{"character_count": 5843, "word_count": 1039, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9757999777793884], "ccnet_perplexity": [2034.800048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
1 court. As your memory. however. seems

 to be none ofthe most retentiye h certain eases, you will permit me to remind you oi l that transaction. The commissioners an-

 pointed by yourself, called on you with a copy of the order for viewing and marking

 out road from Little Rock to the couata

 %e, via. the upper rsettlement on the north

 fork oi the Saline, 10 meet road from the Warm Springs Ill the direction of Little

 Rock, and not mere settlement road, as your letter would lead persons 10 believe. 1 They stated in substance, that they felt an IunwillinGness to act under the order, as it

 contained clause which rendered 1t i'm ! perative with them to view and mark the

 road from Little Rock to the upper settle ment on the north fork of Saline. and

 thence in the direction of the Springs. that

 it was generally believed a new orde had

 been issued and new commissioner ap- pointed, with the understanding that those concerned, should employ a surveyor to run straight line iii the required direc- ton, and that the road was to conform 10 that fine as nearly as the face of the coun- try would admit. They then requested your advice, in your capacity as a Judge

 of the county court, and you replied, sub

 stantially, as follows.---rhat you had a perfect recollection of the circumstances

 attending the issuing of the order and

 that Il was true, the request of the peti-

 toners had been granted, in order that

 they might have an opportunity of running

 the ilne with compass, and thereby set

 ting all disputes, that a change in the VOL ding of the order should have been made.

 the one produced, being an ctcopy of two preceding orders with the execution

 of the preamble and the names ofiheseom

 missioners, and that your advice was that

 they should proceed to the execution of their duty, hy viewing and marking the

 road Tn conformity to the line, withoat

 paying the least attention to the upper or

 any other settlement, You administered to them the necessary oath, and was re- quested to swear the surveyor then i'll at tendance. In answer to an enquiry from you if he would be in at court, he replied

 not unless 1t was required of him, and asl> edTyou if 1t was necessary he should make

 report, to which you replied, No, i cen stoear you nop and int6qm fhe couYt fbaf I hdpe sa0orn you, dnd dtat a0M be suficien.

 These things. Sir, were not as St. panl says, done in a corner----there re were seYer- al men ofundoubted veracity present, and

 you dare Eot deny 1t. In one week from

 the day upon which this occurred, we find

 you on the beneh.----A report is presented

 by one ofsthese same commissioners, and

 you hand 1t to the clerk, with directions to sie 1t until the other papers were presen- ted. Pray, Sir, what papers! Did you ex- pect the report Of the surveyor, when you

 had expressly told him it was unnecessary

 he should make one! Was your memory so

 very treaellerons that you had forgotten

 your voluntary promise that you would iIl-

 form the court that you had sworn him &c.l

 Perhaps you had been favored with a sight

 of a certain co9tnter-petitioH, and ad been

 led to believe that some ofits signers were men of iAtiHeRce in the county, and might

 be of service5o you about the time of the

 election; or, perhaps, (siuce you told a gentleman interested in tlle success Of the

 road, that vou had had your eye on him ere1- since lnSt election, you thought this fit op-

 portunity to vent your spleen by disap-

 pointing him. Is it rule in the court oyer

 which you preside to hear but one side of a question? If not, why harp upon state ment made in the counter-petition, that the line crossed the old road three times, an assertion which can easiy be prov ed to be positively and absolutely false. There were witnesses present, wiiy not enquire lofthems Why not ask the commissioners 1 then in court if this were true or noti---- l They would have told you, and have told 1t upon oath too, that they never saw the old l road from the time they started from Lit l tie Rock until their work was compi ted :. But to your circular, you have, suddenly i, lbecome great stickier for the adminis-

 tration ofthe law according to the letter,

 and hold up in triumph the fact that the

 coiuses and distaaces were not given by the

 commissioners. Is there an instance in your court where the commissioners of the

 many roads vieweA ont in this county,

 have complied with the demands of the 1 law! presume not----since they had ne- ther compass nor chain to ascertain either the one q the other Let ne HOW call your attention to a simple fact, that there 1 was ono straight line to be run, and one only. Now if you will admit what you can- not deny, viz:---sThat straight line in 1 the shortest distance between two points, l it follows as natural consequence, that l there was but one course and one distance

 involved in the enquiry. This being the

 case, the surveyor, if he knew what he was

 about, conld have told you the course he

 was going to run before he started, and II

 you bad been a Judge of such matters, you might. during the session of tire court,

 have ascertaned the distance by refer :. eRee to the map and the application of a

 proposition in geometry known to school

 boys by the appeliation ofPons asinorum--- fAnelice Asses bridge.t The diagram

 used to demonstrate the position, assumed in the enunciation of the proposition, bears

 some resemblance to the outline of a seaad-

 mill, and you had not, perhaps. Tn your

 youth Quixotism of intellect, sufficient to induce you to encounter 1t. The bridge

 was not crossed, but like the witches in

 Tam O'Shanter, you stopped short at the

 abutment----the proposition gave you the

 slip and escaped nHtiiation, unless yoi'

 attempted to demonstrate it, in winch