New-York tribune., 1901-08-10
JUDGE NoYES'S DEFENCE.
NOME OFFICIAL ANSWERS N DETAIL
CHARGES MADE AGAINST HIM

Washington, Aug. 9.-The Department OF Justice
to-day made public the answer OF Judge Arthur
IL Moves the charges preferred again him in the
administration Of his Office OF United States district
5udEe at Nome Alaska.
Judge NOyes details the story Of his trip TO
Alaska, giving an account OF the acquaintance
made upon that journey, more particularly the ac-
quaintance Of Mckenzie and Chips, who have hg-
ured 80 largely in connection with the charges
against the Judge, and denies that he had any
communication with either of these men with re-
spect 20 the business OF his court on his journey
or al any other time He takes up in detail the
various charges made against him, and speclncaIIy
denies every allegation.
lie describes the chaotic conditions existing at
Nome at the time Of his arrival stating that he
found In the neighborhood OF 10000 people of all
classes. and the utmost confusion and disorder
prevailing He sets out that every lot OF ground
IN the whole town had two OF more claimants;
that possession was held in great many instances
by armed force, and that he was besieged upon
every hand Immediately upon his arrival by parties
seeking relief against those who, they said, were
wrongfuIly and unlawfully in possession OF their
property, dvestng Il Of value and shipping the
proceeds out Of the country and the jurisdiction
OF the court
He then tells Of his efforts TO organize his court
and the opportunities which ne subjected
boy litigants and counsel and describes favors that
attempted TO be thrust upon him by solicitous
individuals. He recoUnts the circumstances under
which he appointed Alexander Mckenzie receiver
Of certain mining claims, alleging that ii had not
been prearranged that Mckenzie should act as re-
ceiver but that McKenzie's name was suggested
along with others 10 one of whom the place had
been rendered before Il was offered 10 Mckenzie
The Judge reafilrms the wisdom Of that choice and
compliments McKenzie's administration OF the
property.
Defending his appointment Of a receiver for the
placer mining claims ne denies that he hrst sug-
gested that remedy. and justihes his action upon
the ground that there were scattered along the
beach thousands Of unemployed men who had been
allured 10 Nome by the fabulous tales or Wealth
which had been given out. and predicated upon the
result of the workings Of the previous year; lhat
these men were unemployed without 1000 or
money and desperate. and that 10 have closed
down by injunction the~Qperation OF the p'aoet
claims would have added largely to the hummer %
,,neulpIoved in the camp He says that he followed
a., .ts ree,ect tr, rreredeuts established by former
9udges OF The District of Alaska, ana aou9 ''i''
~ a decree i'm "A similar case n, ...,,,,t o5
re admits that in most cases where ne SpP1t,+ ,,',r+
vaoeivers the r,ureseutauOus made TO me O.l sLC
were largely untrue as 10 the cahduIlltii,o rfI
mines. This, however was nrl n,ir,ted GS mon the
later. and his action was pi,'Il'',' ir,l,fs ne
fairness Of the presentation OF l.L' ,xcassy.,
says. accounted lot ne lr.,i,ers He also
expense Of operation by the Ic,elNtL.s - ~
alapes thar as am additional precHutloh lvIs ~ ~
protection ~ the parties n lileItS.t ~. I'd
in an cases when either or the laru.S r'tu5 rt,5,..-
a maj me cGd dust realized 10y the receive.
should he deposited the safe deposit Nauls ~ ~,
subject to withdrawal. except ny ofett % 9l Ia
Sc,gTt ,fb noticc ro the parties Interested. 5ilu
also that he further ordered IN enc, % interest," or
IequsIe'' t,st IN he proportv might any
III tn,e 20 non tho property worked by the receiver
sor ne n,,rnose Of observing work and mig ~
be qreseut at each and every cleaning UP haue
hv the receiver. and that he III every N1A. -
sihe tried 10 throw every safeguard auo4l M ~
Ip,tebt he conserved FOR the benefit OF the party
who might finally he adjudged It's owner