Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1872-05-20
YsllQH IAcxE1.
A Cerre,psndsns's View ssf shsrsn's
C~salse-Eias That Gentie0sn Desc
AnythiaE WronEf&

re
A Cerrs,psadsn,,s view !sf shsrsn's
Csa,ss-Has That Gentiiosn Desc
AaythinE wrssSt B
From the 8. F. Chronicle Of Saturday. Z.
The following communication Is
from the pen of a weli-known and lead
Ing citizen Of this city. We give 1t as
an act Of fairness, believing that In q.
matter Of this kind all ddes are enti-
tied to q hearings-Eds. 0hroHice.
Ed. CHRONICLE The recent excite
ment regarding the statements made
by the men named Hubbell aud O'Don-
nell In relation TO the Yellow Jacket
fire, having subsidized, It may be proper
to briefly review the Situation.
AS far. as relates to the insinuations
against John +. Jones, the fact that
his pecuniary interests were seriously
hurt by reason OF the casualty, and
tlat his personal sxertions during the
time Of the contlagration, negatives
any presumption Of his completely, In
the nefarious crime Charged Further
than this, there Is no proof that the
statements made do cast any suspicion
upon Mr.. Jones, nor do [ see anything
In the conduct Of Dir. William Sharon
that justifles the charge against Hun
that, governed by political malice, he
has caused the exposition TO be made
Mr.. suARoN's PosrTIoN, -ng
As explained by his friends, Is simply
this: Dir. Sharon, q banker doing
business In Virginia City, has tho
charge of the Yellow Jacket mine. 1t
Is fired, either by accident or design,
resulting In q lamentable destruction
Of life and a great iosso property.
There Is great mystery hanging over
the event. There are mysterious wills
perlngs aud suggestions that the mine
was fired IN the Interest OF stock specu-
lators. Three years pass away; the
event Is almost forgotten; when one
O'Donnell informs Mr.. Sharon that
one Hubbell Is making statements In
dicatlng his knowledge Of certain par
tIculars concerning the fire. Among
other names mentioned Is that Of Kel-
logg, whom he duplicates as having
fired the mine. As yet
Mr.. JONES' NAME HAS NOT TRANSFERRED,
Nor had Mr.. Sharon any intimation
that this gentleman would DO In any
manner connected with 1t. Mr.. Sharon
considers what should DO his duty In
the premises. and finally decides that,
rs former manager Of the mine, he has
no right to ignore the Information. and
that he has no right to give publicity
10 It until he can ascertain the facts
concerning 1t. He employs an officer
In San Francisco, and engages an
attorney, and says to Mr.. 0'Donnell (:
"Produce Mr.. Hubbell before these
gentlemen, and lot him make to them
his disclosures II he has any to make ;
let Col. Hoge then decide whether IL
Is a case for the courts, or whether 1t
Is tho Interested invention Of men
who desire to make money" The in
yestigation was entered upon In no
desire to implicate Mr. Jones, and
without any knowledge Of the
probability Of such an event. Mr..
Jones' friends heard Of the investiga-
ton, and, In the interest Of Jones, de-
manded to see the statement Of Hub
bell, and It was furnished by Colonel
Hoge. The exposition was premature,
but was
NOT OWEN OUT BY SHARON
Nor his counsel. Accidental events
preclpltated the affair upon the public
before Mr.. Sharon or his counsel had
even determined that there was any
thing serious In tho affair, and Mr..
Sharon should not be held responsible
for disclosures resulting from no act or
Intention Of his own. The Chronicle
did not give the history Of the matter
until the street was filled with rumorS.
The matter should be Investigated, not
only that Mr.. Sharon may be vindi-
Gated In his course, and Mr.. Jones be
relieved from even the suspicion Of
completely In the affair, but upon the
higher ground that crime should be
exposed, II it exists, and the law DO
enforced.
When tho Chronicle commented up
on Mr.. Sharon's conduct as "weak
and foolish" In what 1t assumed to be
hls endeavor to crush a political and
financial rival, 1t probably did not
bear In mind his relation to tho Yellow
Jacket mine. Il seems moro Mt first
sight an ungeIfer0ui attempt to gain
advantage over his adversary, and that
the initiative Of this exposure could
have better come from other and less
interested sources /; but, II you con-
slider that Mr.. Sharon was then the
owner, and Is still the owner, and call
to mind the further fact that Ills ene-
mics Ind
CHARaED UPoN HIMsELr A GUILTY. CON-
PILCtTY
With the terrible crime. and his name,
II not openly mentioned, was secretly
whispered In connection with 1t, |
think you will see an ample justl flea
ton for Ills ondeayor to ferret out the
truth and to get to the very bottom of
the transaction. % 80.
In this view Of tho case, It became
doubly important for him to clear his
own good name and ascertain who do
stroyedG his property. and I am not pre-
pared to assert that he did more than
was his 'privllege or his duty In trust
Ing the investigation to his confldeI.-,
tlal counsel, especially as It has trans
pired that the premature exposure and
publicity was not tho net Of Mr.. Sharon
or made at his request.
1t Is an axiom of the law, rs just as
it Is generous. that no man should be
deemed guilty of nh offense until 1t Is
proven. Mr.. Sharon has a right to In
woke this salutary axiom OF common
sense aud ask n suspension of hostile
criticism until his acts shall be fully
known and his motives fully under