Show HOW MUCH FOR ODIUM are am some grotesque phases connected with the claim set up to the effect that the compensation asked by the receiver and his attorneys in the church suit is unconscionable As to its having an abnormally swollen appearance there is no room for question to set up however a point of conscience in relation to any phase of this robbery of a church would be amusing tf if the subject were not so serious a one no people who appreciate justice and esteem it will be able to discover any of the elements of that principle associated with the pursuing parties what an absurdity it is for a man to talk of any act as unconscionable who has stated in effect before a court of justice that he had doubts regarding the constitutionality of the law under which the suit was brought and yet he with his hip brethren on the bench decided it to be constitutional his decision in that regard was 11 unconscionable in considering this anomalous position assumed by the late chief justice justee of utah one is led to exclaim with the poet 10 1 0 wd wad some lower the giftie glatie gie us to soe se as ae athers see us ui it wad frae mony a blunder tree free us and foolish notion we take the ground as will be seen awn that even the incipient symptoms of the presence of conscience in this process of taking a large amount of property f from its owners have never been apparent from the beginning till now the estimate placed upon the labors of the receiver by himself judging from the price asked as compensation tor for them has been declared as already stated by the active politicians who have inaugurated and conducted the examination into his conduct and that teat of his attorney to be unconscionable let this be granted for toe the sake of the present argument and in what light does it place col cel merritt mr pred fred auerbach mr george Y wallace mr W S me mc bornick nick mr J E dooley et cd at i if in this matter receiver dyer has acted without conscience are not those who have aided and abetted in the performance perform nee of the act upon which this charge is based guilty of the same offense offe nae if on the ground of unconscionable claims denunciation should be hurled at him why not give those who have assisted him as exhibited in their of opinion regarding what he should be paid for his services their due share of the consequent blame of course what marshal dyer did was in an official capacity what the others did was presumably from a business standpoint if he is guilty in relation to making an exorbitant claim in an official capacity the other named gentlemen are in one of two positions either that teat the business capacity attrib attributed td to them teem is thin as air or that they wilfully aided and assisted in an attempt to consummate an unconscionable scio act acl it may be claimed in their behalf that teat their estimates were framed without adequate information respecting spec ting the subject to which they related this is untenable a clearheaded businessman business man will not make an estimate concerning any financial question without first gathering all the facts facto as the only intelligent wells basis upon which to form a conclusion speaking of the communication of mr fred this regard it contains an unique element whan it is critically perused it will bo be ob observed sered that the writer of the letter Is of opinion that receiver dyer should be accorded ac coiled some compensation pensa tion for the odium that would necessarily come to him in consequence of his taking property from a people intensely religious what the quality and quantity of the odium would have been had the people robbed of their property been a community of atheists must ne be left to conjecture mr auerbach does not in his communication favoring mr dyet dyer state the proportion of the ot or that should be accorded to fillion the ground of the element of attaching to his position tote raltie of having to carry a lo 10 load of f rort kind is IEA not defined in dol SW mad and cents it is to be presumed thea that this 16 might reasonably be left to we vad Wace tion of the court this odium business is too for far reaching rea ehing for receiver dyer is get it ft double dose of it having been and placed under a ban NY by certain parties bemuse because he did not seize as much property belong belonga ing fig to on an intensely religious 1 peo L pie P as his pursuers think he ought to have seized should not thu odium from that quarter also be taken into info consideration and con from a financial basis bagis then how much should be allowed for the odium cast upon mr dyer in consequence of every hon 69 manou man on the face of the earth who to is familiar to any extent with the foote of thid unparalleled eise case looking upon it as one of the most inex ousa trite and unconscionable robberies over ever perpetrated in a civilized country there are many who jhb can set up claims for cora pensa von for having to bear odium ot rf this BWL all AB who participate in this SUM steal a are entitled to it but how mhd they should be paid for having tc endure it mast inest we presume te left led to the discretion of the court active politicians of who havo have brought about this robbery might on this basis send in their bills for allowance asking that a portion of the fund be set aside for their benefi there is plenty of odium associated with this case on the part of he ruthless pursuers pursUe re it will increase iri 16 volume as it rolls but should never be men coned in connection with this business |