Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1875-08-17
CARD FROM d. f.. BAILY.


EDITOR SENTINEL: Allow me a few
words in regard to the examination OF
+. w. Keys, and in reply to the com
munication of r. M. Beatty, Justice of
the Peace, and your comments there
on, as contained in your issue of to-
day. l was acting as District Attorney
during the absence Of Mr.. Merrill, and
at his request, and on assuming the du.
ties OF his office, found a complaint on
file against Keys, drawn, as / after
ward learned, by Geo. w. Baker,
who subsequently, on the examination,
appeared as counsel for Keys. On in
curing as to the complaint and into
the facts, ! feared there could not be
sufficient evidence produced to hold
Keys, as l was informed that Mr.. Kind,
the prosecuting witness, was anxious
to settle tie matter and have him dis.
charged; but, under the law it was
necessary to have an examination, and
accordingly it was set for the 18th inst.
In examining the witness on the part
OF the State, / was careful to draw out
fully, even infinitely, all the facts bear
ing onthe issue, and found the evidence
so plain, direct and conclusive, that /
thought no reasonable doubt could lie
entertained as to whether the defend
ant should be held or not; and, fur
Their, that it was not necessary to argue
it, and consequently proposed to Mr..
Baker to submit it without argument.
lie, however, wished to be heard, as
A. hiy whit laI a~. II g..
a number of years, and f%avorably-
recently as a member of the Ruby
Hill Miners Union, and therefore in
opening the argument said "that / re
GREETED TO be compelled to assume the
part of prosecutor, and as | had said to
a friend of the defendant that morning,
would rather defend than prosecute"
In following, Mr.. Baker, counsel
for the defendant, sought to show
that the complaint he had himself
drawn was defective, and further that
the oifense committed by the defend
ant was committed while he was intox-
icated.
In closing, I took the ground, which
was sustained by the Court, that the
conn laint was sufficient, and the evi
dence clearly showed the defendant
guilty. As to the plea of intoxlcalion,
! called the attention OF the Court to
the well known principle of the law,
that drunkenness excuseth not" but
haid | could hardly think the defend
ant would have committed The otfense
had he Dot been drunk, and, in con
clusion, turning directly to the Court,
said, "You and | may have sympathy
for the defendant in the position in
which he is placed; we may have com
misseration for him; but we have a
duty TO perform, and the evidence al
ready shows he has committed the
act.n
These are the facts, as car be estab-
iished Ivy a dozen persons present, and
if the language | used (>uch as is ire
quently used by public Prosecutors be
an extraordinary amount of guSh,h
a. you elegantly and foreibly express
it, an guilty, although pardon me ii
| fail to see anything more exuberently
gushing in it Than | find in the conclud
ing paragraph of your editorial com
ments. In this matter felt, and now
feel, that | discharged my full and EN-
tire duty as Acting District Attorney.
AS tothe discharge of the defendant on
his MI recognizance, 1 differed with
the Court, and afterward expressed
my disapprolsation, privately, To JUS
tice Beatty; but that he did upon his
W responsibility as he thought right
and the consequences are his, not
mine. DAv. Il. BAILY.
Eureka, August Is, 1876.