Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1885-09-16

upon to denounce the selection as very
Questionable. A day or two after
ward two men waylaid me as I was
hurrying to the Office to put the paper
to press. Both we're great, burly fel.
lows. weighing from $50 to 26O
pounds. knew neither of them. One
proved to be Reed. After demanding
a retraction, which l refused, he drew
riding whip out of his pocket, which
seized before it was fairly out. A
rough and-tumblc fight ensued which
lasted 10 or Is minutes, the 100 or so
of Haileyites who oongregated this
was about 200 feet from my own Of
hce, at time when the feeling be.
tween the two towns was very bitter)
seeing no occasion to interfere, As l
was evidently able to take care Of my.
self. At its conclusion Reed had a
black eye and a cut or two about the
face, while l showed no punishment
whatever.
The other assault was attempted
last spring. Probate Judge Street
presented an exorbitant fee.bill at the
April meeting of the Board of County
Commissioners. Being one of his
bondsmen and having induced the
other citizen to 60 on his bond, I did
not wish to irresponsible for this act,
and | protested against the allowance
of his bill, amounting to some $1,000.
The Judge is a Democrat, and the
Board is Democratic. Yet THE BILL
WAS REJECTED!
The same evening, the Judge at.
tempted to assault me with a cane, in
the Nevada Hotel; but wrenched
the stick from him, caught hold of his
wrists, and after tauntingly inquiring
why he did not whip the Board in.
stead of me, let go Of him, WITHOUT
OFFERING TO STRIKE HIM! The next
morning two prominent gentlemen
called at the TINES office to state that
the Judge desired to come and apollo
gize; but refused to see him-for
obvious reasons.
In substantiation OF the truth of the
above, | refer you to any reliable,
honorable man in this community. /
have therefore neither been "kicked,
cuiied, nor horsewhipped." As to
the character of the "gentlemen" who
assailed me, have nothing to say at
present.
Your informants (for you say that
you state this on information) have
you in regard to the char
acter of the TIMES. This paper has
criticized tho actions of
public officials, but it has NEVER at
tackled private character. The first is
a legitimate subject of newspaper dis
cusslon; the second is not.
Now, sir, ] would fain stop, but that
| feel compelled to notice the man
Burgess whom, you say, referred to
me as "little scrub" do not re.
having ever exchanged 20
words with this man; but 1 do re.
that several hundred cords of |
wood cut within half mile of HALEY,
A couple of years ago, were sold in
his city-but whether by himself or
Receiver Waters am not positive.
Now, this may have been within the
aw and it may not. If the latter was
the case it may be that this gentle.
nan does not feel very good opinion
not only of the law, but of those who
ire willing to see it enforced, regard.
ess Of persons.
You intimate that have a grudge
against the local land officials. You
ire mistaken. have always been on
he best of terms with them; have
defended them-upon their implied
'eqqcst-when they have been attack
ID, and have endeavored to guard I
heir interests in every way in myt
power. And my attitude toward them
will be the same as it has always been
oward all public officials, to.wit: As
ong as they do their duty, I shall in
lorse them; if they ever fail in it,
hall denounce them. l do not be.
ieve that / will ever he called upon
o denounce them. But l may be; l
nay be.
Now, sir, have endeavorei, while
out the wrong you have done
ne, to keep within proper bounds BY