Mr. S.J.  Field,

To Orleans house.

To 460 drinks................................ $230 00
275 cigars................................   68 75
------
Downieville, October 9th, 1850.           $298 75

[Endorsed:]

“We hereby certify that the within account is correct.

“P.L.  Moore. 
“Wm. S. Spear.”

“Received payment of the within bill in full from Stephen J. Field.

“J.  Stratman.

“October 14th, 1850.”

THE TURNER CONTROVERSY CONTINUED

It was not until after my election that Judge Turner paid any attention to the mandate of the Supreme Court commanding him to vacate his order of expulsion against myself and Messrs. Goodwin and Mulford, and to restore us to the bar.  The mandate was issued on the fourth of July, and was served on the Judge on the sixteenth.  He immediately and publicly declared that he would not obey it, but would stand an impeachment first.  Whilst attending the Supreme Court on the application for the writ, Mr. Goodwin, Mr. Mulford, and myself, were admitted as attorneys and counsellors of that court, and that admission under its rules entitled us to practice in all the courts of the State.  The effect of this, which re-instated us in the District Court, he determined to defeat.  He accordingly directed the sheriff of the county to notify us to show cause, before the court in Sutter County, why we should not be again expelled from the bar for the publication of the article in the Placer Times, to which I have referred, written in reply to his attack on us in his “Address to the Public.”  The order was dated on the fourth of October, and was served on the eighth, and required us to appear on the first Thursday of the month, which was the third.  As the time for appearance was previous to the day of service and to the date of the order, no attention was paid to it.  The Judge, however, proceeded, and on the eleventh of the month made another order of expulsion.  After the adjournment of the court, he discovered his blunder, and at once issued another direction to the sheriff to notify us that the last order of expulsion was suspended until the twenty-eighth of October, and to show cause on that day why we should not be again expelled.  In the meantime, the Judge made no concealment of his purposes, but publicly declared in the saloons of the town that if we did not appear upon this second notice, he would make an order for our expulsion, and if we did appear, he would expel us for contempt in publishing the reply to his article, which he termed a false and slanderous communication.  We knew, of course, that it would be useless to appear and attempt to resist his threatened action; still we concluded to appear and put in an answer.  Accordingly, on the day designated, we presented ourselves before the court in Sutter County.