The Daily state register. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1870-1872, 1871-01-06
VI STATE PRISON.
The Attorney General yindicates
Himself.

Ntate, VINO had tile power and whose
duty it was 4 save il.
This declaration Is false; and | be-
lieve that the writer knew il when he
pcnned IL. / believe il was prompted
by "a maligr at and deliberate pur-
pose 60 iniure the Attorney General
and other State officers, and by a cor
rupt intention to manufacture capital
for Trcadway. 10y creating the belief
that the Prison i lost To the State. and
thai there is no hope that the decision
of the District CoHct will De reversed
by the supreme Court. thus inducing
the Legislature to purchase the state
Prison.
Il is barely possible the conclusion
last stated J., erroneous; hut il not
true, il Is remarkable that in the midst
| Of the litigation. at the instant the
I Legislature convcnes, through the
action Of which alone the plaintiff
can hope 10 make his demands avail
able. the Prison should he declared
lost beyond hope OF appeal: the facts
I fpil~AtAiAllAiE thf IAAtiiA4Al : ftsiliilN
should hc 50 fully stated. and the facts
constituting the states defense should
he SO entirely suppressed, aud the
! blame should be attached 10 State OIL
cials who ha, neither the power nor
right to prevent the mischief. even
hail they known of its existence.
In regard 10 the direct charge of
negligence brought against the Attor-
nnv General. | desire To say that the
present Attorney General qualified ou
the It'll day at January, \. H.. I~i--
after the Prison had been purchased.
aflerthc Judgment against Mitchell had
been entered. after the bond from
Mitchell had been taken. after the sale
had been made, and after the Lcgisla-
ture aud Attorney General \uur~e had
examined the states title and pro-
uouucgd il satisfactory. Unless the
present Attorney General H. RESPONSE
bile for the things which occurred be-
fore his term. nothing can bc pun
down to his negligence, except il bc
the failure "a maEC redemption uf the
property from the King Judgment in
April. Is67. In regard to this, | desire
tu say:
isl. That the present Attorney Cen
crll had neither official nor ~pcr~pEal
knowledge ot the King Judgment.
md. Tia; ne did moi know. and had
no REASON To ,uspcc, the Safes title
defective, or that Mitchell hal. coz
claimed 20 have. any interest whatever
in the prison property. Having uo
knowledge of Kings Judgment, ol
that IL was a lien on the Prison. or that
the States title WAS defective, hc can.
not be- accused OF negligence in not
"redcemiuG." granting the duty, right
and power m the Attorney General L,
make redemption for the state.
But no such duty, right or powcreX.
isis in the Attorney General, au6
nobody knows IL hcttcrthan the editor
OF the Enterprise.
The duties OF the Attorney Genera
. n prescribed by law, are: To attcn,
! the the terms OF the Supreme Court
and there prosecute or defend N
: causes to which any officer of tn.
= state in his official capacity may be
party: also all CAUSES To- which an,
County may be "a party. other thai
I those in which the interest OF tn
County may he adverse to the State, %
A any officer of the State acting in hi
official capacity: and when required
80 give his opinion in writing upoI
. any question ot Lax - the Governor
Secretary of state, Controller, Treas
/; urcr, Surveyor General, the Trustee
Commissioners, or Warden of Stat
' Prison. Hospital or Asylum; and {
- amy District Attorney. with respect l
al, matters relating To his office.
:, Except the allowance of claims. &c
= n a member of the state Board OF ~
II amincrs, and Prison Commissioner
these are his entire official dutie
That the payment Of money in beha
u of the state. IN the redemption of i
Y property. Il not embraced anon
them. will be apparent 10 the most o
binary intelligence, and was we
known to the editor Of the Entcrpri'
al the time he pelned his article.
10 But again, the Attorney General Il
not know. and could not know the
y was a redemption To be made. No pc
or sop. tmUch less the Attorney Genera
L. vas authorized To use the State
a. money 10 make redemption of Il
States property. Without express a
10 tharity neither Jue nor ali of the Sta
he officers with the states money or vi
III their own could legally redeem.
The right of statutory redempti'
H. never existed in the state. and {
- equitable right, il il ever existed, II
" exists u~nimpaircd.
No fund ever existed. nor was n
DUrODrIHflBn ever made, Tor the ru
nd pose Of rcduCming the Judgment or al
on Judgment under which title is elaine
Perhaps in the opinion of the editor
" the Enterprise, these reasons are i
nj sufficient. Perhaps in his opinion, |
le- Acknowledgement chad the power, a
il was his duty 70 make the law in {
first instance; and having relieved {
Legislature from this responsible
'N to have advanced the necessary amot
from his private funds, and COMPEL
Id Trcadway 10 take the money for
Judgment whether or no. Doubt,
this is the coursc the public-spiri;'
generous, conscientious and far-seei
ne editor OF the Enterprise would ha
be pursued. But a man Of less zeal
the public welfare, and less propho
~ sense for detecting deeply concoc'
his schemes Of p~lunder," would II;
be looked to his own business, kept
,tu money in his pocket, and avail
events.
err In order that this deeply concoc
scheme OF plumber may be circu
vented, / desire to call a few pl
mr. facts to the attention Of the Legis
turc.
The suit in question, was not agai
IN IL SIT. - N.xaFln Int ..-a nyai