, 1875-12-16


uty Clerk. The Clerk holds his posi-
ton by the same tenure that the Depu-
ties do, and by no other. Hs has nc
more right to dictate their appoint
ment, no more responsibility for their
acts or interest in their earnings, than
we have in the foreman of the hntelH-
gencer office. Our bond is fled in the
Department of Justice at Washington
and all our reports and settlements ere
directly with that Department. This
every intelligent lawyer knows and re-
cognizes. and not a single complaint
has been made by any member of the
Court or bar of our manner of dis
charging the duties Of the office since
we entered upon the duties Of the same,
seven months ago.
Another cause assigned for applying
vile epithets to the Judge and assailins
the highest judicial functionary of the
Territory in opprobrious and vitupera-
tive terms is, that the Judge refused to
order legal publications in the Intellige''
Ger. That is q right which every Judge
! has and exercises in his own discretion.
Judge Jacobs, when we were opposing
his party politically, on several occa-
sluns struck cul the name of the DIS
PATCH and inserted that of the htelEi9en-
Ger in orders of publication presented
to him for signature, and we never re-
gar1ed it as personal offeuse TO rs, but
the exercise of an undoubted right
Judge Lewis would be wanting in self
respect and decent regard for the dig
naty of the bench to order publications
in newspaper which SO foully assails
the bench and other public officers OF
high standing. 1t is not true, as the
editor asserts. that his paper has SIX
times the circulation of ours. The Dai-
ly and Weekly DISPATCH has a wider
publication and more readers than the
single weekly edition of the intelligenoer,
and we give the legal notices the bene-
fits of publication in both our editions.
The third and last cause for his black
guardism towards Judge Lewis, is the
report of familiar conversation at table
in private boarding house. All we
have to say of this is, that no gentle
man or lady ever reported for publica-
ton private table conversation, and 10
gentleman ever published such in a
newspaper, and We are assured by those
present ON the occasion alluded TO, that
no such reply to Judge Lewis as is re-
ported was there made. The editor
either invented it or his informant is a
liar as he is manifestly no gentleman.
We have simply noticed the InteQi-
gencer rs a public institution with a
power for mischief. There can be no
question between the editor and our-
self upon any question of veracity OF
comparative respectability. The COM
munity in which We both reside, has
long since settled all such issues in an
unmistakable manner.
At each of the last two general elections he
has. managed by magnifying the use, power and
influence of his paper, to procure nomina-
ton upon a Republican ticket and in both in
stances he has been defeated by the popular
vote. At the last election, out of vote of SSt
he received the humiliating vote of 2S3, wher
Judge Jacobs, at the head of the same ticket
received 652; conclusive proof that a majority
Of the members of his own party in this coun.
ty regard him in the same light that Judge
Lewis docs as a '' dirty dog" Compare this
with the unanimous vote which we received
for Clerk of the Council, which never had a
parallel in this Territory, and the endorsement
by the leading member of both parties which
We received for t he appointment for Clerk and
we are content with the comparison, and are
not surprised at the malignant envy which ex-
hibits Itself after the manner of the viper and
the file