once more
the character of the language of Judge
Hardy concerning Judge North, and the
nature Of the wound so easily healed we
quote the statement of A. w. Baldwin
Esqr., publicly made, and the truth of
which was not denied by any of the par
ties. We quote from the Enterprise of
January 10Th. "
Mr.. BALDwtS's STATEMENT.
Mr.. Baldwin said-with your permission,
gentlemen, at the request Of Mr.. Stewart
not feeling any desire to mix myself up in
this matter, but simply for the purpose of
stating facts-I appear before you, and shall
be exceedingly brief, exceedingly brief
Some tims last month Mr.. Stewart and
myself had several cases in Washoe county.
Nr. Stewart at that time was in attendance
on the Constitutional Convention at Carson,
and was trying one Of these cases before
Judge North. During the trial Mr.. Stewart
came ever and told me in very excited man
ner, that Jim. Hardy had told him several
thip0s which reflected very seriously unou the