Daily Yellowstone journal., 1889-09-21
eminent AUTHORITIES"
The Dinident Reply Of a Layman To Law.
yer.

The Courier Of last night takes coca
sion 10 two or three places to score the
editor Of this paper in a very spiteful
msnner. So much spleen exhibited
In one issue necessarily calls for some
attention, and we herein essay the not
very difficult task Of maki1g a reply.
The Courier first attacks Us on our
criticism Of Mr.. Fairfield's interpreta.
ton of the registration law and quotes
the following from The JOURNAL:
1.-TWO such eminent authorities as
the late Encouragement and the edi-
tor OF the YELLOWSTONE JOURNAL"
Using this as a text the Courier
takes the editor Of the JOURNAL IN
task for styling himself an "emlneDt
authority in the law. and goes into
reckless use Of Large caps" to bring
home to him the charge that he knows
no more about law han a cobble stone
knows about conjunctive mood..r
We have heretofore he'd occasion to
allude to the fact, that the per.on re.
sponsible for the editorial utterances
OF the Courier was one Of those un-
happy individuals who require surgi.
cal aid for the proper understanding
OF joke, and in proof Of this We will
venture 10 say that no one in this com.
munity save the person we allude TO,
understood from the paragraph quoted
that the editor OF this paper set him,
self up as an ''eminent authority" on
legal questions. Nevertheless. while
We do not claim this proud eminence,
we do claim 10 have a fair allotment
Of common sense and the ability 10
construe Language, and II was in the
exercise OF these gifts. either inherent
or attained, that We arrived at the
conclusions in regard tn the registra.
ton law that we made public. We
regret that they differ from those ar-
rired at by Mr.. Fairfield, hut the re-
eret Is unsvailing, as we cannot with
out violating oar Arm convictions,
change them. While il il not possible
that layman may always or even in
a majority Of cases, interpret the law
correctly, IL cannot he disputed that
there are instances where the Lam
guage Is 50 plain aud the intent 20 evil
dent, that even one whose knowledge
Of conlunctlve moods Is les than that
possessed by a cobble stone, may grssp
the purposes Of the lawmakers. Such,
we assume to be the instance under
consideration. The writer believed he
understood the law, aud according TO
his understanding made IL public.
Having done so, and controversy
having arisen, he sought the opinion
Of three Of the leading lawyers Of this
city and was gratified TO find that they
each agreed with him, and he was fur.
tber gratified TO find by the columns
Of the Courier that Judge Cullen also
thought a. he did. But Mr.. Fairfield
feels injured that we criticised his con.
struction Of the law, and not that Of
Judge Blake, which was. he says. the
same ~ his own. and Jabs us vicIously
because we have never referred 10 this
opinion Of Judge Blake's. In regard
10 this we will say that we have no
knowledge Of Judge Blake ever hav-
Ing given such an opinion. We do not
remember ever to have seen II quoted
In the Courier. though frequently al
Iuded 10. We do remember, however.
70 have seen In the county clerks
ONCE q telegram nom Helena, which
~ nearly ~ can now be remembered,