Lyon County times. [volume] (Silver City, Nev.) 1874-1907, 1894-11-03
THAT CHARGE AGAINST MACK

talked about expose that Joe Doug
lass and bis nephew, William, have
been going to make to down G. E.
Mack, the Silver Party nominee for
District Judge in this district, has
appeared. 1t is in the shape of
decision rendered by Judge Hawley
in the case of ]. M. Douglass VS.. J.
D. Byrnes, in which c. E. Mack
was one of the Commissioners APP
pointed to assess damages against
plaintiff for running tunnel
through some mining ground in
Silver City. The report of the Com
missioners was requested to be set
aside because, as Mr.. Douglass had
explained around here, Mr.. Mack
was at the time he was a Commits
sioner in the case employed by de-
PENDANTS in another case. Now let
us see how that statement compares
with the decision of Judge Hawley.
Here is what it says:
1.-THE fact is that this Commits
sioner; &c. E. Mack) previous to the
time of his appointment, had acted
as an attorney for one of the de-
PENDANTS, which was unknown to
petitioners or their attorney, or to
the Court; but it affirmatively ap-
pears that said Commissioner was
not regularly employed for said de-
PENDANT and had only been specially
retained to try two cases in the
Justices Court and that his en-
ployment for, and business with the
defendant was ended and settled
prior to his appointment as Com
missioner"
Notice that it says previous to the
time of his appointment he had act
ell as attorney for one of the de-
fniants. If there is anything
wrong about lawyer taking case
FIR one party at one time and an
other party at another time there
has been no decision to that effect
by any court in the land. Mr.. Mack
has built himself into a lucrative
law practice by his uprightness in
all cases he has been engaged in.
That he ever did any underhanded
work in any case has yet to be
proved, for certainly this decision
of Judge Hawley's does not SO
prove. The Commissioners were
discharged because it appeared
that the damage were fixed at too
high figure to suit J. M. Douglass;
but we take it that any damage at
all would be too high to suit him,
In fact. his claim was that no dam
age had been done, and another
set of commissioners did award de-
PENDANTS damage.
If there is any irregularity in
anything done by C. E. Mack, as
shown by the decision of Judge
Hawley, we fail to see it. Mr.
Mack is a gentleman whom no
such methods as those being
brought forward 10 defeat him will
harm in the least with unprejudiced
thinking men. He is not man
for the corporations, therefore they
do not want him. He will not
be pnrchasable by any person if
he is elected to preside on the
bench in this district, and the tax
payers throughout the district can
rest assured that they will have all
Court business attended to with
regularity and in an impartial
manner, with no delays to witness
es and jurymen, and Herewith ex-
ira expense, for him to get into a
condition to transact business. The
charges against Mr.. Mack are
about the --LATEST campaign litera-
ture that has ever been brought to
the surface in this fight, and they
are brought out at this late moment
SO that what little damage they
may do cannot be refuted in the
outside districts.