The weekly Arizona miner., 1878-05-31
THE INJUNCTION BUSINESS AGAIN.

Benjamin Morgan Esq, of the law firm
 of Hargrave & Morgan, has taken offsnse ai
 an article in the MINER of yesterday. in
 which we attempted to defend Judge Silent
 against what we conceived to be an unjust
 attack upon him in the Enterprise of the
 day before. We presume really that it was
 none of our business to defend Judge Silent,
 anymore than it was that of the Enterprise
 to assail him, and that he perhaps cares as 1 little for the one as the other, but lest the
 thew Judge" should form an incorrect esti-
 mate of the kind of people among whom he has come to reside, we undertook to refute the following statement which we copy from
 the Enterprise of Tuesday.
 HThere appears to be much talk and con-
 plaint in our community regarding the frequency of injunctions granted by our new Judge, as it has tendency to cripple and retard the business interests of the community"
 The paper further went on to say that "IegaI gentlemen here" had enlightened the writer on tie subject of iDjunctions and the law governing them.
 l Guessing at the source of this sudden law
 earning ofour contemporary, we hazarded the remark that the ''legal gentlemen here," in question, were those who had failed to make the "new Judge see that they knew all about the law of injunctions, etc, and had turned their attention away from the Court room to the more congenial atmosphere of the editorial sanctum, where the editors rules of law are not so strict as those of the Court, or words to that effect.
 We felt that injustice was being done in thus beginning a war upon the Judge before he hardly got fairly seated upon the bench, and although he may not thank iis for the part we haze taken, we did tine best we knew how to defend him.
 As matter of fact we were not aware that Mfr. Morgan had argued an injunction case before Judge Silent, we did know that an injunction had been granted against using the Atzlan Mill or removing anything from 1t, and naturally supposed the attorneys who lost the case were the Illegal gentlemen alludei to in the Enterprise, and it was to "these legal gentlemen here," who ever they may prove to be. who advised the Enterprise on the law of finjunctions, that we alluded | in our remarks.
 NIT. Morgan, for whose legal abilities we'll as | his literary attainments, we have the highest | assures us that no such informa- | ton or advise was obtained from him, and | IS We regard him as gentleman no less as lawyer, it follows thatit was not him, and that the the Enterprise gets its informa- tion from some less reliable source, MT. M., declared to us that he never should have thought of making such an accusation, and that he condemned it when he saw it in the Enterprise.
 The imputation of Mir. Morgan, that other attorneys, who are afraid to come out and 'how themselves, are prompting us in this natter, and hiding under our skirts, was ioubtiess heated expression, and as we re- gard it beneath him in his cooler and more natural m 'ods, so shall we treat it as un- worthy of reply from us, further than to ay that We consult no attorneys as to what se shall say, or write for a newspaper, or ve should probably the better steer clear of living offease such as this for which we are rraigned.