Daily independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 188?-1915, 1888-11-05

Judge 0. r. Leonard. having been
assailed through the Carson Tribune on
account Of his opposition to the eleva-
ton Of Judge N. A. Murphy, the Car
son Appeal rendered tho use of it's col.
umns for q reply. In response to this
offer Judge Leonard indited the follow
ing letter, which he sent to the Appeal
for publication. The editor of that
paper refusing to print it, it WAS sent to
the Virginia Chronicle which paper
prints the Tribune article and also the
offer of the Appeal to print Judge Leon
ard s reply, both of which are omitted
here for want Of space. We publish,
however, extracts from Judge Leonard's
letter giving his reasons for supporting
Judge Seawell for Justice of the SUI
preme Court. Judge Leonard opens
his communication as follows:
LAS rule you have exhibited n
spirit of fairness towards those enter
tanning opinions different from your
own; and for this reason accept the
offer of your columns for the purposes
indicated in your article. In so doing
you will not expect me to say simply
whether or not I have opposed Judge
Murphy. You will expect me to give
reasons for my conclusions. And in
doing this, if / should say anything
dista teful to Judge Murphy or his
friends, it will be because / cannot
avoid such result, but remember that
this discussion is not of my seeking.
"Iust why should be selected at the
present time as target for newspaper
shots is not plain to the common mind,
but probably Il is to yours. Certainly
1 am not ''bobbing up for Office" now,
and I know of no renson why should
not be permitted to exercise the ortli-
nary rights of American citze nship in
this most important matter. In two
months l shall resume che practice OF
my profession, and naturally. in COM
mon with other lawyers, I desire the
Court OF last resort In the State to be
such TINT when case is presented it
oan and will receive honest, fearless.
intelligent consideration from three
Judges. This is the constitutional
right Of every litigant and attorney in
the State.
Both Judge Murphy and Judge Sea-
we'll go before the people and say they
nre not running for political Office.
end consequently TINT they will not
discuss political questions. This il en-
tirely proper, but if it mems anything,
it is that voters should favor at the
polls the man best fitted to the high
Office to which he aspires. hold it to
DO every mans duty, as a rule, to sup
port the nominees Of his party, regard
less OF every consideration but one
and that is the public good Private
feelings should not enter into the ques-
lion, personal likes and dislikes should
he put aside. But iHcupacity in any as
pirnnt for Office that is non-politicnl is,
and ought to he, enough to make nuy
voter scratch his ticket and insert in
stead n better name -
Judge LeouRrd then compares the
records of the two candidates during
their incumbeucy Of the Office OF Dis
trict Judge, which record has been pub
lisbed heretofore in these columns, aud
closes as follows:
''Iu n criminal cnse Judge Murphy
refused to give an instruction and i'm
dorsed thereon the grounds of refusal
i'm subst ,nce a. follows: "Refused--.
Because this is not the law, il uvt ap.
plicahle to the case, and has been gircn
before This record can be seen i'll the
Clerks Office ut Hawthorne.
w. ''Tbese are some of the reasons why I,
in commonwealth nearly MI the attor.
noys Of the State, do not favor Judge