Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1879-12-07
THE GARDNER SUIT FOR DAMAGES.


The Carson papers inform us that the jury
failed to agree in the case of Gardner Us. r
ington, Bliss l. Co., and were night before last
discharged by Judge King. The plaintiff has
for several years supplied logs to the mills OF
defendants at Lake Tahoe, and his complaint
claims heavy damages because of loss suffered
through, as he charges, incorrect and fraudu-
lent scaling of logs. We suspect that MIR.
Gardner has listened to over sanguine advls-
ers in the case The numbering business of
the defendants at Lake Tahoe, is under the
Immediate direction of Mr.. S. NJ Bliss. Mr..
Gardner will never secure a jury that can be
made TO believe that S. M. Bliss is guilty of
any fraud. II mistakes have been made, all
that Mr. Gardner requires, is to make them
apparent to Mr.. Blss-and he will appreciate
a claim made in Justice, quite as soon as any
Jury could--and he will correct them, and
would If it took the coat off his back to do so:
We are aware that an honest man, if he be-
longs to a wealthy corporation, enters court
in this country at a disadvantage, bat that
disadvantage does not go so far that S. M.
Bliss can be. convicted of fraud. He is one of
the men who rates his integrity very much
higher than any amount of money, and the
community where he lives understands this
80 we'll that Mr.. Gardner will be wise if he
reaches the same conclusion before he expends
any more money on a hopeless case.--Bntsr-
PRISE.
The above would convey the idea that the
Jury failed to agree. This is incorrect. The
Jury agreed upon verdict for the plaintiff in
the suit, but could not agree upon the amount
Of damages On the first ballot, the dam
ages ranged from $500 to $30, 900, but there
was not q man who did not believe that the
plaintiff had a case. On the last ballot, FIVE
Of the Jury men held that as the Fume 4
Lum Der Company had offered to compromise
for $500, the plaintiff was not entitled to any
more; while seven of the Jurors held out for
$4,000.
II tender of a small amount of money,
such as was offered as a compromise in the
Gardner case, could be taken as basis for a
verdict in suit for damages, then would
plaintiff always be at the mercy of defend
ant. The Enterprise says that an honest man
belonging to corporation enters court at a
great disadvantage. 1t might be remarked in
the same connection that an honest man who
is poor, and who does not belong to a corpo-
ration, enters conrt at much greater disad-
vantage. The jurors who wanted to settle
upon $500 verdict, because the defendants
offered such a sum as a compromise would es-
tablish precedent that a defendant can fix
the damages in a suit in accordance with his
own ideas and inclna.ions. The APPEAL has
made no effort to prejudice this case and has
fairly given the statements Of both sides. The
Enterprise lays considerable stress upon the
TACT that Bliss is an honest man. His honesty
was not questioned in the trial, or at least
there was no testimony to show that he had
acted dishonesty, but there was testimony to |
show that the scaler PIERCING did not scale the
aQs properly, and the fact of the Flume Il
lumber Company Offering to compromise was
IN admission that the logs were not properly
called. Gardner brought the suit because he
lid not believe that the sum offered by the
efendents as a compromise was sufficient to
him for the loss. The testimony
1as too volu minons for publication in any pa
er published in Ormsby county, and the En-
srpr.se has reached it's verdict without hav-
ng heard particle of the evidence
|